Interesting to note the following, in reference to Jaime Satterfield:
Quote:
Carjack/slayings trial ends with grisly testimony
By Jamie Satterfield
Posted August 17, 2009 at 9:44 a.m. , updated August 17, 2009 at 5:23 p.m.
|
This morning in the print edition, it was "the carjacking trial."
Now (evening of the same day), online, it's "carjack/slayings trial."
Couldn't let go of that "carjacking," could you, Jamie? A reluctant concession to reality (or probably just to a number of complaints) forced you to tack on the slash and the slayings - an ugly neologism, the result, but you don't care: if they demand that I say something about slaying, I'll just throw it in there - "carjack/slayings" - there, I'm done, you racists.
What about "murder" trial? Yes, there are other charges, but the central event was the snuffing of two lives. It is a murder trial: court isn't convened because a vehicle was stolen (which it wasn't) or some jism was spewed (on someone now dead). Murder. Murder. Why can't you say murder?
Too racist?