Your part of the dialogue may be over, but mine isn't. I won't yield to tactics of attrition and I'll avoid responding with insulting narrative. I have been respectful to your dissenting opinion and up until that last post you have kept your responses at a genteel level. MsTitan "gets" what you don't. Many others do as well, they just don't respond because you are blind to what it obvious to so many. Sure- Pac is not a model citizen, he has engaged in behavior offensive to many which has resulted in criminal and civil charges. Goodell has suspended him under the premise that guilt in the court of public opinion alone is sufficient to warrant a conduct policy violation. Apparently, only for Pac though, because already there are examples where Goodell could have enforced the same premises on others (Vick, Porter, etc) and he chose not to. Guilt in the court of public opinion alone sufficient to warrant a conduct policy violation. Sufficient enough to strip a man of his livelihood. Did Pac deserve it- SURE- IF HE IS TRULY GUILTY OF THE ALLEGATIONS. I, and many others, have no problem with that. But the league does not have the right to engage in the same type of justice used by lynch mobs and witch trials. NAMELY- GUILT IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION ALONE IS ENOUGH TO IMPOSE PUNISHMENT. You see the problem with bigotry is the recalcitrance to review one's own beliefs. The irrational defense mechanism that somebody just might be wrong. Our country was founded on principles to protect individual rights such as the right to a fair and speedy trial, innocence until proven guilty, and later protection of civil liberties were added to prevent unfair labor practices. You see, I believe, you hate Pac so much that you can't accept that he was unfairly treated by the league policy. In fact, you deny the obvious that the policy was not administered consistently. I have presented numerous logical explanations to demonstrate this to you, yet you still repeat the same arguments. You "ping-pong" logic when you debate. So, unfortunately, I must resign to myself that you suffer from bigotry. (Look up the definition). I have on numerous occasions proposed that we simply "agree to disagree" on the issue- yet you then respond spewing some form of argument that I logically dismissed SEVERAL times in posts previous. Pac- suspended BEFORE legal guilt. All others- suspended AFTER legal guilt. Policy=Arbitrary. You want the last word- have it. I am done. For the benefit of the forum, I will stop responding to you on this topic and let the thread sink off of page one.