Letters for February 25, 2010
Letter of the week
Doesn’t Rachel like her tat?
Re “Rethink the ink” by Rachel Leibrock (SN&R Popsmart, February 11):
Rachel, Rachel, Rachel. So you decided that everyone’s tattoos are stupid just because you’re feeling a little old?
I mean, sure, getting your first tramp stamp at 40 might be a little Cougar Town, but you say yourself that you have previous tattoos. See, it seems to me that tattoos are a conscious decision, one that (hopefully) most of us think about long and hard, before committing to ink. I know I sure did.
In fact, I feel a little let down. I was a freshman at Sac High when your cover story [on “riot grrrls”] was published (“Grrrl power” by Rachel Leibrock; SN&R Feature Story; May 11, 1995). I took that credo to heart, Rachel. I investigated, I rabble-roused, I thought for myself—and I got tattoos. I made art and joined crappy bands and made zines—and I got more tattoos. Tattoos that reflected my personal journey through life. Tattoos that made me feel empowered, tough and unique. (Yes, unique—even in the land of a million tatted d-bags.)
So when I see this article, with you so clearly projecting your negative self-image onto women who are most likely forced to cover up their tattoos, I feel incredibly let down. Maybe we should be discussing stuffy corporate policy in a world where employees are dissuaded from proudly showing a personal and financial investment in permanent local art, or the judgmental attitudes of those who deem their tattoos more “quality” than others (such as your condescending description of tramp stamps).
Or maybe we should be looking at the attitude shift from a formerly freethinking Sacramentan who now feels entitled to shame a large portion of Midtown Sacramento culture, because she’s “over it.”
Or maybe you should suck it, Leibrock. I like my tattoos. Sorry you don’t like yours.
Humbug on A.B. 32
Re “A.B. 32 crunch time” by Cosmo Garvin (SN&R Feature, February 18):
First of all, I think there may be some natural, cyclical global warming, not man-made global warming. Second, this cap-and-trade boondoggle will be seriously kinked by those who see it as a massive moneymaking scheme. Third, the taxpayer/consumer will take a big hit in his/her pocketbook with no real improvement to show for these additional costs. Bah, humbug!
Water and money
Re “Fish out of water?” by Alastair Bland (SN&R Frontlines, February 18):
Thanks for the excellent article on the Delta, peripheral canal and California water politics. It demonstrates once again that if you want to know why politicians do what they do, just follow the money. This will not change until we have full public financing of elections.
SN&R readers should also know that building the peripheral canal and Sites Reservoir in the Sacramento Valley will lead to new efforts to divert more Klamath and Trinity river water to San Joaquin corporate farms and Southern California developers. There is not enough water to fill the reservoirs that exist now, so why else would they want yet another reservoir?
Zeke Grader of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations says more money for fisheries restoration is meaningless when what fish need is water. That’s right on the money. But why does his organization support giving agriculture more water—and salmon less—up on the Klamath?
R.V.’s fan hits bottom
Re “Bottomed out” by R.V. Scheide (SN&R Race to the Bottom, February 18):
R.V.’s giving up his column? But who will I turn to for a big downer dose of reality and an even larger dose of testosterone-fueled ranting? Without R.V., I might become a detached-from-reality SUV-buying Pollyanna.
Besides, he didn’t tell us where to find him after the apocalypse, because really, he should be eaten first.
Puppies quickly become dogs
Re “Zen of puppies” by Ginny McReynolds (SN&R Essay, February 18):
We were saddened by this essay.
As people who work hard in placement of dogs to loving homes, we wish puppies were not so cute. Countless people adopt a puppy and delight in their sweetness and “puppy smell.” But when the puppy starts to age at 4 or 5 months, their interest in the dog wanes and it is often relegated to the backyard with little or no human contact, or turned in to a shelter and a new puppy adopted to start the sad process all over again.
Please, only adopt a puppy if you are willing to love and care for it for 12 or more years, even after its cuteness fades.
C.A. Parker and family
Climate can’t be put on hold!
Re “Logue’s loser” (SN&R Editorial, February 18):
There is no way that California can go backward or hold on the issue of global warming. The legislation is already there, yet the issue itself of global warming is still denied, misunderstood and considered to be untrue.
The facts themselves reveal that preparing for and attempting to mediate global warming need to be pushed forward, rather than be put on hold as suggested. How can anybody put our world’s climate and the safety of all its creatures (including human beings and the food we eat) on hold?
That is ridiculous, irresponsible and unacceptable!
Leibrock inks it right
Re “Rethink the ink” by Rachel Leibrock (SN&R Popsmart, February 11):
Thank you! Pop and fashion are great, but come on: Fashion changes, pop deflates. Why would you want to make a drunken commitment to something you may regret?
Lots of my friends have tats, even on their foreheads, and that’s cool, but it is not a small thing. It is a major commitment (d’oh!).
OK, Picts did it a thousand years ago, but this is now, so think like you are going to live 80 years and hit the pause button. One of my sons has a white tat (he’s a Marine); the other does not (aspiring fireman). Commitment is not a problem, but it is worth denying at least half of the time.
Good riddance to a bad measure
Re “Strong mayor, RIP” (SN&R Editorial, February 4):
Bravo! Shortly after reading this editorial, I heard that the state court of appeals had denied the “strong mayor initiative” backers’ request to bar the trial court’s decision and put the measure on the June 8 ballot. This effectively removes the strong-mayor initiative from the June ballot and delays any further consideration of it by voters until a later date. That means it might have a more reflective voter base to weigh in on the measure, rather than the primary date, which would only attract conservatives who are inclined to support [Mayor Kevin] Johnson and his cause, as sought by the GOP-insider firm that authored the measure.
This calls for a celebration the size of a Super Bowl party.
Marijuana is medicine
Re “Growing pains” by Shannon Rooney (SN&R Green Days, February 4):
Butte County Assistant District Attorney Helen Harberts is entitled to her opinions, but she must stick to the facts when she talks about marijuana and medicine. Her claim that “there is no solid scientific evidence that marijuana is medicine” is patently false.
When Harberts denies the medical uses of marijuana, she conveniently closes her eyes to studies that prove her wrong. Legitimate medical studies are the reason that the Wisconsin Medical Society, National Institutes of Health, Vermont Medical Society, Virginia Nurses Association, San Francisco Medical Society, Rhode Island State Nurses Association, New York State Nurses Association, National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine, Medical Society of the State of New York, Health Canada, Federation of American Scientists, British Medical Association and American Nurses Association, and dozens more, have endorsed medical marijuana.
Assistant District Attorney Helen Harberts is just another Reefer Madness liar, more interested in putting people into prison than telling the truth.
Re “Abandon all hope” by R.V. Scheide (SN&R Race to the Bottom, January 28):
There are major differences between [Gov.] Arnold [Schwarzenegger] and President [Barack] Obama.
Our governor seeks to widen the difference between the rich and the poor by waging a war against labor, education and social services. Arnold’s M.O. is “divide and conquer”; he is driving the masses of organized labor to fight for their own cause at the expense of others. Teachers believe their budgets should not suffer at the expense of the correctional officers. In-home care workers resent law enforcement because their program will experience significant cuts. Local public-transportation projects in cities from San Francisco to Long Beach are battling over federal stimulus funds. The poor and disabled point fingers at immigrants for the reduction in services they receive.
But there is only one responsible party for this catastrophe. Schwarzenegger is guilty for the California deficit calamity, just as our previous administration, in cahoots with Washington and Wall Street, bear the responsibility of our national economic crisis.
I am sorry if you did not advance far in life and would like for everybody else to earn minimum wage, lack health-care coverage and be forced to work overtime with no pay. Most of us recognize that we owe fair labor laws to community organizers—like President Obama—and others who pioneered the road for future generations. If you wish to be exploited by big corporations without a retirement plan, you not need to move to India or China.
Dear amigo, your plan A should be to apply at Wal-Mart, and your plan B could be to move to Florida and work in the tomato fields to earn 72 cents for each 32-pound bucket of tomatoes you pick. Maybe when you decide to return to California, our prisons will be manned by the Corrections Corporation of America (Arnold wants to sell San Quentin and release 45,000 prisoners, you know). Schools in poor neighborhoods targeted for cuts would have disappeared while charter schools are subsidized. And basic social services like Medi-Cal, CalWORKs and [In-Home Supportive Services] would be a thing of the past.
But the biggest difference between President Obama and Arnold Schwarzenegger is that “the terminator” would rather see California children and elderly populations succumb to hunger and illness than raise taxes on the rich or increase taxes on corporations.
Good luck in Wal-Mart or the Sunshine State!