August 31, 2007
FOUR FOR FRIDAY
Q1 - Underwear: Pull up your pants or else! That's the sentiment behind efforts in cities across the U.S. to ban droopy trousers that reveal men's boxer shorts, and baggy sweats that reveal a women's thong. In just the last seven days alone, city councils in Shreveport and Alexandria, Louisiana, and Atlanta, Georgia, have taken up measures in favor of banning fanny-flaunting pants. Do you think it's okay for cities and towns to legislate apparel?
Q2 - Compensation: Richard Jewell--the contract security guard who was falsely accused of planting a bomb at the 1996 Summer Olympics, and who despite never being charged with any crime underwent what was considered by many to be a "trial by media" that took a great toll on his personal and professional life--died earlier this week of what appear to be natural causes. Nearly 10 years after his ordeal, in April of 2005, Jewell was completely exonerated when Eric Rudolph pleaded guilty to carrying out the bombing attack at Centennial Olympic Park, as well as three other attacks across the southeast portion of the United States. Considering Jewell's situation, do you feel people who have falsely been accused of major crimes should be entitled to compensatory reparations, or is having to deal with such situations simply the cost we must pay in order to live in a society that affords us with so many freedoms?
Q3 - Make Room: What particular item of food, regardless of how stuffed you may be, can you always find room for?
Q4 - I Insist: Growing up, I had a neighbor who was rumored to wear a brand new dress shirt each and every time he went to work. Never would he wear the same dress shirt twice. What is one thing that you are absolutely particular about?
Posted by Mikal at August 31, 2007 12:18 AM
| TrackBack
Q1- Nope, let boys be boys, and girls be girls, and men stare at girls being girls!
Q2- If any compensation is awarded, it should most definitely be just that...compensation and nothing more. It is human nature to expect more for nothing. It is a part of life to be falsely accused of "things". It is unfortunate that some "things" are more extreme or radical than others.
Q3- Tough question, I would probably say Beef Jerky and a Shake or Malt...strawberry!
Q4- I would say that I am pretty particular about my socks. It is probably safe to say that I replace old socks with new socks before they need to be replaced. However, I don't really care if the socks on each foot match color or style. Most of my socks are the "no show" ankle socks, but I have been known to wear a tube sock on one foot and a "no show" on the other. You will hardly see me wearing white socks. If you see my wearing a white sock, that is a first sign indicator that I need to go buy more socks or do laundry.
Q1: Underwear - While I detest the boxer-flaunting look, I do not feel government should be able to legislate what we can and cannot wear.
Q2: Compensation - I firmly believe that people who have been wrongly accused, prosecuted, jailed, and/or unfairly editorialized by the media out of their jobs, careers, and normal everyday lives should be entitled to compensatory reparations AND in cases where the media made front-page news of the innocent, there should be public apologies that carry the same weight in terms of coverage and placement.
Q3: Make Room - The best chocolate-flavored beverage ever: Yoo-hoo!
Q4: I Insist - on wearing a crisp, clean, white T-shirt with a strong collar. Mind you, the T-shirt does not have to be brand-spankin' new, but I have found that they will only last me about 10 washings before the collar loses its character.
Q1: I hate seeing men/boys sit on a chair with their boxers touching it and not their pants, eww! But I don't think government should regulate what people wear (it would be nice if they stopped making certain sizes of thongs though, hee!).
Q2: I believe the media should make some sort of monetary compensation and a big fuss about their mistakes, just as they would had they been right.
Q3: That's tough, I guess chocolate, well any candy and usually soda, hehe.
Q4: I don't know, I don't have anything that I'm absolutely particular about, maybe socks - you must wear socks with tennis shoes, someone should tell my kids that ;).
1. DRESS CODE: No entity should legislate any sort of public dress code, despite the fact that cities and towns are doing so. Yesterday, The NY Times ran an great article on this, entitled "Are Your Jeans Sagging? Go Directly to Jail."
2. FALSE ACCUSATIONS: Citizens should be compensated when false accusations are KNOWINGLY made or KNOWINGLY continued. Otherwise, it simply is a price we pay as part of a free society. The real question, then, becomes, "How can such a thing be PROVEN?"
3. ROOM IN THE BELLY: I always make room for (sweet) cereal with skim milk (go figure!). Friends tease me that I am worse than the Jerry Seinfeld sitcom character. I buy cereal in bulk and lots of it - the good stuff, too. Lucky Charms and Fruity Pebbles are my top favorites.
4. I INSIST ON: I insist on good manners, courtesy, and the recycling of aluminum cans, sometimes to the chagrin of house guests.
