10 video games not to buy for kids

Some interesting news is out about a list of 2007 videogames that is unlike most lists you may have seen before. Unlike the usual top seller lists, or the Best of 2007 that you are going to see from various retailers and websites, this list details what not to buy.

It’s not a worst of the year list either. This is a list that focuses on the most violent and child-inappropriate games in the industry. I have to say that the list is accurate, though to be fair, the games on the list are all rated for mature gamers. These aren’t games intended for the Game Cube or Wii. In fact I would imagine that the titles alone are enough to make most parents realize that a young child should not get or play this game.

Without guessing I’m sure you can imagine the #1 game on the list of 10. Obviously it is the drug and violence promoting Grand Theft Auto. It doesn’t matter which iteration of the game you want to think of, they all are equal on this subject. Even worse if you consider the abysmal portrayals of African Americans and Latinos/Hispanics.

The rest of the list includes 3 movies conversions, 2 video game dynasties, a rapper and a few other popular games. The full list follows:

• 1. Grand Theft Auto
  
• 2. Manhunt
  
• 3. Scarface
  
• 4. 50 Cent Bulletproof
  
• 5. 300 The Videogame
  
• 6. The Godfather
  
• 7. Killer-7
  
• 8. Resident Evil 4
  
• 9. God of War
  
• 10. Hitman Blood Money
  

The things I can’t imagine are why any parent of a young kid would buy them these games. I mean Manhunt? Hitman? What do you want your kid to group up to be? Are they also looping The Professional and Reservoir Dogs for the kids as a bedtime story?

I will say this though, this is the first list that includes the bewilderingly insipidly named rapper that I think he deserves and I’m happy to know about. If for no other reason, if this prevents the sale of another product targeted directly to African Americans (and yet oddly enough bought mostly by White Americans) that depicts us as mindless criminals’ intent on nefarious activities, then I am pleased to blog on it.

I will also note one other thing. I love the Hitman and Resident Evil series. I think they are some of the best done games each time they come out with a new version. I equally feel that there is no way I would let a little kid play or watch any of them either.

Some things are just obvious.

Final thoughts about the TV One Heartland Presidential Forum webcast - 12.03.2007.1

The full post can be found at Vass. Other political commentary by Michael Vass can be found there or at Presidential Race Blog

I happened to be traveling on Saturday, and was out in public watching the Heartland Presidential Forum. I heard a couple of different comments about what some people thought about it. One was

“Show me and honest politician and I’ll show you a dead politician.”

Several had that kind of reaction to the event. Many were just starting to follow the race for the Presidency. Of course everyone that was listening and watching part of the webcast with me was moderately interested. Several had no idea who Dennis Kucinich or Chris Dodd were. None were interested in watching the whole event. Everyone thought I was crazy to be working on a Saturday. But well over 5,000 people were at the Forum, many spending hours (one group spent 12 hours on a bus) to arrive.

So for those that were not able to see the Live TV One webcast of the Heartland Presidential Forum, or have not read my live commentary on the event, I offer this summary of my thoughts. [By the way, I want to thank TV One for selecting me as one of the 5 bloggers that covered the event live. Each of us had a unique viewpoint and it’s worth reading what they all had to say as well.]

Basically one thing was very clear from the beginning. This was no debate, formal or informal. It was not like any of the usual political gatherings we have come to expect and often ignore on television. But what else might you expect from Iowa?

The event started with no real pomp. Instead there were far too many accolades for various officials and organizations that were involved with creating the event. Oh and gospel singers. Oh and a prayer from a female reverend. Like I said, not your regular political event.

After all the various people involved too their time to blather on about how great it was to be there and see the response of the people from 32 states gathered their, things got under way. Actually it’s a bit unfair to say they were blathering. Yet at the same time, I could have done without the fanfare. I honestly didn’t care who they were or their political affiliation. I wanted to hear the Presidential candidates speak and see how they responded to the questions of average American.

But as the event went forward, I noticed something. More than the fact that this was not a Presidential debate. It was a propaganda stump for the Democratic Party, and liberal viewpoints. That was most likely the reason that though Republican candidates had been invited, only one arrived to participate. Of course since only one arrived, they were denied the chance to speak to the people.

That was perhaps the first clue to what was to follow. It was announced that the lawyers for the event (they needed lawyers for this?) felt it would be an endorsement for the only Republican Presidential candidate to speak. So he was denied, and his name was never mentioned. Nothing like lawyers to make something political even more partisan than it already was. How they thought one candidate could be singled out like that is beyond me since there were 4 other candidates there.

Continued in Part 2...

Preparing for the TV One Heartland Presidential

This is an excerpt about the TV One Heartland Presidential Forum webcast that will occur latter today.

As the TV One webcast of the Heartland Presidential Forum at 2:30 today approaches, I want to review some of the main issues that I think it will and will not cover. Overall I think that the candidates, of both parties, will seek to avoid a large number of issues most people really care about. Expect a good deal of deflection and moves to tangent issues rather than answering the actual questions posed. I doubt that it will be as obvious as the dramatic and highly covered yes, no, and maybe answer Senator Clinton offered on driver’s licenses for illegal aliens in New York State but I believe they will happen none the less.

First off there are the issues that the candidates will avoid speaking about. The issues are widespread and party specific. For the Democrats there is the fact that for 9 months of this year virtually every candidate vehemently stated that the surge in Iraq could not and would not work. They coupled the disbelief in the surge with they demands for immediate withdrawal of troops.

In the past couple of months, the most liberal pundits, reporters, and politicians have verified that the surge has in fact worked. Iraq is safer and more stable now than since Saddam Hussein was removed. Thus we have seen the debates and the public speeches of the candidates have moved from immediate withdrawal and failure, to a need to withdraw most troops (leaving an unspecified amount of troops for an unspecified amount of time) and failure, to not speaking about the subject at all as much as possible. Kind of funny how that went.

In addition Democratic candidates have moved into the subject of national healthcare as their primary talking point. Though all the plans are not fully explained, and the cost (upwards of 100 billion dollars at the least) has no explanation where it will receive funding from (extra taxes from the rich is the general answer. What is rich is a floating income number ranging from 200,000 at the top and 90,000 near the bottom).

For Republicans the key early issue was again Iraq and supporting the surge (and thus highlighting the Democrats willingness to retreat) and being against terrorism al la 9/11. After several months of each candidate mentioning how strong they are against terrorists they all have shied away from using the single greatest attack on American soil in past 60 years for their political gain (mostly).

The new line of discussion, now that the surge has been shown to be working and President Bush has mandated that surge troops will be slowly phased out of Iraq, has become illegal aliens. Each candidate has claimed they will resolve this issue, though there is no plan stated that will deal with the 12 million plus illegals that are in this nation right now, nor any that will be coming in the future. There are half thoughts of paths to citizenship, documentation, healthcare and deportation but no real plans. And lots of one-upmanship over who is tougher on the subject and who has the best past performance. Oh and there are arguments over who is more devoutly religious, and who can do more to prevent higher taxes. Again no real plans though.

So that is what they were all talking about, and what they want to discuss now. It’s a very short list. And yes I do realize they spoke about other things. But that was/is the focus.

Continued at Preparing for the TV One Heartland Presidential Forum Part 2 - 12.1.2007.1