Ghost of a flea

I think you are oversimplifying it slightly. For some I'm sure the antipathy is rooted in an envy of money and privilege.

On the other hand, she is somebody who habitually makes poor choices but appears to suffer no ill from it. Real life is rarely like that for the rich or the poor.

You can imagine what would happen to a nurse colleague of yours, or an accountant colleague of mine, should they be caught in a sex scandal, have a massive ongoing disagreement with a co-worker, be convicted of driving while intoxicated, and finally be caught violating the probation conditions of the DUI sentencing. Termination papers would follow in short order. Friends would be in short supply.

Having some acquaintances who have been, for instance, caught in an affair and charged with a DUI, there is a burdensome personal cost attendant to both. Things are never the same thereafter.

I don't get particular satisfaction of out her current predicament, but let's be blunt. She is this generation's Daisy Buchanan; bereft of any real sense of personal responsibility or consequences for her actions. Jail may be the catalyst that matures her.

I do think she deserves unmitigated scorn for sobbing in the courtroom, though. Failing to fight courageously and showing fear in the face of the enemy used to be capital offenses.

These are all excellent arguments and I expect Ms. Hilton might even agree with most of them (though, to quibble, she has not to my knowledge had an affair!). It is the astonishing degree of vitriol directed as her I find disturbing, something akin to the bacchanalian emoting at the death of Diana. We are not quite at the stage of Shiite self-mutilation with swords and whatnot but I do not think we are that far off either (and by we I do not include thee and me but the culture).

A rare event when I disagree this strongly with Hitchens.

The creepy populism vibe to the coverage and public reaction does not invalidate the righteousness of the circumstances that have helped spur such reaction, or the subsequent righteousnous of the reaction itself.

Paris Hilton is a signal of cultural rot, and the legal manifestations - DUI and subsequent parole violations from someone with millions of dollars who can pay a driver - are capped by a form of spectacle and punishment that are indeed poetic. Just because many of the individuals who celebrate such cultural rot exemplified by Paris (ahem) are also now Romans in the Coliseum, thirsty for her blood and aided by a bankrupt media, does not minimize my pleasure at her public humilitaion by more than a scintila, just as those who clamored for Democracy in the Middle East shouldn't have denied like-minded policies just because they are pushed by the members of the historical political opposition.

It's JUST, just the same.

As for Hitchens saying this:

Second, she should be left alone to lead such a life as has been left to her.

If only Hilton had granted us the same pardon from her ubiquitous, vacuous, inescapable celebrity in the first place.

On this issue, Hitchens is merely an underinformed contrarian.

Oh, and ditto what Chris Taylor said, well put.

Except the part about not getting "particular satisfaction," in my case.

I don't know that I see vitriol so much as a continued misplaced focus. Ms. Hilton is essentially a not very important person who, when she has gone about her lawful business, gets inordinate attention. Now, in relation to her unlawful business she merely gets the same inordinate attention. That is the problem with setting oneself up as a measuring stick. You can then be used to measure many things.

It is gratifying to see the law being applied by the judge in a meaningful way. Ten years ago, breach of probation relating to drunk driving would get a minimum of 60 days in the Pembroke slammer. One other note. The real problem in this instance is the sheriff's actions, not the convicts. The judge properly brought the sheriff and only incidentally Ms. Hilton back to court this week to explain what went on. If I had an emotion, but one far short of an eye welling up, it was related to seeing her being jerked around but in the end the right thing was done.

Once again unable to keep the eye on the ball. Please re-read my statement for the slow of thinking.

Also, my update makes my case.

Well of course the media focus is disproportionate. But it has been during the good times for her as well, so justice is served once the tables turn. Hitchens' piece (seemingly endorsed by your post) also shows a bit of sympathy for the howling child torn apart by media jackals.

As one astute commenter under Hitchens' piece says, "Live by the Media, Die by the Media."

The statement by her in your bolded update only adds to the farce, as she's been sucking the oxygen out of news focus on the war for years now, with nary a scolding or guilty thought.

The contempt from the media and their focus remains, even if their shallow corruption is a useful tool for sweet Schadenfreude.

I don't think your commenters are slow-thinking, I just think they (at least me) are viewing the media excoriation as a part of the actual "sentence."

Well, I am delighted to see Canadian law as it applied in Pembroke ten years ago receiving your robust defense.

As for Paris' comment all I can say is she supports the troops: Why do you hate kittens and ducklings?

It's just so easy to heap scorn upon someone like Paris Hilton, who is (as they say) "famous for being famous". Each one of us wishes it was true in our own lives. The whole of North America reeks with envy and jealousy of this blonde babe.

I'm envisioning a Hilton-led group of entertainers that travels to Iraq to support the troops. I hope she puts her money where her mouth is on this, because that quote above is certainly the finest thing she has ever said! It would be really noble to see her put substance behind that sentence.

Is it really true that one would wish for being "famous for being famous"? If that is the point, then it is more than a little sad. The poor saps of Renfrew country and the rest of reality (which includes us all) (we without PR suits to co-opt those who serve and die) have to concern ourselves with the little duties of life like being obedient to the law. In a better time that would be enough to erase a person's name from the record.

I blame her parents for not bothering to instill their daughter with a sense of personal responsibility. They should be in jail with her.

Now, that never never happened much in Pembroke. Totalitarian Japan of the pre-war period, sure, but never Pembroke.