Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Culpepper blindsided by erroneous reporting
Star Tribune ^ | February 4, 2005 | Kevin Seifert

Posted on 02/04/2005 11:51:22 AM PST by Libertarian4Bush

Inside XXXIX: Culpepper blindsided by erroneous reporting

Kevin Seifert

February 4, 2005 SUPE0204.DIARY

JACKSONVILLE, FLA. -- This is what happens when there is too much media and not enough stories. One of the NFL's most genuine and kind players carried out a genuinely kind act Wednesday. And what did Vikings quarterback Daunte Culpepper get for his thoughtfulness? National scorn, thanks to an Associated Press reporter who misinterpreted the scene and never bothered to follow up with the key players. Here's what happened...

(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Minnesota
KEYWORDS: culpepper; nfl; racists; sports
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 next last
To: Libertarian4Bush

Too bad we aren't all as perfect as AP "reporters".

61 posted on 02/04/2005 12:47:45 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roaddog727

That's never going to happen.


62 posted on 02/04/2005 12:48:41 PM PST by vpintheak (Liberal = The antithesis of Freedom and Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak

"That's never going to happen."

Yah, I know. Wishfull thinking at best......


63 posted on 02/04/2005 12:50:55 PM PST by roaddog727 (The marginal propensity to save is 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: mhking

Won't be the last time, either...


64 posted on 02/04/2005 12:50:59 PM PST by hchutch (A pro-artificial turf, pro-designated hitter baseball fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr

You said:
Because the eye witness says, "We were standing at Culpepper's side when the transaction took place. There was no animosity, no hurt feelings and no accusations of impropriety -- only thank-yous from Townsend, his parents and a doctor nearby." If they ain't offended, why are you?

Dear Mr. Wall Crawler,

I doubt that you, my friend, know the meaning of "impropiety". What Mr. Culpepper did, imho, was improper and conflicted with accepted standards of good conduct and good taste.

Since you asked the question, yes, I choose to take offense because Culpepper did this in public, in front of the TV cameras.

I answered your question. Will you please answer mine? Are you saying that Culpepper's giving-and-then-taking-back the jewelry was in good taste and acceptable conduct? Or are you choosing to NOT take offense?


65 posted on 02/04/2005 12:54:14 PM PST by i_dont_chat (Remember this: Jesus loves you and Allah wants you DEAD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: i_dont_chat
Of course what he did was fine. What else are you supposed to do in that situation?

Again, Ill just go back to the article,

"Anyone who has met Culpepper knows he wears the necklace every day. He has for years. Garish as it might be -- its main ornament is a 6-inch hot pepper -- it carries sentimental and personal value. Since when is anyone -- athlete, actor, politician or average schmoe -- obligated to hand over personal possessions permanently when someone asks? Or should Culpepper have shot down the request and embarrassed Townsend on television?"

No ones ever called me Mr. Wall Crawler before.

Thanks for the respect even though thats not my name.

66 posted on 02/04/2005 1:06:04 PM PST by wallcrawlr (www.bionicear.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian4Bush
This is all I said:

To: SF Republican

Someone tell me why a man wears $75,000 worth of necklaces

Ah la clinton.... because he can? I dunno.

34 posted on 02/03/2005 1:21:53 PM EST by b4its2late (The Lord made man before woman to give him time to think of an answer for her first question.)

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I'll correct the incorrect part.

Someone tell me why a man wears $75,000 $100,000 worth of necklaces

67 posted on 02/04/2005 1:07:19 PM PST by b4its2late (The Lord made man before woman to give him time to think of an answer for her first question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian4Bush
Drop a note to the AP and let them know what you think of their inaccurate reporting.

info@ap.org
68 posted on 02/04/2005 1:28:38 PM PST by Beckwith (Barbara Boxer is the Wicked Witch of the West . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian4Bush

Another lying story from some old reporter type HACK! Dante should SUE the you know what out of them.


69 posted on 02/04/2005 1:31:37 PM PST by cubreporter (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian4Bush

OK, let's give Daunte the credit he deserves because he's apparently not as selfish and glory-mongering as everyone first thought ... But seriously, what's a guy doing wearing a $100K necklace in the first place? I shudder to think that this image is what our nation's youth looks up to. I know choice of jewelry may sound insignificant, but whatever happened to taste and modesty? I mean, come on. Tone down the bling and let your true character shine through.


