Skip to main content

My response to a Charlotte Observer letter-to-the-editor

I've often been critical of the letters-to-the-editor published in the local Columbus Dispatch paper, but know my local paper is far from alone in the practice of publishing such awful letters. Just this morning, I read the following letter-to-the-editor, published by the Charlotte Observer with regard to Carolina Panthers' starting quarterback, Cam Newton, entitled, "Cam should marry his son's mother":

"In response to 'The Chosen One: baby will change Cam's life (Jan. 1):

So the man whom we celebrate, and with good reason, has produced a son. Congratulations would be in order if he had been man enough to marry the mother of his child and make a home. This happy occasion is blighted when Cam, whose own parents were married, skips the very basis of being a good parent.

I am just very sorry and very disappointed.

Patricia S. Broderick, Mooresville"

Granted, judging by her picture, the author of this piece appears to be between the ages 92 and 143, but still... This woman may be from a different era, but marriage is not a prerequisite to being a good mother, father, or having a happy, healthy family. It's becoming increasingly more commonplace for couples to hold off marriage or not get married at all, not to mention having a child out of wedlock, than had been the case in years past. It's also becoming more commonplace for unmarried couples to live together prior to getting married, so I'm not sure why in the world Ms. Broderick felt the need to italicize the term "home," insinuating the well-paid NFL star quarterback isn't providing a home for his long-time girlfriend and child. Segueing from that, this child wasn't the result of a one-night stand, a drunken night out, a wild frat party, or a fling; he was the result of a long-term couple which hasn't officially tied the knot yet. When some athletes have been convicted of rape, murder, domestic violence, etc., this woman really has the gall to complain about an athlete having a child with a long-time girlfriend? Seriously? Perhaps this woman's revised New Year's resolution should be, "I'll stop judging people like it's 1916." That'd be nice, for last I checked, it's 2016...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cam-newton-baby-observer-letter_568acda9e4b0b958f65c650f

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...