A new low for the media

Today in the LA Times, Timothy Ruttin has a piece called "Razing Arizona Law" in which he lambasts what he calls Arizona's "Draconian" law, "an American version of apartheid". Even for the LA Times, this is a new low. Amazingly, Ruttin describes the law as doing something completely different from what the law actually does. Ruttin, however, says that he is describing the law "the language of the statute notwithstanding". In other words, Ruttin admits that the law does not say what he is describing, but he is telling us what he knows the law truly says. This is idiotic enough. Ruttin ignores what the statute actually says and makes it up as he goes along. And Ruttin comes up with a racially divisive, hateful interpretation that is designed to make folks angry. Okay, so there is a race baiting, hate mongering columnist who wrote a piece for the LA Times. But there was also an editor at the Times who read this piece of garbage before it ran. So the Times read this and knew that Ruttin was admitting that he ignored the actual statute to tell the readers about the apartheid statute that he made up. The Times should be ashamed and print a retraction and correction. Ruttin should be dumped. But that is only my opinion, and I did read the language of his article.