The conventional wisdom is often wrong.
A person may use his fundamental right to communicate whatever he likes, but the people like his point as per their personal choice only and not necessarily that which is always fundamentally right.
A person who is in the elements of his own is often thrown to a situation to be shown all alone; and people who aren’t may be in a position seen by all, but they are often unknown to be utterly lone.
If life is a game, then the people who play in center with their own style only make the real name; but for others the aim is just the same for they do anything from comment, copy, criticize, cover or cheer by being anywhere.
Sometimes, something of someone is liked too much not because it holds too much value or has a true value, but because there are too many bidders and buyers to have the same thing at the resale value.
The moot question is not that how many persons are of good or not so good character, but who applauds the character truly as the real beauty factor in own and others' lives.
First person to appreciate the good points of others is always special in life as he or she manifests his or her leadership through initiatives.
First female referee can't play probably, either, right? But you're thinking the game like you know it? Okay, see ya.
Of course, all people have their own reasons for believing what they do about gender. In my case, in over two decades of collaborating with men and women in music - conductors or otherwise - I have seen no distinction.
What is trust, sidhe-seer, but expectation that another will behave in a certain fashion, consistent with prior actions?
I love craftsmanship of any kind, a job well done either by my chiropractor or carpenter, and I am addicted to print, the type, the ink. But my basic passion is journalism and I can't live without being online.