Turn it back to 1964?
We'd just assassinated a president and the Warren Commission said it was the act of a lone assassin. Medgar Evers had also just been assassinated and his murderer was not charged for 30+ years. The war in Vietnam was being accelerated. The Boston Strangler's last victim was found. Race Riots in Harlem New York, Elizabeth, NJ, Paterson, NJ, Jersey City, NJ, Rochester, New York, Dixmoor, Chicago, Ill and Philadelphia occurred. Nelson Mandela was sentenced to life imprisonment. The PLO Palestinian Liberation Organization, is established. The ineffective 'War on Poverty' began. Three civil rights workers were murdered by the KKK in Mississippi and they got away with it for a long time.
Never thought Mr. Bennett would like to go back to THAT year.
Me? 1984 was a pretty good year, by comparison.
I've not made a decision on this issue, yet. How does the Knoxville News Sentinel, the Drudge Report, the New York Times, the Miami Herald, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Chattanoogan.com, among many other media outlets, still exist while not charging folks to view their on-line newspaper (And, the Knoxville News Sentinel still allows comments on news articles!)
Could it be that the aforementioned media outlets, et al, are better at reporting the news and, therefore; encouraging more people to return to their site, thus increasing more advertising revenue?
Why are we even talking about this? Have any LPGA folks 'come out' by declaring themselves as heterosexual, for the last 20 years?
Why does this even matter, in the great scheme of things?
Dude is pretty good at basketball. Seems to be a stand-up, eloquent and educated fellow.
What does his private (Until he gave it to the media) sexual preference have to do with anything related to his chosen career at which he is evidently good at?
It'd be nice if the 'left', and Mr. Bennett, tolerated opposing opinions? It also be nice if the 'right' tolerated the opinions of the 'left.' Until either involve my Constitutional personal space?
Isn't that it how it is supposed to work? Extremists, on either side, like Mr. Bennett and, on the opposite, Alex Jones, are a disservice to the true, realistic goals of the middle.
I challenge the so-called 'left' to tolerate, as they demand of the holders of my liberal Christian world view, which happens to be leaning towards the 'right.'
Tolerance, should be, indeed, a two way street. Isn't that why they wrote, fought for, bled and died for that whole US Constitution thing?
Sadly, that seems not to happening under 'One-Way' President Obama and the likes of 'One-Way' Senator Corker.
Either 'way', circumstances will force the rest of us to meet in the 'middle.'
Anytime. You just have to sign the forms, waive the liabilty and get the permissions from the higher-ups for a ride-a-long. For the record, I seldom go 'off the record.'
But, no forms, or permissions, are required to grab a lunch break. A shift, or two, would give you a greater perspective on another world view, though. Either way, I'm cool with it.
Back to the topic.... I was going to reply to "shen's" puerile comments regarding all my 'privilege', but sometimes allowing the contrary opinion of the author stand on its own merit, or lack thereof, carries more weight.
Last one, for now.....
Regarding an ex-criminal applying for a job..... "He was told he'd have to be arrest/conviction free for three years before he could be considered for a position."
Three whole years? Conviction/arrest free?
If I was conviction/arrest free for the entire three years it took me to get through my sophomore year in college, he can do it!
So. Back to the topic at hand.
Do the readers agree that Mr. Cook should be just as wordy, forgiving, compassionate and enabling when it comes to murdering, racist and abhorrent collection of thugs as he has been wordy, forgiving, compassionate and enabling when it regards another group of thugs of his choice?
Do the readers agree that Mr. Cook should be just as willing to mediate a dispute between rival members of murdering, drug dealing and anti-social gangs (Who are murdering each other, with some occasional collateral damage to innocents) versus any other dispute amongst rival members of murdering, drug dealing and anti-social gangs?
"On occasion, Tennessee has jailed individuals for unpaid fines too....."
True. So? You're intimating that since, in the past, people have been unjustly jailed for things they should not have been jailed for, we should just quit jailing people, on principle?
"As any post that begins with "I have friends....?"
Care to point out for us any post I have proffered that began with, included, or ended with, as you've falsely alleged, that tcrashfx stated, "I have friends....?"
Does your non-existent, but self-entitled, definition of 'privilege' include putting words in my mouth as ethereal proof of your point. A point that you've been, to date, unable to successfully argue?
C'mon, Brenda. You're slipping. In the past, you've often quoted me correctly. Get back with us when you get your stories straight.
"Not everyone can pull themselves up by their boot straps like you seem to think."
I have to entitle these thugs the bootstraps, define the bootstraps and then pull them up by their bootstraps, that I gave them, or it's my fault they are bootstrapless?
"Not everyone has bootstraps."
Probably true, considering the entire world. In this country everyone is born with fetal bootstraps. Or, they're all provided with the tools to make some synthetic bootstraps for themselves, with the materials at hand, if they are so inclined.
"Your privilege is showing."
My 'privilege' is the fact that I was born into poverty, to immigrant parents, in America, in rural, racist Mississippi, in the early 1960s, and was endowed (Without me actually earning them) certain Constitutional rights, just 'cause I drew a breath in the US.
My 'privilege' was that I, in exchange for those rights, learned that certain RESPONSIBILITIES were required for me to continue to receive these free rights. My 'privilege' is that I soaked up, by force, the free education (At home, church and school) I was given.... All the way through college.
My 'privilege' was the fact that when I made bad choices (They were numerous and, sometimes, repetitive) I was forced, against my will, to pay for these errors in judgment in some righteous, painful (and fair) manner.
I was a teenager when the 911 system first came out and I thought that my getting a well-deserved a** whoopin' required I report this child abuse to the authorities.
The cops came out, heard my Mom's story, observed the damage I'd caused and they listened to my 'opinion piece' on the alleged incident (My 'opinion piece', curiously, sounded a lot like pretty much any David Cook opinion on crime and punishment.) One cop went to the trunk of the patrol car and got out a piece of bamboo and handed it to my mother. He said, "Do what you need to do, Momma, and we'll stop you if it approaches the level of child abuse."
She complied, as did the cops, and I survived. There was no 'truce' on the table. I have not dialed 911 since. (To this day, when I dial '9', for an outside line, the back of my thighs start burning.)
My 'privilege' is the fact that I was forced, again, against my will, to learn from these lessons at a tender young age. Deeds, actions, decisions clearly have consequences, as do words. My 'privilege' was that it was clearly demonstrated (By my parents, my teachers, my peers and the unsympathetic cops) that it was incumbent on ME to learn to earn the rights I had been graciously given.
My 'privilege' is that, to date, I've done my best to retain these lessons about right and wrong which were instilled into me by either a strong word, a look, a belt, a bamboo stick or a lost minor 'privilege.' I should note that it is settled law that parents do not have to follow the Constitution when raising future productive adults.
Yea. My 'privilege' is showing.