A Rose without thorns
I'm not even through reading your cover story on Rose, but I'm laughing and having a ball reading it ("Headed for Splitsville? Just hope your spouse doesn't hire Rose Palermo," May 15). I had the pleasure of getting to know Rose during the Conway Twitty Estate trial since I served as his public relations firm and she served as an executor of his estate. As a result—and you'll get a kick out of this—Rose performed the wedding ceremony for my husband and me. Selecting Rose was a true indication of our commitment to one another, huh? Yes, we're still happily married and are about to celebrate our 10th wedding anniversary. We're still on our honeymoon. To my knowledge, it's the only wedding ceremony she's ever performed.
I thought you'd enjoy knowing that—almost as much as you likely enjoyed interviewing Rose Palermo.
Susan Andrews Thompson
This article seemed nothing more than an advertisement for Ms. Palermo's services if your goal is to destroy and take unfair advantage of your soon to be ex. The goal in these unfortunate situations is supposed to be fairness and justice. The lawyer's job should be to acquire the necessary facts to reach a fair and just settlement. The first rule in "Rules of Professional Conduct" for an attorney states a "calling to promote justice and public good." Rule 2 of conduct states, " having special responsibility for the quality of justice." Rule 3, "consistent with requirements of honest dealing with others."
In this article, Palermo admits when requested by the opposing counsel to send "credit card statements." Palermo by her own admission "intentionally" sent only the first page of the statements to hide the itemized spending habits of her client. The opposing counsel made the mistake of thinking Ms. Palermo had integrity and professional ethics and would comply with what she admitted to knowing was the requested information. She intentionally withheld the requested information. Where was the judge in this matter? Who oversees this court?
Who you callin' a freak?
First, the state legislature has always engaged in the trivial ("Tennessee Republicans get more unstable by the day," May 14). It is not a right-wing or left-wing conspiracy.
Second, the Category 4 home schoolers whom you describe as "freaky" are really not. The diplomas awarded by these Tennessee schools have been accepted by state government for 30 years until a year ago, when a Department of Education employee claimed they were invalid. Home-school students score higher on nationally normed tests, but because they don't use the state curriculum, some legislators feel the diplomas are worthless.
Right-wing conspiracy? The bill that made the diplomas valid again passed with two-thirds of the House voting for it and all of the Senate.
Which nobody can deny
Let me just say that before anyone has the right to comment on the film House of Numbers, they better have seen it first ("Controversy lingers after premiere of Nashville director's AIDS documentary," May 7). Having watched the film several times, I can assure you that there is nothing "denialist" about it. The film simply offers new information and challenges its audience to think...think outside the box, outside of what has been drilled into our heads about HIV/AIDS for the last 20-plus years. You might be surprised what you'll learn, and you might even leave the theater feeling a bit duped by what you've been told, and rethink what you thought you knew about HIV/AIDS. If you are able to look at it objectively, then you will discover that the documentary can be used as a tool to help inspire and empower those suffering from this horrible syndrome. Maybe there IS hope. Maybe it's not a death sentence after all. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, absolutely. But please do not ignorantly make accusations against something that you haven't even seen for yourself. Do yourself a favor and see House of Numbers. It may just rock your world.
The controversy lingers because The Tennessean made the mistake of giving the Brent Leung crockumentary any semblance of legitimacy in the first place. There is no debate about what causes AIDS among medical researchers and there is no doubt that HIV treatments improve the health of people living with HIV/AIDS. Giving Peter Duesberg and other AIDS Denialists credibility is a disservice to public health and the original write on the Leung film was just that.
How about 31?
I think it's wrong to give a 30-day notice before you die just to get a deposit back ("Please give a 30-day notice before you die," May 14). A person could die anytime without notice. A person can walk down the street and get hit by a car and die. How would we know to give a 30-day notice when we didn't know ahead of time? I guess it's gotten to the point people have to make a will and put in it, "I give a 30-day notice every month in case I die before myself or anyone else knows." Where is the respect for the family or the deceased person?
Wanda Faye Emler
Video of the referenced meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1421914688&x-yt-cl=84503534&v=FIO2vLW1p_A
Video of Eddie Overholt being arrested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84503534&x-yt-ts=1421914688&v=TtDF6-_JnNc
No. Abortion and packing the Judiciary top the agenda this year
While I agree with most of Sherri Cole's post, "lifers" DO most certainly see a…
I will keep a good thought for Greg. He was a man who kept a…
MPD apparently has an inordinate fear of nutsacks falling across the bridge of his nose…