H. Beatty Chadwick has been in a staring match with the judicial system for the past 14 years, and the system just blinked. Chadwick was ordered to pay his ex-wife $2.5 million after their divorce. He refused to pay saying that he couldn't because he lost the money in a series of "bad investments." The judge in the case didn't believe him and sent him to jail for contempt. That was 14 years ago. Last week another judge let Chadwick go saying that "continued imprisonment would be legal only if there was some likelihood that ultimately he would comply with the order; otherwise, the confinement would be merely punitive instead of coercive." Chadwick, now 73, is believed to have served the longest contempt sentence in US history.
According to a study to be published in The Journal of Political Psychology, you can tell someone's political affiliation by looking at the condition of their offices and bedrooms. Conservatives tend to be neat and liberals love a mess. Researchers found that the bedrooms and offices of liberals tend to be colorful and full of books about travel, ethnicity, feminism and music, along with music CDs covering folk, classic and modern rock, as well as art supplies, movie tickets and travel memorabilia. Their conservative contemporaries, on the other hand, tend to surround themselves with calendars, postage stamps, laundry baskets, irons and sewing materials. Their bedrooms and offices are well lit and decorated with sports paraphernalia and flags — especially American ones. Sam Gosling, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Texas at Austin, says these room cues are "behavioral residue." The findings are just the latest in a series of recent attempts to unearth politics in personality, the brain and DNA. I, for one, support a woman's right to clean.
Without responding to a particular message, it seems that people are commonly decrying Wal-Mart, et. al. for refusing to sell Acclaim's 'BMX XXX.' On the other hand, it seems that people applaud Acclaim for exercising its right to make the game and they're glad consumers have the right to buy it. That seems like a double-standard to me. It seems as if people would deny Wal-Mart, et. al. the right to moral outrage. People have forgotten what "tolerance" means; one defintion is, "The endurance of the presence or actions of objectionable persons, or of the expression of offensive opinions" (Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1913, taken from GDict). One need not approve of something in order to "tolerate" it. Voltaire said something like, "I may not like what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." People seem unquestioningly willing to defend Acclaim's "right to say it," but they don't seem equally willing to defend Wal-Mart. Acclaim has no right to Wal-Mart as a sales venue. Wal-Mart should be applauded for its expression of its freedom to choose what products will (and will not) be sold in its stores.