Letters for January 12, 2012
Socialists in real estate
Re “City takes biggest money hit yet” (Newslines, by Robert Speer, Jan. 5): Well, serves them all right! It’s about time officials realize they should be looking out for the city’s business and stay out of the real-estate business! Real estate is for private enterprise and not for government entities! Those socialists will never learn.
Don C. Pejsa
Herger and Big Oil
Re “They’re in the money” (Downstroke, Jan. 5): Three years ago, at a Fourth of July public celebration in Chico, I asked [Rep. Wally] Herger about the Big Oil money he had received for his campaign. He became enraged and called me names such as “stupid liberal,” etc.
He can’t be honest and just admit that he received the Big Oil campaign money. Proof of his campaign money sources can be found here: http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/ can_give/H6CA02010.
Here she is, folks
Re “Acupuncture for everyone” (Healthlines feature, by Claire Hutkins Seda, Jan. 5): Wow, such a nice piece about community acupuncture in Chico! Thank you!
Is there any chance my contact info could be included, too? I’m at www.PinwheelChico.com, 345-5566, 740 Flume St.
‘Uglification’ of Lower Park
Today I found myself on Highway 99 where it intersects Lower Bidwell Park for the first time since our tree canopy has vanished. In place of our beautiful trees stood an American flag.
Let me say that our flag cannot take the place of our beloved tree canopy. In fact, it is insulting that someone thinks this tragic project is in anyway patriotic, and [the flag] ought to be removed immediately.
This will surely be another one of those projects, much like the Upper Park viewshed issues resulting from the homes built along the canyon edge, that make us look back in horror and wonder how in the hell did we let this happen! I for one am quite angry that we didn’t work harder to find a resolve to this further “uglification” of our treasured Lower Bidwell Park.
Highway 99 never belonged there in the first place.
He’s paid his dues
Re “The race card” (Letters, by Ani Sky, Jan. 5): The race card? Boy, do white people like those two words, along with affirmative action and all the other euphemisms when they don’t like so-called uppity black men.
But you know what? Even with the killing of black leaders, black people are still here, and we don’t hate America, like some of our other brown individuals in far-off lands do. We have fought for this country from the War of Independence to every war that this country has been in.
It is very strange that a small town like Chico is afraid of one little black man, a man that outside of Chico people recognize as an international artist and resident here who I hope brings honor to the city. If the city of Chico wants its black people to be dope-heads and gang-bangers, then go out and recruit them. High-tech media lynch me if you will. I have paid my dues to society, and I am happy to be leaving it soon.
Where are the data?
I recently made public remarks to the effect that Assemblyman Dan Logue and other elected Republicans had gone out of their way to tout Nevada as a state much more friendly to business than California, yet recent U.S. Labor Department statistics show Nevada with the highest unemployment rate in the country.
I was criticized for “manipulating the data” on the basis that Nevada was just a one-industry state. It seems to me that if Nevada is indeed such a great business model, then it should surely be more than a one-industry state.
Conservatives are forever telling us that California is a horrible business model, with over-regulation and taxes strangling our economy. Yet many independent nonpartisan groups tell us that a large number of corporations in the state are not paying their fair share of taxes.
Personally, I do not know where the state ranks in terms of competitiveness with other states, but I’m tired of this mantra constantly spouted by conservatives without any data to substantiate their claims. It could well be that their claims about California’s regulations and taxes are no more valid than their claims about Nevada.
Charles W. Bird
Support alternative parties
Considering Congress has the lowest approval rating ever and the number of people registered independent or “decline to state” is accelerating, why would anyone keep voting for major-party candidates?
Both the Tea Party and Occupy movements express disgust at the political establishment. So why aren’t alterative-party candidates emerging as viable?
As Richard Winger documents at Ballot Access News, unfair election laws hinder alternative parties. For instance, California’s new “top two” primary election will likely eliminate alternative parties’ chances to win.
Additionally, both mainstream media and independent media do not report on alternative parties much. When alternatives are mentioned, it’s usually in a derogatory context with labels like “underdog,” “spoiler” and “long-shot” conditioning people to fear them.
Republican and Democratic friends express “throw the election to the worse candidate” fears when I ask why they keep voting for them. This is a demented abuser-victim mentality where the victim (the voter) is too afraid to leave unaware of better options.
If you’re a liberal, why not vote for the Green or Peace & Freedom parties? If libertarian, why not the Libertarian party? If conservative, why not the Constitution party or American Independent party (not to be confused with being an independent voter)?
If anyone is interested, contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org and let’s collaborate. It’s time to dump the two-party system.
In our Dec. 29 year-in-review story “What were they thinking,” local radio station KKXX was incorrectly identified as being owned by Harold Camping’s Family Radio. The local Family Radio station is KHAP.
Also, in her Jan. 5 Greenhouse column, Christine LaPado reported that the H.J. Heinz Co. owned 20 percent of the Hain Celestial Group, makers of Celestial Seasons teas and other food and personal-care items. Heinz sold its interest in Hain in December 2005.
Finally, the caption to the photo of the corner of South Park Avenue and 11th Street that accompanied our Jan. 5 Newslines story, “City takes biggest hit yet,” incorrectly stated that the property’s redevelopment would not be affected by the dissolution of the Chico Redevelopment Agency. In fact, the city has not yet signed a purchase agreement with one of the several owners of the properties on the corner, which means that redevelopment cannot be done on the site.
The mistakes have been corrected online. Our apologies for the errors.—ed.