What is Vanity Fair thinking? A semi-dressed photo of Tiger Woods noticeably darkened as he pumps iron and stares into space is their February cover. True the interview and photos were shot well before the scandal, but why now? Because it sells magazines and our corporate controlled media is selling soap. Then we have Brit Hume, no saint himself, he is on his second marriage, pleading with Tiger to get saved in effect, to turn from Buddhism to the Christian faith that will offer forgiveness. And if Tiger doubts that he can ask Ensign, Marc Sanford, Ted Haggard, Foley and a long list of folks wrapped in family values.
Why is this so important? This story is a tragedy. A very gifted athlete began a descent into self destruction about 3 years ago, right after his dad died and went on spree, tearing down all things wonderful in his life. He tore down his image, his marriage, his wife’s trust, his reputation. While I want Tiger to get it together I am more interested in why this terror information on the underwear bomber was withheld. I think Vanity Fair’s cover is as gratuitous as the GQ issue of Rhianna unclothed. What does this have to do with poverty in Haiti, in Africa, in India, in China? 5 corporations own all media. As long as we buy their wares they will keep feeding us this slop. I have heard folks maintain that our government was up to no good and spoon fed us this drivel while they were off doing something they should not have been doing. Conspiracies abound. What do you think? I would like to know.