Singular SensationTo the Editor, All right, smart guys, get out the dictionary (if you own one) and look up the word "singular," as in Raul Grijalva's comment about Richard Carmona ("What's The Prognosis, October 14): "It appears to be a singular act of bravery on his part, potentially saving several people's lives." Nurse Dick Jaskiewicz -- and apparently Chris Limberis and the editorial staff of The Weekly -- thinks singular means "single," as if Grijalva implied the shooting was Carmona's only act of bravery in his life (which would indeed be a snide remark).
However, singular actually means "unique," thereby making Grijalva's comment one of sincere praise. Grijalva meant -- as I see it -- that the only person in the world (or at least in Pima County) who has both the compassion and bravery to take the actions that Carmona took on that fateful day is Carmona. Carmona is singular -- unique.
I guess Grijalva is going to have to dumb down a little if he expects to be understood by his constituents. But journalists really should know better.
-- Jim Parks
Bad SignsTo the Editor, Regarding "Board Lord Bites Back" (November 4): A wise person once said the only thing billboards are good for is providing shade for cows. When you consider that probably 99.9 percent of the public finds billboards to be in the nuisance category, along with telemarketing calls, panhandling, littering and graffiti, why are we allowing these big signs to exist? Aren't we overdue for a statewide voter proposition?
Champion of common sense causes, Mark Mayer, figured he could wipe out at least illegal billboards. And for challenging those who tacky up the town, he's being sued by the billboard Goliath. It's a case that will further prove that not only are billboards ugly, but so are the people who make them.
In honor of Mark Mayer, we should show our support by standing under an eye-torturing billboard with our hands on our hips and shouting a great big "YUCKO!"
-- Ginny Mikuckis
Media MercenariesTo the Editor, It is a sad fact that many of Tucson's major media outlets (television, radio, newspapers) are owned and operated by out-of-state mega corporations that do not always have the citizens' best interests in mind. In this modern capitalist society profits for the rich and powerful often take precedence over the public good. When We The People are presented with nothing but biased information by the media, democracy suffers. And then who is left to expose the farce when the messenger is in on the take?
Media is funded by consumers and subscribers. The distant executives endorse those candidates and initiatives deemed beneficial for their bottom line, regardless of any shortcomings. The opposing side is ridiculed and attacked regardless of its merits. The truth is lost in relentless rhetoric and the citizens are left to make a uninformed choice, unable to sort fact from well-funded fiction.
This last election shows that people can be duped into voting for the Cali-fornication of Tucson by East-Coast CEOs intent on reaping maximum harvest from this vast expanse of undeveloped land. A population increase translates to higher profits for the media. Personally, if I had wanted to live in a Phoenix-esque megalopolis I would have moved there. If I'd wanted to drink river water I would have parked my van on the banks. As it is, it all came to me. And you.
And now, rather than buying a home here we must go further to find a pleasant community with cultural activities and manageable traffic, as well as the basic necessities of clean air and water. We're moving to... I'm not saying. Some media flunkee or politico might follow us and screw it up.
-- Steven Baird
Bed SoresTo the Editor, I and others found the cover illustration for the feature "Land Ho" (November 4) to be degrading to both men and women. We Tucsonans would appreciate the artist not depicting such ugliness of humanity in our favorite newspaper! -- D. StephensonTo the Editor, Lots of research, no doubt, went into Dan Huff's "Scum of the Earth" (November 4), but the prostitution metaphor, through a bit amusing at first, wore thin, fast.
I'm wearying of all the garlic spitting, hump-suck-blow-fuck and related argot that increasingly riddles TW articles.
Developers and like mentalities have, indeed, created the most monotonous, unctuous sprawl of ticky-tacky houses and neighborhood invasions/infestations of ugly, toxic, big box businesses imaginable. They've taken the Tucson out of Tucson. Can Mr. Walkup possibly smell the coffee?
Take Continental Ranch, for example. The lanes, streets, cul-de-sacs of never-ending "stucco boxes," as you so aptly describe, are doing something terribly wrong to our individual and collective psyche. Hate seethes forth! "Road rage" is everywhere -- you'd know if you've so much as cut someone off lining up for a Walgreen's cashier.
As for the insides of these houses, privacy is nearly non-existent; television nooks, big enough for an Eller billboard, dominate the living or rec rooms. Property widths allow but a maximum of 12 feet between dwellings. You're close enough to hear a neighbor running his electric toothbrush!
And we are describing the plight, equally, of Mondo Vegas, Kansas City, Boise, Oneonta, New York. If only the slave-wagers could be sensitized to avoid these "planned communities." Yet, so many Tucsonans are buying in! How can the bladers be stopped? How can people be offered alternatives? The deception of Civano is the worst imaginable.
If/when Home Depot is up and running at El Con, don't buy. Just say no. Rid yourself of the stinking, puking habit of buying into suburban sprawl, even given The American Dream. Pitch teepees, dig hogans by the Santa Cruz! Dan Huff could join, too -- but leave the four-letter perturbations at the Weekly's doorstep.
-- Jeff Sullivan