70 posted on 02/04/2005 1:42:48 PM PST by CasaDeQueso (Sgt., USMC 1987-1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr

"Anyone who has met Culpepper knows he wears the necklace every day. He has for years. Garish as it might be -- its main ornament is a 6-inch hot pepper -- it carries sentimental and personal value. Since when is anyone -- athlete, actor, politician or average schmoe -- obligated to hand over personal possessions permanently when someone asks? Or should Culpepper have shot down the request and embarrassed Townsend on television?"


wallcrawlr, you seem to be agreeing that just because the teenager made the “request” in an open forum, Culpepper was obligated to comply with the request.

Some people do make inappropriate requests, sometimes in public. Maybe the requests are made out of ignorance, bad taste, inexperience, manipulation, or any number of reasons.

All I am saying is there was no reason for Culpepper to react as he did--except to heap unwarranted attention upon HIMSELF. It had nothing to do with “protecting the feelings or embarrassing of the teenager” as intimated. It had everything to do with building up Culpepper’s ego.

If the highly respected Culpepper doesn’t learn from this lesson, he is not teachable.


71 posted on 02/04/2005 1:46:05 PM PST by i_dont_chat (Remember this: Jesus loves you and Allah wants you DEAD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: i_dont_chat
All I am saying is there was no reason for Culpepper to react as he did--except to heap unwarranted attention upon HIMSELF.

I disagree.

Go here and read about this man and his "unteachableness". http://gen.culpepper.com/interesting/sports/emma.htm

72 posted on 02/04/2005 2:02:06 PM PST by wallcrawlr (www.bionicear.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: usafsk

"maybe you should be hanging out with Al Campanis."


Who was also NOT a racist


73 posted on 02/04/2005 2:07:34 PM PST by sam_whiskey (Peace through Strength)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian4Bush
No, it still seems to me that he should have been honest: "No, I won't give you this ice" (pointing to the necklace) "but I'll be happy to get You one. Let me talk to you after the shoot."

The whole staging was all Culpepper's fault and not the reporters. It looks petty to EVER take something away after you give it, no matter the circumstances. It smacks of being a publicity hound---and for the record, I know DC has a rep as a nice guy. It was mishandled on his part---not the press's, and I usually don't stick up for the media.

74 posted on 02/04/2005 2:09:40 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news (there is no c in Amtrak and no truth in MSM news))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jokelahoma
So it's perfectly acceptable for you to generalize all the folks who posted about Culpepper as "Rush-Lovers"

his comments were specifically referenced, in the culpepper threads, by some of FR's resident racists.

and learn how to spell hypocrisy before you accuse anyone of it. capiche?

75 posted on 02/04/2005 2:09:53 PM PST by Libertarian4Bush (hit 'em low, hit 'em high, and watch our eagles fly!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: BootsOnTheGround

Or, why not be honest and say, "NO. But I'd like to give you this gift." Why is that so tough?


76 posted on 02/04/2005 2:10:24 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news (there is no c in Amtrak and no truth in MSM news))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: roaddog727
The MSM needs to get their facts straight before they go to press.

Don't hold your breath waiting.
Ain't never gonna happen.

77 posted on 02/04/2005 2:10:44 PM PST by Fiddlstix (This Tagline for sale. (Presented by TagLines R US))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LS
The whole staging was all Culpepper's fault and not the reporters.

it was portrayed as if the family's dreams had been shattered. the journalism was irresponsible, and (deliberately?) cast culpepper in a bad light.

it's no different from the selective omissions that get our blood boiling over the media's treatment of GWB.

78 posted on 02/04/2005 2:14:06 PM PST by Libertarian4Bush (hit 'em low, hit 'em high, and watch our eagles fly!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian4Bush
Mmm hmm... "some" being the operative word, yet your post was, in its wording, directed at "Rush Lovers". Not "some" Rush lovers, not "obnoxious" Rush fans, just "Rush Lovers". Yet it's a terrible, terrible thing when someone does that to a player you happen to love. Until we see the apology that should be forthcoming for your rank hypocrisy, you've little room to judge others on their posts.

And just as an FYI, while it isn't true that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel", it is true that catching a typographical error, calling it a spelling error, and criticizing it in a reply is the biggest straw-man there is, and the last refuge of someone who has been caught with no way to defend their actions. I'll refrain from returning the favor with your punctuation.

Your reply didn't change the fact that I believe you still owe an apology to Rush fans whom you maligned with your blanket statement. I won't hold my breath waiting for it, however, since the "holier-than-thou" attitude reflected in your posts on this topic seem to make such a move impossible on your part.

79 posted on 02/04/2005 2:26:22 PM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian4Bush

Screw you for implying a "racist" must = a Rush-lover. You lower yourself to the level of the MSM talking-heads when you do that.


80 posted on 02/04/2005 2:26:45 PM PST by sam_whiskey (Peace through Strength)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson