Not quite! Well I'll be durned. Amy's now a wife and a new mom. Good for her. I like her even better now.

>The
>2nd place person invariably winds
>up with a better deal,
>no?

What has Jenn M. been up to nowadays?

Looked that up yesterday. She left Clifford Chance and went to an entertainment law firm on the cliffs of Santa Monica. Ha!

On Imus when he was asked about this he likend it to being in the Olympics and winning the gold medal. What if someone had been asked if the second place winner could also receive a gold medal?

The fact that lost respect for him is sad and appears that you never really had any respect for him in the first place.

It has been done before, last winter Olympics 2002, the Russian Pairs skaters did not have as good of a program as the Canadians, the Canadians ended up with the silver and the Russians gold, the IOC took the rare step and awarding dual gold medals to both teams, they even had a new medal ceremony where both teams were praised and each got to hear their anthem and see their flags raised. The fact that they shared the gold does not take away from either teams perfomance.

Sorry but totally different situation. In the case of the skaters it was shown that there was bias in the judging of the original gold medal recipients. In order to fix the mistake they awarding the medals to the other couple.
In this siutation there was nothing to rectify. Randall was the winner. Trump had already planned to offer 2 spots but failed to tell any of the contestants.

>This is an excerpt from Randalls
>website(http://www.randalpinkett.com/faith/index.asp
>
>"God has truly blessed me. He
>has blessed me with incredible
>talents in engineering, business and
>technology. He has blessed me
>with a loving wife, a
>wonderful family and caring friends.
>Perhaps most importantly, he has
>blessed me with the opportunity
>to do His will by
>working in the service of
>others.
>
>At an early age I learned
>that "to whom much is
>given, much is expected" (Luke
>12:48). I therefore place great
>emphasis on using my God-given
>talents to give back to
>the community. Throughout my professional
>career there has always been
>a component of my business
>and entrepreneurial endeavors, speaking engagements,
>research, writing, and civic and
>volunteer activities focused on helping
>others."
>
>Wonder if his "faith" came into
>play at all when he
>decided to not give Rebecca
>the opportunity to work for
>Trump.

Rebecca was 'business', not 'volunteer activities' or community'. She won nothing, Randal owed her nothing, and she got nothing - from Randal or Trump.

This is the
>first time I could not
>decide which one I wanted
>and after Randall's stunt I
>have lost so much respect
>for him.

I'm sure Randal is devastated.

I find it surprising that Randall has lost respect (by some) simply because he doesn't want to share his prize. Again, if DT wanted to hire Rebecca so badly, he would have done it and Randall would have had nothing to say about it. I believe that had DT said, " I can't decide. You both are hired!", Randall would have congratulated Rebecca and kept it to moving. But DT turned to Randall and told him he was hired. Randall doesn't have to share any job opportunity with the second best person. He won fair and square raising $11k for his charity on the day of the event. As it was said previously, why weren't the other winners asked to share their spotlight with the runner-up? Why must Randall be the one to share what he rightfully earned. YES EARNED! I don't think Randall is the one being selfish. He was a shining star from day one and deserves to win this competition he signed up for. If the tables were turned people would be screaming bloody mary that DT had the nerve to ask a woman to share her rightfully earned prize with the second best. It's unfair to expect Randall to do that as well.

>I find it surprising that Randall
>has lost respect (by some)
>simply because he doesn't want
>to share his prize. Again,
>if DT wanted to hire
>Rebecca so badly, he would
>have done it and Randall
>would have had nothing to
>say about it. I believe
>that had DT said, "
>I can't decide. You both
>are hired!", Randall would have
>congratulated Rebecca and kept it
>to moving. But DT turned
>to Randall and told him
>he was hired. Randall doesn't
>have to share any job
>opportunity with the second best
>person. He won fair and
>square raising $11k for his
>charity on the day of
>the event. As it was
>said previously, why weren't the
>other winners asked to share
>their spotlight with the runner-up?
>Why must Randall be the
>one to share what he
>rightfully earned. YES EARNED! I
>don't think Randall is the
>one being selfish. He was
>a shining star from day
>one and deserves to win
>this competition he signed up
>for. If the tables were
>turned people would be screaming
>bloody mary that DT had
>the nerve to ask a
>woman to share her rightfully
>earned prize with the second
>best. It's unfair to expect
>Randall to do that as
>well.

I couldn't have said it better myself!