Oh folks. I don't think this is helpful. Could people who want to keep this going create a separate list serve?
Beverley
Beverley Earle
Gregory H. Adamian Professor of Law
Department of Law, Taxation and Financial Planning
Bentley University
175 Forest Street
Waltham, MA 02452
[log in to unmask]
1-781-891-2915
Cell 1-508-380-8038
-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kurt Schulzke
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 3:36 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: NYT recommits to honest reporting
Randy,
The maudlin morality is just ridiculous. We elected a bald-faced liar to the presidency 8 years ago. Where were you and your compadres then? And what was Hillary Clinton if not another bald-faced liar?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hanson, Randall" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Academy of Legal Studies in Business" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 3:20:28 PM
Subject: Re: NYT recommits to honest reporting
Hi,
You lost me with your last sentence!!! People are not angry about losing an election. People are angry because we elected a morally bankrupt person as the leader of our country. It has nothing to do with respecting your beliefs. If you can't see why there is anger ---- nothing can be said to you to have you understand the reaction.
To make matters worse--- in your email---you are trying to frame the issues to support your position---which does not address why so many are so upset. You are doing exactly what you complain everyone else is doing to you.
Randy Hanson
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Schwerha, Joseph
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 12:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: NYT recommits to honest reporting
Hello:
I voiced my response earlier and have reviewed most, if not all of the responses. It is really discouraging and, frankly, hateful in and of itself (since that seems to be a word being used by a lot of Democrats right now), to marginalize and dismiss opinions that are held by others. I find it curious that at least one respondent seems to think that you can't be a Republican and still care about equality and justice. Another, states to you can't vote for the Republican candidate and still respect our Constitution or Democracy. I respect all of your opinions, no matter how much I disagree with them. Nevertheless, none of you have really discussed the point that I brought up - There are people that REALLY disliked the policies implemented in the last 8 years and the fact that Democratic party put forth a candidate that is very polarizing. The fact that there was a criminal investigation of Hillary by the FBI during the election cycle is not a fiction. It seems like you want to completely dismiss any views that disagree with yours as backward and indicative that everyone who voted for Trump wants to reinstate slavery and do away with equal rights. God forbid we discuss harder issues like our sieve of a border and the ACA and how unaffordable it is quickly becoming. Just because you want to secure our borders doesn't make you a racist. Do you lock your house at night - probably your cars, too? Why? Is that really that different from securing our borders? A lot of women and minorities voted for Trump. Are they all just misinformed, or worse yet, just dumb? Can they not have legitimate points of view that just disagree with yours? And if you want to cut taxes, then - obviously - you hate the poor. And if you are religious, you must be forcing your beliefs on others because you may have sincerely held beliefs that don't fit nicely within the Democratic agenda. And, yes, Trump has policies if you would just look - https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies.
Please, please refrain from framing the issues so that everyone who disagrees with you cannot possibly believe in something that can benefit OUR country. You can paint Republicans with your broad brush all you want; but, please just realize what you're doing. You say you are inclusive (i.e. Stronger Together) and want to incorporate everyone. However, from my point of view, those of you acting like the sky is falling because you lost an election ought to think long and hard about who is tolerant of others' beliefs and who is not.
Warmest Regards,
Joseph J. Schwerha IV, M.S., J.D.
Director, Entrepreneurial Leadership Center Associate Professor of Business Law & Technology Department of Business & Economics California University of Pennsylvania
250 University Ave.
California, PA 15419
P 724.938-1016
C 412.296.3954 (personal)
________________________________
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Dan Levin <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 12:11:50 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: NYT recommits to honest reporting
John, well said.
Dan
On Nov 13, 2016, at 1:31 PM, John Allison <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Government standing down and letting people be themselves is exactly how we got slavery, Jim Crow, gross inequality for women, hatred of gay people and discrimination against them, dirty air and water, man made climate change, massive fraud in the mortgage industry, and a host of other phenomena.
John
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Nan Ellis <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: 11/13/16 12:11 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: NYT recommits to honest reporting
I am not sure what you mean by, "Maybe it's time to stand the government down a bit and let people be themselves?"
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 13, 2016, at 9:08 AM, Kurt Schulzke <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> em to do? Maybe it's time to stand the government down a bit and let people be themselves?
|
