Comments on: Slate Hatchet Job On Firefighter Ricci http://www.conunderground.com/slate-hatchet-job-on-firefighter-ricci/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=slate-hatchet-job-on-firefighter-ricci We are not here, you didn't see us. Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:43:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: admin http://www.conunderground.com/slate-hatchet-job-on-firefighter-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-148 admin Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:23:34 +0000 http://www.conunderground.com/?p=3453#comment-148 Ha ha I hatcheted the hatchet, you are very astute. Ha ha I hatcheted the hatchet, you are very astute.

]]> By: M. Wilson http://www.conunderground.com/slate-hatchet-job-on-firefighter-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-147 M. Wilson Mon, 13 Jul 2009 20:39:47 +0000 http://www.conunderground.com/?p=3453#comment-147 Is this supposed to be journalism? If you wish to get your point across to a broader audience (and not just yell/preach at those that are ALREADY on your bandwagon), you might consider using citations and actual arguments. Your piece on a hatchet job is in itself a hatchet job- and a poor one. Don\'t turn into another Rush Limbaugh wannabe. Is this supposed to be journalism? If you wish to get your point across to a broader audience (and not just yell/preach at those that are ALREADY on your bandwagon), you might consider using citations and actual arguments.

Your piece on a hatchet job is in itself a hatchet job- and a poor one. Don\’t turn into another Rush Limbaugh wannabe.

]]> By: admin http://www.conunderground.com/slate-hatchet-job-on-firefighter-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-146 admin Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:39:44 +0000 http://www.conunderground.com/?p=3453#comment-146 In neither of the three law suits did Mr Ricci seek any special advantage because of his dyslexia. Did he want to be treated as equal to everyone else? Sure who doesn't?As we all know the last case has nothing to do with his handicap at all but of course Dahlia is not known for letting facts interfere with her,ahem, stories. In neither of the three law suits did Mr Ricci seek any special advantage because of his dyslexia. Did he want to be treated as equal to everyone else? Sure who doesn’t?As we all know the last case has nothing to do with his handicap at all but of course Dahlia is not known for letting facts interfere with her,ahem, stories.

]]> By: oldnassau http://www.conunderground.com/slate-hatchet-job-on-firefighter-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-145 oldnassau Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:29:19 +0000 http://www.conunderground.com/?p=3453#comment-145 You are quite correct in labeling Slate's article as "a hatchet job". First, Mr. Ricci is not responsible for the news media's supposed depiction of him "as a reluctant standard-bearer". He has never portrayed himself as "reluctant", or eager, for that matter. He has simply defended his rights. Second, an perhaps more importantly, the Slate article fails to mention that Mr. Ricci WON both his lawsuits!. The first, in 1995, "... was settled in 1997 with a confidential settlement in which Ricci withdrew his lawsuit in exchange for a job with the fire department and $11,143 in attorney's fees. As for the second, as we all know, the SCOTUS agreed with him. I guess that Dahlia Lithwick, the Slate writer, knows better than either the City of New Haven (who settled #1) and the SCOTUS. Third, Ms. Lithwick completely misrepresents your comment noting that Mr. Ricci never requested special treatment for his dyslexia. Your comment correctly refers to only his second case against New Haven for throwing out the promotion test. It (the comment) does NOT, as she implies, refer to any of his earlier actions. You are quite correct in labeling Slate’s article as “a hatchet job”.
First, Mr. Ricci is not responsible for the news media’s supposed depiction of him “as a reluctant standard-bearer”. He has never portrayed himself as “reluctant”, or eager, for that matter. He has simply defended his rights.
Second, an perhaps more importantly, the Slate article fails to mention that Mr. Ricci WON both his lawsuits!. The first, in 1995, “… was settled in 1997 with a confidential settlement in which Ricci withdrew his lawsuit in exchange for a job with the fire department and $11,143 in attorney’s fees. As for the second, as we all know, the SCOTUS agreed with him.
I guess that Dahlia Lithwick, the Slate writer, knows better than either the City of New Haven (who settled #1) and the SCOTUS.
Third, Ms. Lithwick completely misrepresents your comment noting that Mr. Ricci never requested special treatment for his dyslexia. Your comment correctly refers to only his second case against New Haven for throwing out the promotion test. It (the comment) does NOT, as she implies, refer to any of his earlier actions.

]]>