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

Skip to comments.

Accused Former Duke Lax Player Lands Morgan Stanley Job
The Wall Street Journal ^ | April 18, 2007 | Dana Cimilluca

Posted on 04/18/2007 11:03:11 AM PDT by abb

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 261-270 next last
To: Carolinamom
Nobody deserves such continuous character assassination

Gross mischaracterization. She has not continuously spoken against them. She has been defending herself from attacks such as yours' all for stating the opinion that the boys' behavior irked her.

Her criticism of the boys has actually been mild. You are hyperbolizing.

201 posted on 04/18/2007 5:24:28 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
It was the personal, taunting nature of her comments.

Taunting? Nothing struck me that way. Please cite example.

And do you really consider a statement about someone in the media personal? Like I said, I know some people believe themselves intimate with people in the news but really.

202 posted on 04/18/2007 5:29:20 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: what's up
If it was your personal family she had judged I could understand your personal animosity. But she has expressed an opinion about people featured on national TV. I understand the propensity for viewers, especially younger viewers, to become personally attached to TV figures;

Reade, Colin, and Dave are real human beings, with real families. Many on these threads are alumni of Duke, or have children attending there. Some have been in communication with people near to the families.

So I think you mischaracterize by implying it's some kind of TV celebrity attachment.

but this is no excuse to become personal with someone who you are communicating directly with when she has not gotten personal with you at all.

Hey, as I said before, she laid that card on the table.

203 posted on 04/18/2007 5:33:44 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Reade, Colin, and Dave are real human beings, with real families.

I would venture to say that every media story which goes on for weeks contains real human beings.

And they draw crowds and advertising because people begin to think they really know them.

Thus, the addiction to the MSM. It gets really blown out of proportion, however, when people start to think that when you comment on these media figures you are getting "personal". I think then it might be time to turn off the TV.

204 posted on 04/18/2007 5:38:25 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: what's up; pa mom
The same opinion repeated for 7 hours was not a hyperbole but a fact. She seems obsessed.

The purpose of this thread was to celebrate Reade's getting on w/the rest of his life. It was hijacked unfortunately.

205 posted on 04/18/2007 5:39:58 PM PDT by Carolinamom (God is pleased to get knee-mails.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Carolinamom
The same opinion repeated for 7 hours was not a hyperbole but a fact

No your comment about "character assassination" was hyperbole.

Hyperbole being a quality that appears too often on FR these days, unfortunately.

206 posted on 04/18/2007 5:45:25 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: abb
The 24-year-old Maryland native had a job lined up at J.P. Morgan Chase’s investment bank that was rescinded in the wake of his May 2006 indictment, with the bank telling him it probably wasn’t the best time to be starting a new job. After he was cleared recently, J.P. Morgan came back to Evans and made a new offer, which he declined.
207 posted on 04/18/2007 5:49:13 PM PDT by restornu (I know that thou art redeemed, because of the righteousness of thy Redeemer; 2 Ne 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Labeling his action as immoral was a personal attack on his character. No evidence that he was the one who invited her to “perform”. He left shortly after she arrived, apparently having no inclination to watch HER immorality on display.


208 posted on 04/18/2007 5:54:55 PM PDT by Carolinamom (God is pleased to get knee-mails.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Most of us are glad he did that.

He accepted the job with Morgan Stanley.


209 posted on 04/18/2007 5:55:13 PM PDT by Sue Perkick (And I hope that what I’ve done here today doesn’t force you to have a negative opinion of me….)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: pa mom

Are you kidding? Hiring/obtaining “adult entertainment” by young men at colleges, in the military and any group situation where there is a collection of unattached young males has been going on for a lot longer than you or I our even our grandparents have been around. During the Civil War the troops stationed in the Arlington/Alexandria/DC area referred to it as “going down the line”. It’s part of human nature and it isn’t going to change and you will be “irked” by a large part of the male population past and present if you don’t get over it.


210 posted on 04/18/2007 6:04:23 PM PDT by RJS1950 (The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sue Perkick

Very sad and pathetic people show up here sometimes.