1. I think the indecent exposure laws are all the more the government should have to say on the subject.
2. The trouble I have with these kinds of things is that there are so many lawsuits in this country that are totally rediculous, to the point where legitimate grievances like this just don't seem to carry any weight. Honestly, this kind of thing deserves the kind of recompense that Mikal describes, the reparations ought to be equal in kind and amount to the damage done (although that's really impossible in most cases). Basically, I'd have to say that this kind of thing just makes me angry that we have so many useless things clogging up our legal system, like McDonald's getting sued over their customers being so stupid I hope they win Darwin awards.
3. Bacon.
4. The dishes... I won't even let my wife do them, and honestly, since we don't have a dishwasher I insist upon doing a meticulous job on the dishes, and then the job is not done until the sink and counter tops have been equally subjected to scrutiny.
Q1: I think schools should have the ability to ban these types of revealing styles. Do I think that local legislations should be able to do so? Not really.
Q2: I don't feel that anybody is really entitled to much these days. Unfortunate situation indeed, I feel for the guy. I feel for every individual who is set free after years of incarceration after DNA proves their innocence. But at the same time, I've got no solutions.
Q3: Candy.
Q4: I used to be really particular about many things, til I had children. Now I just overlook most of them, have to pick my battles. I'm really picky about preserving the perfect, new condition of my devices. For example, I have not peeled off the factory protective plastic off the screen of my video iPod. I bought it nearly two years ago.
underwear: Uh... I would rather see someones underware then their crack. So as long as they are talking about fanny-flaunting pants lets put in provisions for the refrigerator repair man.
compensation: Compensation is due. Absolutely. I am usually the one who hates all of the suers in the world, but people that are unjustly imprisoned or attacked by the media should be compensated in some fashion. This reminds me of the rediculous reporting that went on when they extradicted that one guy for the ramsey kid murder and it turned out that he was the wrong guy. They had helicopters at the airport taking photographs of him stepping out of the plane.
room: chocolate
particular: eating chinese with chopsticks.
1. Underwear: It is okay to an extent. Like Greg said, indecent exposure covers most of what is needed. Perhaps we'd be better off redefining indecent exposure. I, for one, think exposing your nasty undergarments is indecent.
2. Compensation: Tough one. I'm pretty much in agreement with Lee on this one. Frankly, I think Jewell got off easier than most people think. At least he wasn't arrested and hauled off. Our prisons have plenty of falsely accused people in them. However, I think compensation in Jewell's case is justified, but not from law enforcement (the last thing they need is to have their budgets screwed by paying millions of dollars to somebody that is pissed he was a suspect). The media should have taken the full force of his lawsuit.
3. Make Room: When I'm full, I'm full. I simply can't eat anymore. But, I guess I'll often chew on french fries without thinking about it.
4. I Insist: Not replacing something until it can't be used anymore. In contrast to Jake, I'll wear socks until they are so full of holes that they just fall apart when you try to put them on. Umm... I'm a bit of a hypocrite though, because I'll occasionally replace my computer long before it's needed. Though I'm always sure to hand down the old one to somebody who can and will use it.
Ahhhh Belicovaaaaeeee!!! I posted last weeks also!!!
Q1 - After seeing a 300 pound women walking down the street with her thong exposedÖI think extreme measures are needed to prevent others from seeing that. I meanÖunless youíre into that.
Q2 - TRIAL BY MEDIA!!??? Thatís a new one to meÖwhatís next, trial by kindergarten class. Wow...I think the compensation should be paid by the very people who falsely put him there, I think the media makes a fair amount of income they should be able to take care of a few families for the ìsmallî mistake.
Q3 - PizzaÖ.Nothing extensiveÖjust pizza
Q4 - My combat moves!! I have to be particularÖ If I am to strike an opponent to the nerve behind his neck, I had best be precise in what I am doing otherwise it could turn into an awkward situation. He might think Iím trying to give him a lower neck message instead.
1+2: Nothing new: no to underwear laws and yes to compensation for many reasosn people have already said
3: white cheddar cheeze-its. I can eat a whole box in about 5 minutes if i'm not careful
4: I'm particular about my socks. I have left-footed and right-footed socks and always match them accordingly so that my socks fit perfectly with no excess-fabric spots or abnormal stretching.
Q1: no. but i agree that schools should be able to enforce more strick dress codes.
Q2: compensation in that the media acknowledge their mistake and apologize for it. That would be awesome. A section in the newspaper for "Apologizes for misleading stories" with pictures of reporters and their email addresses would be awesome.
Q3: icecream. tip roof sundae to be more specific.
q4: as you Can tell I'm very particular about using a consistent sentence case for all of my comments.
Posted. Click the namelink to see 'em.
