Fuzzy Dice

1. A Michigan law prohibiting items being hung from the rearview mirror of a car might be revised because the original law is not enforced or taken seriously. The original law bans any item being hung from the rear view mirror, while the revised version of the law would only ban large items that obstruct the view of the driver.
2. "'I thought it was legal as long as it's not something that obstructs your view,'Pentecost said recently."
I like this quote because I believe it best summarizes the main points of the article. It shows the ignorance of the general public concerning the law. It also brings to the attention of the reader the idea that not all items hanging from the rearview mirror are a safety hazard, and that only large items capable of obstructing the driver's view should be banned.
3. I am in favor of the revised law, but against the original law. I believe that the original law banning all items being hung from a rearview mirrors is fruitless and ineffectual. A vast majority of cops were not even enforcing the law, and the general public was not obeying the law. The common people did not even know the law was in place. I do believe that people should be able to hang items from their rearview mirrors as long as the items do not get in their line of sight. If these items could potentially distract the driver, the lives of other civilians could be in danger. The attention of the driver needs to be completely focused on the task at hand: driving. Not everyone is capable of handling a large item hanging from their mirror, so to avoid the deaths of innocents, hanging large objects from rearview mirrors should be banned.

Lebron James

1. The point Albom is trying to make very clear is that Lebron James was not targeted because of his race. James went from being one of America's most beloved athletes to the sixth-most dislike athlete as a result of his enormous ego. Lebron lost fans because of his arrogance. He didn't lose all white fans or all black fans, but people of all races were up in arms after he pompously made the announcement that he would now be playing for the Miami Heat. Albom is tired of black athletes blaming all of their controversy on race just because it is easy to do so.
2. I agree with Albom completely. Why should a black man be able to blame the results of his own arrogance on race, while the white man can not hide behind the race issue? The general public needs to understand that just because a black man is targeted, it's not just because the color of his skin. The way Lebron announced that he was leaving Cleveland implied that he believed was God's gift to basketball, and naturally he was attacked for it. Lebron's popularity fell apart due to his own actions, not because he is black.
3. In my opinion, Albom's strongest point comes at the end of his essay, when he references Brett Favre's leaving Green Bay. "By the way, there was similar vitriol toward Brett Favre after he left Green Bay. Ego. Money. Why didn't CNN ask Favre if it was about race?" -Mitch Albom. This quote combined with Albom's assertion at the beginning of his essay, the ridiculousness of black athletes being able to blame their controversy on race, perfectly portrays his point. Brett Favre is a white man, therefore he could not blame his troubles on race, but Lebron James, a black man, can? It doesn't make any sense, especially when the arrogance of Lebron surpasses that of Favre. In his essay, Albom is basically pleading with his readers to realize that just because it is easy to blame such conflict on race, they must take one's actions and ego into account.