Pitts Targeted by White Supremacists

Precisely my point, although there are many on here who would argue Pitts' agressive stance and tone is what he's using to jolt people's thinking. I just worry that it will jolt them the wrong way. Important message, but maybe the wrong tone.

 

I think this also shows how the rich can buy themselves a slice of showcasing their innocense through the media.

That shouldn't be something only given to those who can afford it.

 

Oh. My. God.

Chee: I'm not disconnecting anything.

I agree with the commentary, which I read when it first ran, and the use of the last line to summarize his feelings. I noted above I'd use a similar line to summarize my feelings. Hell, my last line would have been more terse because that's who I am. Hammer those idiots.

No one said the line obscures the overall piece, though you responded as if someone did make that charge. One poster noted how the target audience would react to that line. They'd be pissed. And they'd be pissed because they're loons.

That poster used the word incendiary. I infer from your response that you didn't like his/her use of that word. Correct?

The line is incendiary. But then again, so is the column. And that's a good thing. That is exactly the type of response called for to refute the charges of those loons.

Where has anyone here who has read the piece said they agreed with all Pitts' points until they got to the last line and after that their opinion was altered?

 

read the comments listed beneath his article....

It's pretty much typical of many of today's "readers." Not so much reflective of the posters on this site.

 

Not sure how the rich -- I'm assuming you're referring to the Duke case -- "buy" media coverage. How specifically does that happen?

 

It seems to me that the more mney you have, the likelyhood of possible innocense vindicating you tends to find its way through the press compared to the hordes of average income americans who've been railroaded by the system only to find vindication after years of incarceration and the help of Barry Schek.

 

Selfishly, I sometimes find myself wishing for a real-life application of "Starman justice". This is one of those times.

 

Perhaps you're misrepresenting it a bit. The rich typically can afford better attorneys, etc. Not sure how buying media access in and of itself is a path to innocence for the rich. Not that I'm defending them, mind you, because I'm so far from rich I can't even see its dust trail.

 

You're right though. Big time attornies are much more likely to have inroads through the media than your average everyday Legal Aid lawyer.

 

These psychos want to basically exterminate certain groups off the face of the earth? Good, I'm all for that. Let's start with the assholes, themselves. All those Nazi-wannabes should get curb-stomped, only have Tony Soprano put all his weight behind each boot.

 

But Chee....one could also say that the Duke allegations attracted the media it received because they were "rich", and when they were first arrested and charged, their "status" didn't work in their favor at all.

 

Precisely the point I tried to make. If anything, their rich status got them demonized, not revered.