211 posted on 04/18/2007 6:08:47 PM PDT by Locomotive Breath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Taunting? Nothing struck me that way. Please cite example.

"These kids still irk me." and "Lie down with dogs . . ."

212 posted on 04/18/2007 6:09:13 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Carolinamom; pa mom
Labeling his action as immoral was a personal attack on his character.

You are mischaracterizing what she said. Here's what pa mom said about him.

And I have commended that guy for his behavior.

You are not presenting the facts.

213 posted on 04/18/2007 6:11:18 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Sue Perkick

the way I read it he declined

After he was cleared recently, J.P. Morgan came back to Evans and made a new offer, which he declined.

****

JPMorgan Chase retains Chemical Bank’s headquarters and stock history. ... with some Drexel partners, sought to begin what is now called Morgan Stanley. ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPMorgan_Chase


214 posted on 04/18/2007 6:12:52 PM PDT by restornu (I know that thou art redeemed, because of the righteousness of thy Redeemer; 2 Ne 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: pa mom
How is it repugnant to say that men shouldn’t be looking at women stripping, that their behavior was risky?

I'm back! Well, risky? yes! But that's a far cry from repugnant, and beats the heck out of sinful.

Christ was invited to dinner by a Pharisee (Luke 7: 36-48) and he, in turn, allowed a prostitute to enter and wash his feet with her tears. The Pharisee said to himself: "If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what sort of woman this is who is touching him, for she is a sinner." Part of Christ's reply was: "You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven--for she loved much. But he who is forgiven little, loves little.".

I'm not writing this to rebuke you but to point out that what Christ sees isn't necessarily what we see. Who knows what purpose we serve in His kingdom? Who knows what will come of out our efforts? Is it unseemly to consort with prostitutes (or strippers...in your context)? Perhaps, in our World. But is it in Christ's World? It merely seems to me that the answer to that rests with Him and not us. Perhaps we should reserve our judgment on such matters, and let Him rule.

215 posted on 04/18/2007 6:13:14 PM PDT by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
"These kids still irk me."

She was saying how she felt as far as the behavior with strippers. She wasn't taunting.

And then she quoted a maxim... which is said quite often and very true. And if you need me to explain it it is that if you engage in nefarious behavior you may get "fleas". That is...if you live a very clean life you are less apt to suffer bad consequences. Not to say nothing bad will ever happen to you, but you are less apt than if you run with a loose crowd.

If you were personally taunted by these comments you may be an overly sensitive person. Again, you may be too attached to celebrity figures on TV.

216 posted on 04/18/2007 6:16:57 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: pa mom
Why the personal attacks? I have been unfailingly polite to you.

I know this wasn't in reply to one of my responses, but yet I hope you don't feel I've personally attacked you. I've simply tried to point out some differences of opinion between us.

I simply don't believe that what these young men did was immoral or deserves censure. Was it callous or a youthful folly? Yes! Was it repugnant? No!

Much of the criticism you've received is unjust. You simply aired your viewpoint. Yet to many, your viewpoint seems to censure actions that aren't reproachful to most people; even those of a conservative mind. I guess that's what's so upsetting to so many. In any event, hang in there; and have a good evening.

Jim

217 posted on 04/18/2007 6:29:49 PM PDT by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath

It was stupid enough in the beginning but after a year it’s beyond petty.


218 posted on 04/18/2007 7:07:59 PM PDT by Sue Perkick (And I hope that what I’ve done here today doesn’t force you to have a negative opinion of me….)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Since you disregarded this before, I'll repeat:

Many on these threads are alumni of Duke, or have children attending there. Some have been in communication with people near to the families.

So I think you mischaracterize by implying it's some kind of TV celebrity attachment.

219 posted on 04/18/2007 7:17:23 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: what's up
These kids still irk me.

She was saying how she felt as far as the behavior with strippers.

Agreed.

She wasn't taunting.

I say that she clearly was. I guess we'll just have to leave it at that.

220 posted on 04/18/2007 7:27:47 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 261-270 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