I have never really liked Martha Stewart.
I watched her shows a few times, and I was both appalled and awed.
I was amazed at this woman’s perfection, but nevertheless, I wanted to jump into my television screen and smear my greasy fingers across her polished silver.
Every time she proclaimed, “It’s a good thing,” I wanted to yell, “You suck, you uptight *#!%&!”
Human nature is such. A blonde housewife is not supposed to become a billionaire domestic diva, so we hate her.
When Stewart was indicted in June, it put a small smirk on my face thinking about a soft organza strewn across a federal prison cell with an exotic dandelion toilet bowl planter accenting her otherwise drab surroundings.
I began to think deeper and deeper into what Stewart’s life would be like in the slammer.
Her new prison name would be Malicious Marth, her speciality removing blood stains from battle worn prison laundry and making a mean carrot souflee spiced with paprika and basil.
She would teach arts and crafts classes to the other inmates, and on Valentine’s Day Victorian love letters lined with delicate lace and decorated with roses, tulips, and forget-me-nots would circulate the lucky penitentiary as prisoners learn new ways to express their feelings from ole Malicious Marth.
Martha, always a go-getter, would take control of the prison garden.
Rudabegas would become a staple in inmate’s diet.
In short, Stewart’s stint in prison would be her most ambitious and sucessful domestic adventure, forever placing her in the homemaker hall of fame.
Too bad she’ll never go to prison.
Overzealous prosecutors are going after Stewart on too little evidence, probably to advance their own careers.
The securities fraud charge was put against her simply because she told investors she was innocent.
How can proclaiming one’s innocence in a country where one is presumed innocent until proven guilty be a crime?
The public has spurred on prosecutors.
We love to see, as one reporter put it, “little miss perfect” in a not so perfect light.
There is something that draws us to a fallen idol to spit upon his or her flaws in misfortune.
One only has to take a drive down Bluebonnet and observe the ruins of the fallen Jimmy Swaggart’s ministries. It’s human nature.
People have come out from the woodworks to criticize Stewart.
Even Pam Anderson figuratively shook her finger at Stewart in the December issue of Jane magazine.
Stewart gained about 40,000 dollars from selling her ImClone stock, but lost between 400 to 700 million dollars in stock holdings in the aftermath of the scandal.
Martha Stewart Living just released its first magazine without the Martha Stewart name bombarding its readers all over the cover.
Stewart has also stepped down as CEO of the company.
There’s no telling what kind of damage will come to both Stewart and her brand image when she goes to trial.
The government is depending primarily on the testimony of Stewart’s stockbroker’s assisstant to convict Stewart.
This won’t be enough, especially considering Stewart’s legendary temper and perfectionism may give some people dishonest and vindictive motives to testify.
Free Martha!
It’s a good thing.