-
Sidebar Ads
-
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Email
Print
Digg
Facebook
StumbleUpon
Google
Yahoo!Member Opinions:
By: 2isonU on 6/28/12
Finding the above editorial ("Post files appeal in Islamic lawsuit") perplesing, I would like to address the following posting to (1) Rutherford County Judge Robert Corlew III and (2) Rutherford County Chancery Court Clerm and Master John Bratcher:
Stated Corlew III, via this editorial: "We continue to have seriuous questions wether The Post qualifies as a newspaper of general circulation in Rutherford County."
PARROTING Corlew III, Bratcher was quoted as saying, "Given the uncertianty . . . the Chancery Court will no longer use that newspaper to publish legal notices, effective March 1, 2011."
First, Let me make clear this fact: It makes total sense that Bratcher would PARROT Corlew's stance - right vs. wrong not mattering one eye-o-ta - beecause it wouldn't be prudent, career-wise, for a Clerk and Master to rebut a judge with whom he works . . . do you follow me?!
Judge Corlew III, allow me to let in you on a very simple-to-understand secret: Under Tennessee law, the Murfreesboro Post meets all guidlines necessary to qualify as newspaper of general circulation in Tennessee. With your inductive and dxeductive reasoning skills, surely to goodness, you can sort out this in that space between your left & right ears.
If I didn't better, I would ask: Do you two - Judge Corlew III and Clerk and Master Bratcher - live in a "tree house"?
However, being an understanding, civil-minded sort, I'm going to intervene on behalf of the belabored Corlew III and Bratcher. For reasons of therapeutic reality, professionalism & an apology to Rutherford County and its residents, you two pillars of the community should stand on The Square and, over a good sound system - as a duet - sing repeatedly: "The Murfreesboro Post is a newspaper, indeed/Please forgive us, these words, please, heed"!
Finding the above editorial ("Post files appeal in Islamic lawsuit") perplesing, I would like to address the following posting to (1) Rutherford County Judge Robert Corlew III and (2) Rutherford County Chancery Court Clerm and Master John Bratcher:
Stated Corlew III, via this editorial: "We continue to have seriuous questions wether The Post qualifies as a newspaper of general circulation in Rutherford County."
PARROTING Corlew III, Bratcher was quoted as saying, "Given the uncertianty . . . the Chancery Court will no longer use that newspaper to publish legal notices, effective March 1, 2011."
First, Let me make clear this fact: It makes total sense that Bratcher would PARROT Corlew's stance - right vs. wrong not mattering one eye-o-ta - beecause it wouldn't be prudent, career-wise, for a Clerk and Master to rebut a judge with whom he works . . . do you follow me?!
Judge Corlew III, allow me to let in you on a very simple-to-understand secret: Under Tennessee law, the Murfreesboro Post meets all guidlines necessary to qualify as newspaper of general circulation in Tennessee. With your inductive and dxeductive reasoning skills, surely to goodness, you can sort out this in that space between your left & right ears.
If I didn't better, I would ask: Do you two - Judge Corlew III and Clerk and Master Bratcher - live in a "tree house"?
However, being an understanding, civil-minded sort, I'm going to intervene on behalf of the belabored Corlew III and Bratcher. For reasons of therapeutic reality, professionalism & an apology to Rutherford County and its residents, you two pillars of the community should stand on The Square and, over a good sound system - as a duet - sing repeatedly: "The Murfreesboro Post is a newspaper, indeed/Please forgive us, these words, please, heed"!
By: Venerable on 6/28/12
One point to raise here is that now that the DNJ's website is now closed to everyone that does not have a subscription, it undermines the "general circulation" and accessibility of these public notifications. The Murfreesboro Post is free in both print and web, but everyone has to pay for the DNJ in print and web. Couldn't the legal argument be made that the Post is in fact more accessible to the public, especially low-income families?
One point to raise here is that now that the DNJ's website is now closed to everyone that does not have a subscription, it undermines the "general circulation" and accessibility of these public notifications. The Murfreesboro Post is free in both print and web, but everyone has to pay for the DNJ in print and web. Couldn't the legal argument be made that the Post is in fact more accessible to the public, especially low-income families?
By: 2isonU on 6/28/12
Judge Corlew & Clerk and Master Bratcher, I thought I would share with you two this posting from a previous edition of The MP (though on the same subject, Corlew not recognizing The MP as a newspaper of general circulation):
***
(NOTE: To qualify as a newspaper in the state of Tennessee, the following requirements must be met.)
(1) The newspaper in question must be published once weekly, at least. The MP is published twice weekly.
(2) The newspaper in question must have news of general content. The MP features an eclectic mix of content.
(3) The newspaper in question must be available throughout the county. The MP is available at a plethora of locations throughout Rutherford County.
Backing up bit, in 2007, the Tennessee Attorney General sent a letter to The MP stating it met the guidelines necessary to qualify as a legitimate newspaper.
Still, Attorney Alisha Hodge, an ombudsman for the state of Tennessee Comptroller’s Office, also expressed that The MP, in fact, qualified as a newspaper.
For some “strange reason(s),” Corlew failed to mention Attorney Hodge’s comment (a substantial comment, from a substantial source) recognizing that The MP met all qualifications necessary to be called a legitimate newspaper.
Now comes the question: What, precisely, are the “reasons” behind Corlew’s reluctance to publicly recognize The MP as a newspaper?
(A) Is he naïve to the definitive guidelines that spell “what is an actual newspaper” vs. “what is not”?
(B) Does he have a “set agenda” that prohibits him from publicly recognizing The MP as a legitimate newspaper in Tennessee?
(C) Does someone or some group have “some kind of “leverage” over Corlew?
(D) Any of the above?
(E) Any combination of the
(F) All of the above
Judge Corlew & Clerk and Master Bratcher, I thought I would share with you two this posting from a previous edition of The MP (though on the same subject, Corlew not recognizing The MP as a newspaper of general circulation):
***
(NOTE: To qualify as a newspaper in the state of Tennessee, the following requirements must be met.)
(1) The newspaper in question must be published once weekly, at least. The MP is published twice weekly.
(2) The newspaper in question must have news of general content. The MP features an eclectic mix of content.
(3) The newspaper in question must be available throughout the county. The MP is available at a plethora of locations throughout Rutherford County.
Backing up bit, in 2007, the Tennessee Attorney General sent a letter to The MP stating it met the guidelines necessary to qualify as a legitimate newspaper.
Still, Attorney Alisha Hodge, an ombudsman for the state of Tennessee Comptroller’s Office, also expressed that The MP, in fact, qualified as a newspaper.
For some “strange reason(s),” Corlew failed to mention Attorney Hodge’s comment (a substantial comment, from a substantial source) recognizing that The MP met all qualifications necessary to be called a legitimate newspaper.
Now comes the question: What, precisely, are the “reasons” behind Corlew’s reluctance to publicly recognize The MP as a newspaper?
(A) Is he naïve to the definitive guidelines that spell “what is an actual newspaper” vs. “what is not”?
(B) Does he have a “set agenda” that prohibits him from publicly recognizing The MP as a legitimate newspaper in Tennessee?
(C) Does someone or some group have “some kind of “leverage” over Corlew?
(D) Any of the above?
(E) Any combination of the
(F) All of the above
By: johnphilleo on 6/28/12
I agree that the Post has more potential public access than the DNJ because it is free in print and online. It is obviously a legitimate newspaper, and can be picked up almost anywhere around town. I answer (E) Any combination of the above. I believe Corlew has a set agenda and that there are definitely groups who have leverage over him. The Post is merely another victim of the tragic campaign to deny the local Muslims their constitutional rights.
I agree that the Post has more potential public access than the DNJ because it is free in print and online. It is obviously a legitimate newspaper, and can be picked up almost anywhere around town. I answer (E) Any combination of the above. I believe Corlew has a set agenda and that there are definitely groups who have leverage over him. The Post is merely another victim of the tragic campaign to deny the local Muslims their constitutional rights.
By: bota on 6/29/12
I say "Salom" to all the above posts. The online MP is a lot more informative and allows a much, much broader range of public opinion. (It) is less political and free from a corporate dictator and that in itself allows the reader to be better and more honestly informed on local issues and news.
I say "Salom" to all the above posts. The online MP is a lot more informative and allows a much, much broader range of public opinion. (It) is less political and free from a corporate dictator and that in itself allows the reader to be better and more honestly informed on local issues and news.
By: 2isonU on 6/29/12
Hail-hail the Solomonic wisdom of "Bota"! Where others are engulfed in a cloud of total DARKNESS, Bota truly sees the LIGHT! Sock-it-to-'em, King Bota!
Hail-hail the Solomonic wisdom of "Bota"! Where others are engulfed in a cloud of total DARKNESS, Bota truly sees the LIGHT! Sock-it-to-'em, King Bota!
Login and voice your opinion!