Letters for February 12, 2004

When in Rome
I am a 13-year resident of Reno, and I’ve never pronounced the name of our state as Ne-vah-dah. It has always been Ne-va-da to me as far back as geography in grade school. I fail to understand, however, why it grates on most people here when it is pronounced (as far as a lot of folks are concerned) incorrectly. Especially when we have a prominent and quite visible local TV and radio personality who can’t pronounce Virginia City properly. Saying Vah-jin-yah would (in my humble opinion) not set well with someone from the great state of Virginia. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending the President here by bringing this up, but let’s grow up and pay closer attention to things that matter more than someone’s peculiar way of pronouncing things.

Jim Reynolds
Reno

Janet Jackson’s baby bottle?
FCC Chairman Michael Powell has been a very busy man lately. Janet Jackson’s breast was clearly more than he could handle. He immediately launched an FCC investigation to discover how a breast found itself bouncing around his airwaves, which are usually reserved for gratuitous acts of violence and the corporate reconstruction of our reality. How many millions of our tax dollars is Powell going to squander on his hunt for the cause behind the outing of one of Janet’s top agents? Maybe he could hire Kenneth Starr to sniff around Janet’s drawers for, oh, let’s say $50 million or so.

Does Powell really imagine Americans are depraved enough to see the glimpse of a mammary gland as more dangerous to the welfare of the United States than Powell’s own recent efforts to dismantle our First Amendment rights? The damage done to the people by his weakening of the already insufficient limits on media monopolies is far more pernicious than Janet’s televised anatomy lesson could ever be. How strange that a human breast can turn Powell into such a raging moralistic tiger, and yet the selling of our airwaves into the hands of a few monster corporations leaves him purring like an overstuffed pussycat.

Mr. Powell, we don’t want our only windows on the world controlled by the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Clear Channel. You and your FCC have blatantly betrayed America’s trust in appointing Fox as guardian of the henhouse of America’s information. Yes, Janet showed her baby bottle. But it is you, Mr. Powell, who has disgracefully exposed himself by shamelessly unzipping your corporate fly and relieving yourself all over our First Amendment. You are the one who should be investigated—for corruption in using your FCC post to help foster mega-media monopolies, and helping destroy the laws ensuring the People’s right to an unabridged free press and free airwaves.

David Singelyn
via e-mail

Good call
Re “Play ball” [RN&R, Cover story, Feb. 5]:

Congratulations on your excellent article. For the first time, the public has been given a real insight into what has been happening in the quest to bring baseball back to this area. As a Reno native, I have a rather pessimistic viewpoint on the feasibility of such a venture, but it looks like the die has been cast, and once the good old boys club decides on something, it’s a done deal, and the public be damned.

Gary Sorensen
via e-mail

Damned right
Re “Equal marriage rights for gays” [RN&R, Letters, Feb. 5]:

I would like to respond to Darryl Hoenshell’s letter about the gay marriage “agenda.” The Traditional Values Coalition is only one organization lobbying for gay marriage. I can assure that not all the gays think like that. Most commitment ceremonies I have been to have consisted of two people, not three or four. You’re worried about the gays promoting polygamy. Heterosexuals are practicing polygamy, and even though it may be against the law, it still happens. What’s wrong with group marriage? If those people want to live like that, so be it. Who are we to judge others?

I sometimes think the real issue with gay marriage is fear. Fear that gays might show people what real commitment and values are. We might show the heteros how marriage is really supposed to work. I have a cousin who has been married four times and a brother who has married twice. Society accepts that. The fact I want to have a commitment ceremony in July with my partner is not an act of immorality. I know gay couples who have been together 17 years, 22 years, even 32 years. I have straight friends who have been married and divorced in the same year.

Everyone should have the right to marry if they choose to do so, and no one should judge, no matter what their sexual preference is.

Angela Brooks
via e-mail