For readers of the Daily Courier in Prescott, Arizona. Comment and discuss. Be nice, now.
Muggs archive
▼
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Three events mark Sept. 11 anniversary
The comments say it all. The teabaggers will try to hijack the anniversary to push their conspiracy fantasies. And the Courier is right there to help. Notice that the other two event announcements include nothing like this. The teabagger press release probably included a lot of nonsense that the others didn't, but Paula should have known to leave it out and the editor should have redlined it.
2 comments:
I encourage you to share your own views and experience with me and other readers. How you do that matters, and I'm committed to maintaining a place where readers and commenters can feel safe from adolescent BS. So here's the deal:
There are two kinds of anonymous comments: those by people who have a genuine fear of revenge from the dark side, and those from darksiders just hiding to avoid accountability. You may post comments anonymously, but I reserve the right to treat anonymous comments as found items that belong to me and do with them as I see fit.
If, on the other hand, you're willing to stand by your convictions and post under your own name or a regular handle, your comments belong to you, and I'll edit them only on egregious violations of respect for others.
If this doesn't work for you, I'm sure you'll be happier somewhere else.
"The Courier is right there to help"? Funny how short some people's memories are. The Courier took it on the chin for not covering their last event, and now the Courier is in bed with the teabaggers? Make up your mind!
ReplyDeleteIf that was taking it on the chin, dear Anonymous (too-chicken-to-ID-yourself-Courier-employee), y'all are mighty thin-skinned down there, a phenomenon I have observed regularly over the years. It's also clear that you're way more sensitive to criticism from the right -- your identified we-group.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, it wasn't me who complained about non-coverage of that teabagger meeting, that was the teabaggers. The thing I remarked on was the non-coverage of the march on the Square acouple months ago, and only then because I expected y'all to give it the shoot-the-puny-crowd-in-foreground-so-it-looks-bigger treatment.
Just to reemphasize, in case you didn't get it: you should not have published the "current threats to freedom that loom ..." graf. That was a very basic and glaring editorial error.