Monday, June 17, 2013

Some Condemn "Sesame Street" Character With Parent In Jail



PBS is at it again.  First, they develop a character on the “Arthur” cartoon show that has Asperger’s Syndrome ( a form of autism), now they have introduced a “Sesame Street” character named Alex, who wears a hoodie and whose father is in jail. 

Yes, that’s right, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is creating characters that help kids who might otherwise feel ostracized feel as though they are part of the mainstream because they are.  But there are some knee-jerk reactionary people who see the depiction of a character with an incarcerated parent as a bad thing, that it somehow makes it “normal” for a child to have a parent behind bars.  But they miss the point: the character is meant to help the child, not the parent in prison. 

This is not the first time the CPB and Sesame Street have come under fire for tackling social issues in ways that are seen as attempts to influence children.  The characters “Bert” and “Ernie” are two males, sharing a bedroom (with separate beds) that have a close friendship.  There are those who seek to sexualize that relationship, implying that they are homosexual lovers, but the show has never done so.   Sesame Street’s diverse cast and the friendships and tolerance for everyone in all walks of life that are depicted in the show have helped children mainstream into society for decades, teaching them simple Spanish and sign language in ways that have us all speaking “Sesame Street Spanish” in a pinch.

Alex is not meant to portray the norm, but he is meant to let kids who live the nightmare of an incarcerated parent feel normal.  What the critics fail to understand is that, while it is one thing to condemn guilty adults for the crimes they commit, it is another thing entirely to condemn the children for the sins of the fathers.  Even the God of the Old Testament gave that up when he sacrificed his only begotten son for the sins of all mankind in the New Testament. 

And that is the irony in this story: that the very people who are supposedly the most forgiving are the first to judge.  They are often the first to condemn children for the choices adults make, be they alternative lifestyles (i.e.: gay adoption, same-sex marriage, etc…) or incarcerating petty drug offenders (robbing their children of a parent when rehab might have solved the problem) or even stigmatizing the welfare and other assistance that poor parents (many of them single unwed mothers who chose not abort their babies) need to help raise their children.   

Broadcast outlets, like PBS and the CPB, wield great power in the shaping of public attitudes on any number of socioeconomic and political issues and they, therefore, have a huge responsibility to the public (from whom they utilize the airwaves).  PBS and the CPB are to be commended, not condemned, for reaching out to demographics poorly served by commercial broadcasters because they are not as profitable as the money-demo, adults 25-54.  A child with autism should be able to see himself in a character on TV, just as should a child with a parent in jail.  So many children in that lamentable state are minority children and so are fighting off layer upon layer of prejudice and bigotry.   Let’s all consider that before reacting to a felt puppet on a kids’ show.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

More Conflicting Testimony in the Jodi Arias Case; Leads Prosecutor on Tangents That Take Him In Circles



*****NOTE NATURE OF POSTING...NOT G-RATED*****

Another day of cross-examination in the death penalty case against Jodi Arias as prosecutor Juan Martinez continues to press the accused murderess on her conflicting opinions of Alexander’s character in light of her claims that he was sexually aroused by children.  

Arias again affirmed that she continues to love Alexander and believes he was an amazing and inspiring person, despite her allegations of pedophilia and kiddie-porn, saying that was a side of himself that he hated.

Arias spent much of the day taking Martinez on tangents far away from his core case, quibbling over semantics, making him repeat question after question, obviously frustrating him with her insistence that she could not remember key events or that what her answers meant depended on how one defines words like "show".

Martinez was obviously anoyed when Arias told him her brain was "being scrambled" by his aggressive questioning and that he was "moving in circles."

Martinez even flew off into unrelated lines of questioning, like how he himself made Arias feel as he asked questions and if that was what was sparking her memory lapses, arguing the difference between "memory" and "truth".  

Arias flustered Martinez a bit when she frankly referred to her enjoyment of orally pleasuring Alexander to climax on her face, but noting that the same act in a cruder context made her feel like a prostitute

Arias says Alexander attacked her in his Mesa home in June of 2008, so she stabbed him, shot him and slit his throat in self-defense. Prosecutors say the cruelty of her crime and the circumstances at the scene show that she planned to kill Alexander all along.

The day ended on an odd note, with a sidebar and early recess and her attorney asking the judge to order that the Maricopa County Sheriff's office provide her lunch to keep her in good health during the trial and that she is suffering migraines. 

Trial resumes Wednesday morning at 10:15.

Friday, February 22, 2013

Arias Motion For Stay Denied, Petition For Review Remains Undecided

BREAKING:  The Arizona State Supreme Court denies Jodi Arias' attorney's motion to stay any death penalty proceedings immediately after a conviction.  Arias' attorney argued that Mesa Det. Esteban Flores lied about the aggravating factor that would make Arias death penalty eligible. 
Court Spokeswoman Jennifer Liewer says a decision on the petition for review "will come at a later date."  See the order here:

 SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA
JODI ANN ARIAS, ) Arizona Supreme Court
) No. CV-13-0049-PR
Petitioner, )
) Court of Appeals
v. ) Division One
) No. 1 CA-SA 13-0026
THE HONORABLE SHERRY STEPHENS, )
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ) Maricopa County
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, in and for ) Superior Court
the County of Maricopa, ) No. CR2008-031021-001
)
Respondent Judge, ) FILED 02/22/2013
)
STATE OF ARIZONA, ex rel. )
WILLIAM G. MONTGOMERY, MARICOPA )
COUNTY ATTORNEY, )
)
Real Party in Interest. ) O R D E R
__________________________________)
Upon considering the Application for Interlocutory Stay of
Aggravation Trial filed by Petitioner Jodi Ann Arias,
IT IS ORDERED that the application for stay is denied.
DATED this ________ day of February, 2013.
_______________________________
A. JOHN PELANDER
Duty Justice
TO:
L Kirk Nurmi
Jennifer L S Willmott
Juan Martinez
Diane Meloche
Hon Sherry K Stephens
Ruth Willingham