USA Today is one paper my schedule rarely allows time to peruse. Sport's columns I normally glance over quickly.
It was then a relief to find one Sports writer who labels correctly the "debate over what damage has been done to Bryant's image and his endorsement power..." as "...irrelevant and insulting."
1 posted on
07/22/2003 10:06:26 PM PDT by
bd476
To: bd476; Admin Moderator
You changed the title, which is discouraged here.
The title is "Bryant takes shot."
If you want to make an editorial comment, do it in the space below the article.
Changing the title GUARANTEES that someone will post this article again tomorrow, with the proper title, thus wasting precious bandwidth.
2 posted on
07/22/2003 10:10:56 PM PDT by
sinkspur
To: bd476
Don't change the title. Thank you.
To: bd476
the mistake of adultery
Crapping your pants when you think you are going to pass gas is a mistake. Forgetting about your child and shoving yourself into a woman not your wife and doing so without any STD protection is a bit more than a "mistake".
4 posted on
07/22/2003 10:13:56 PM PDT by
isthisnickcool
(Liberals - Their neural synapses are corroded.)
To: bd476
Bryant then called his alleged victim a liar."I've been falsely accused of something," Bryant said, "and I'm innocent."
This is the nastiest possible way of saying "Bryant says he is innocent." This columnist is basically saying Bryant's been accused of something so horrible that he should not even have a chance to claim that he's not guilty.
What is it with these rapist sports columnists? I can call him a rapist if I want. It's not like O'Connor can deny that he's a rapist, or he would be calling me a liar. And, you know, it's wrong to call someone a liar, even if they, you know, might be lying. Yeah. </sarcasm> <Note that this is sarcasm, and I'm not actually accusing Mr. O'Connor of being a rapist>
6 posted on
07/22/2003 10:18:46 PM PDT by
xm177e2
(Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
To: bd476
Actually, potential damage to Bryant's image and endorsement power are at the crux of the matter. The issue isn't merely if he raped the woman or not; but rather what he and future athletes have to lose by simply being accused of rape. If such stars are fair game for accusations while the accusers remain hidden - thereby, not having anything to lose - then presumption of innocence is dead. The fact that an accusation carries so much weight, means any star is a target.
To: bd476
The real question is "Did Scott Peterson kill Kobe Bryant?"
15 posted on
07/23/2003 5:50:45 AM PDT by
AppyPappy
(If You're Not A Part Of The Solution, There's Good Money To Be Made In Prolonging The Problem.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson