This should be good...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200....ap/index.html
|
|
|
|
|
This should be good...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200....ap/index.html
I may sound like a cold-hearted bastard, but it is absolutely ridiculous. I see no way that what Imus said could have hurt her "character and reputation". Just another example that people are just looking for easy money and 15 minutes of fame. Next thing you know, they'll be blaming him for any future losses because of the "damage" his comments made.
Since I don't know you I won't assume that you are a "cold-hearted bastard." I don't think the intent of your post is to malign the young woman from Rutgers. BUT, I would like to point out that all she did was play basketball, representing her school to the best of her abilities, and Imus used a horribly derrogatory and racist comment that was mean-spirited, hateful and hurtful.Originally Posted by AG_jr
At least for the coming season, I expect every time Rutgers is on national television, there will be reference to the Imus story and hate-slang he used when describing their physical appearance. This story and those horrid comments will now follow this team and that young woman for the remainder of their careers. It doesn't go away. People will eventually stop talking about it, but they will never, ever forget it. It was despicable.
Perhaps, and I cannot speak for the Rutgers players, but perhaps this is more about the future rather than the past, and all she is doing is standing up for herself, and making sure that any other hate-minded announcer thinks twice before making comments like that down the road.
When you put the word "damage" in quotes the way you did, it almost implies the damage was made up. If that is how you think, I could not disagree with you more. And, for you to jump to the illogical conclusion that they will "blame" Imus for ANYTHING except what he is RESPONSIBLE for, seems, at least from my perspective, to be misguided thinking.
Personally, if Imus had referred to ANY of our Techsters in the same way, I think this board would have been FILLED with complaints and Imus bashers.
It wouldnt have bothered me had he said it about the Techsters. I personally think people need to get thick skin. Do you remember the saying "Sticks and stones....."? I am tired of all the PC crap.
If she wouldn't have filed this suit, I wouldn't have even known her name. She would have been forgotten. She wants the publicity and is willing to let this stick to her to get the publicity.
Good post and good for this young lady for not laying down and taking it like so many before her had to do.
Frankly, I don't care what side you are on regarding this issue. It is about time that people that are hurt stood up for themselves.
This thread should probably head to the political section of the board soon, since it is likely to elicit strong opinions and has nothing at all to do with our Techsters.
If she is thinking about the future, and wanting this to end, she is killing her own cause. Bringing about this lawsuit, which is likely to drag out for a LONG time, will only keep bringing it up over and over again. I agree that it was terrible what he said, but, I also believe people should learn to get over things. When you step into the spotlight, expect there to be consequences.
That is your opinion. I think it is misguided and ill-informed, but it is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
Sounds like the thought police are on the prowl.
Don Imus may be a jerk but I'm pretty sure this Document protects his right to be one.
The Bill of Rights
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Yes, it does. Protects the KKK, as well. In fact, it is why all of us can speak our opinion on the matter. Thank goodness the ACLU is out there fighting for our ability to uphold this amendment. :icon_wink:
Actually I have seen worse on this board between fellow techsters and definitely between posters from "some" other schools and the Tech faithful on this board. Yes, it would be good if everybody played nice, but that ain't gonna happen. All this PC bullshit just validates the existence of the sharks and the parasites of our society. I'm sorry this girl got her feelings hurt but I am also sure she has heard much worse on the playground growing up. And to tie up our court systems with this kind of garbage is ludicrous.
1) "Oh no, I sure hope nobody ever calls me a mean name again. I think I may have to sue them." That's what this boils down to.
2) Yes, it will be talked about, but she made it an individual battle when she decided to file a lawsuit. Like it was said, nobody would have ever remembered her name, or that she even played for rutgers for that matter, unless she told them.
3) Like I said, she is killing her cause by filing this lawsuit. Now all the future holds for her is the phrase, "Oh, you're the one that filed that lawsuit against Imus.". This will forever haunt her now.
4) That's because I believe this damage IS made up. I promise you I have been called much worse than what Imus said, and I don't recall ever filing a lawsuit over it.
5) You're right, we would have been angry, but I would have expected our Techsters to show how big we really are and just shrug it off. It's a name...get over it.
That is very tough of you. I don't think any of us can make a definitive statement unless we have walked in this girl's shoes, though.
Anyway, you have the right to your opinion. She has the right to her's and to take him to court.
Yes she does.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