1. Hmmm. I donít really know. On the one hand, I would really love to see less of other peoples underwear hanging out of their pants because I think it looks awful. On the other hand, Iím not really in favor of regulating freedom of expression. Whatís next? Will they start saying that people canít wear their hat sideways? (Which is something else that looks ridiculous IMO). It really depends on how the legislation is defined and enforced. Obviously, there are laws that regulate indecent exposure in public and where outfits violate these laws, Iím all in favor additional legislation to enforce decency, but really, most boxers cover up private parts as well as any other clothing, and when thongs come up out of pants (as opposed to pant going down to reveal the thong) they donít really reveal anything thatís forbidden per indecency laws, so I donít see how you can say itís indecent. Itís just taking away that persons ability to express that they are a sloppy moron or perhaps a skanky hoóand they should have that right.
2. Being horrible at keeping up with current events, I know no more about the situation than what you have written; however, if media entities made accusations about him or drew conclusions that proved to be false, then that is slander and I think he most definitely has a right to remuneration of some kind for that damage to his reputation and what that must have done to his ability to earn and provide for himself.
3. Unfortunately, I have a bad habit of making room for just about everything when Iím full, but most especially I can always make room for food that is free.
4. I hate it when my DVDs get out of order.
1. I think it's a crying shame that our cities and towns have to take this action to tell people what is appropriate to wear in public. I'm sorry, but, in my opinion, I think it looks disgusting. I have no desire to look at a stranger's drawers in public.
2. Depending on the circumstances, I think compensation could be appropriate, and maybe it should be paid by the media. The media claims the freedom of speech, and they must accept the consequences of their actions. I don't think a repeat offender is entitled to compensation by anybody. When they make the decision to become a criminal, I believe they should forfeit some of their rights. We should never take our freedom for granted.
3. If I'm wanting a taste for salt, potato chips---preferably Ruffles. If I'm wanting a taste for sweet---chocolate...anything.
4. I don't buy/wear used clothing. Not even gently used. I have accepted donations of clothing for my daughter, but I passed most of it on to someone else. There were only a few items that I kept.
1. I think it's idiotic. Dress codes in school? That's fine by me, but localities trying to outright ban items of clothing? Sounds suspiciously Taliban-like and could be a very slippery slope that could easily progress to other issues, such as banning clothing with political messages because they may be offensive to someone of a different party affiliation. Also, who gets to make the determination? This is the sort of bad law that does nothing but increasing the levels of disrespect for laws in general as well as for those those who are responsible for enacting or enforcing them.
2. Of course they should be compensated. The loss of one's reputation, good name and quite possibly one's family and job shouldn't be part of the price to be paid for having so many freedoms.
3. Raspberry or blackberry sorbet
4. I can honestly say that there's nothing that I'm that particular about.
Wow, if they start writing tickets for ass crack they would have to first go after the union and all their plumbers and construction workers who let it all hang out. Been going on since the invention of dungerees (sp?) so no.
The Jewell case was covered by most of the media with facts that were correct. The way they did it was in poor taste. Headline by the Atlanta Journal: "FBI suspects 'hero' guard may have planted the bomb." He suffered from prosecution because of it. So compensation was probably appropriate. But some take it too far with huge payoffs on "punitive" damages and such. These sort of things can crush a newspaper's budget, unless they're under a conglomerate run by Mr. Murdock.
cashews
clicking "preview" before I blog post
Q1 - I'm not into seeing it, but I completely disagree with the government, at any level, LEGISLATING what we can and can't wear! Besides, what happens if you lose a lot of weight and your pants are big? (don't laugh - it happened to me!)
Q2 - Compensation for wages lost possibly, but not excessive.
Q3 - Hmmmm, after last week in Houston, I'd have to say good Tex-Mex! It seemed like no matter where I went I had room for it! LMAO. Thank goodness for the gyms back home! lol
Q4 - Hmmm...sad but I can't think of anything off the top of the my head, but I'm pretty tired too...
Q1 - I'm not into seeing it, but I completely disagree with the government, at any level, LEGISLATING what we can and can't wear! Besides, what happens if you lose a lot of weight and your pants are big? (don't laugh - it happened to me!)
Q2 - Compensation for wages lost possibly, but not excessive.
Q3 - Hmmmm, after last week in Houston, I'd have to say good Tex-Mex! It seemed like no matter where I went I had room for it! LMAO. Thank goodness for the gyms back home! lol
Q4 - Hmmm...sad but I can't think of anything off the top of the my head, but I'm pretty tired too...
1. No. Also, baggy pants look awesome, and I choose my shorts specifically to show them off.
2. Yes to the first part. One of our fundamental beliefs must be trust in our justice system. If we're let down, it'll be someone's fault.
3. Chicken. I have a separate stomach to hold it.
4. Cups of tea that go all the way to the top. Don't bring me one where the tide's gone out. And I can't cope with floaters on the top either.
Post a Comment:
|
