Letters for October 15, 2009

Tea bagger 101

Re “He liked the ending” (SN&R Letters, October 8) and “Tea bags for two” by R.V. Scheide (SN&R Race to the Bottom, September 24):

I’m trying to understand the “teabagger” argument, but since I don’t let Rush do all my thinking for me, it’s tough to comprehend.

1. Government does a terrible job at everything it touches, except, of course, funding for the interstate highway system, which the teabaggers used to get their buses to Washington for their rally. And the government-funded Internet (yes, Al Gore really did approve the funding that made the Internet possible), which teabaggers (35 percent or less of the population) use to drown out other (65-75 percent) opinions, and the government-funded Medicare and [Veterans Affairs] health benefits none of them want to lose, and the multitrillion-dollar wars we’re “winning” in Iraq and Afghanistan, all good things to the anti-government folks.

2. Government, [which] does such a terrible job at everything it touches, will do such a good job in being one more competitor in the health-insurance industry, that it will put all other competitors out of business, even though [House Resolution 3200] specifically prohibits employers from dumping employees off of private insurance and onto the “public option,” somehow everyone will jump ship from private insurers. Private insurers are doing such a great job, and government will do such a terrible job, that millions of Americans will eagerly switch from their great private insurance to terrible public insurance. Oh, and even insurers who’ve been around for 200 years and have billions in annual profits won’t be able to find one dime’s worth of efficiency improvements so they can stay competitive; they will just have to throw up their hands, and say, “That’s it, we can no longer compete, we’re shuttering our doors forever.”

3. Unregulated big business is always the answer. Look how great our economy has been these last three years after Republicans deregulated the housing and stock markets. We let [General Motors] and Chrysler slide for years, instead of regulating standards for safety, emissions and fuel economy, and then we put in very watered-down standards in all three areas, and look how great GM and Chrysler are doing now against Japanese competitors (who meet all those higher standards).

4. Taxes are always a bad thing, even when they pay for police, fire protection, roads and education. Taxes that pay for wars to kill thousands of our working-class children, and thousands of innocent civilians in other countries, are always a good thing. Tax breaks for big corporations that eliminate American jobs and hire cheap labor in China, India, Mexico or Vietnam, then ship lead-filled toys to our American children? Also a good thing.

Gee, maybe I understand teabaggers better than I thought! Mega-dittos, Rush.

Ed Hass
Elk Grove

The thrill is gone

Re “City of snoops” by Cosmo Garvin (SN&R Bites, October 8), “The question concerning textology” by R.V. Scheide (SN&R Race to the Bottom, October 8) and “What TV show are you addicted to?” (SN&R Streetalk, October 8):

[I was] very disappointed to see Bites’ identity revealed in your last issue. Nothing personal to Cosmo, but somehow the thrill is gone.

Also, [I] wasn’t surprised to see R.V. Scheide’s appearance match his inane, blowhard rambling—and can’t help but suspect that subnormal douche bag Daniel Foglesong from the Streetalk piece is somehow related.

Jason Holt

Safe is safe, right?

Re “City of snoops” by Cosmo Garvin (SN&R Bites, October 8):

I just wanted to point out the typo in the last sentence of the third to last paragraph. If not, I appreciate [Mayor Kevin Johnson]’s approval of Sac police’s balance of civil liberties and “pubic” safety as well.

Stephanie Gladden
via e-mail

Angsty for Nietzsche

Re “The question concerning textology” by R.V. Scheide (SN&R Race to the Bottom, October 8):

Using your editorial space to pitch your new blog is fair game, if a little crude.

But what’s up with the painfully aborted and half-assed attempt to shoehorn every angsty high-schooler’s favorite philosopher (Friedrich Nietzsche) into a facile diatribe against cell phones and Twitter as filler for the first two-thirds of a purely self-promoting column?

Seriously: You hate AT&T and text messaging? How hip is it to bitch about things that annoy everyone over the age of 12?

It took nine paragraphs of directionless wank—you could have just gone with “I don’t even own a television!”—to rationalize the promotion of your new blog. I believe this is called “burying the lede,” at least when discussing articles containing newsworthy information.

Next time, just say, “Check out my Facebook page!” and, if you have nothing else to say, sell the white space to other advertisers.

Lukas Simonis
via e-mail

Hero worship for Cooper

Re “I’m not the sheriff” by Anthony Pignataro (SN&R Frontlines, October 1):

Mr. [Jim] Cooper is a great man. I support him in his decision to move on up.

I have known him since I was a little girl, almost 20 years. He has shown me through a drug presentation in my elementary school what drugs can do to people, and to this day I have never tried a drug, ever.

Sarah Lynn George
Elk Grove

Don’t diss Rachel!

Re “Teabags for two” by R.V. Scheide (SN&R Race to the Bottom, September 24):

For years, as I protested the disastrous policies of the prior administration, I was called things like traitor, communist, fascist, terrorist, in addition to a variety of obscenities. I was shoved, spat on, flipped off and screamed at.

Where were R.V.’s lofty ideals then?

These “tea parties” have less than nothing to do with the actual Boston Tea Party. I feel no remorse about poking fun at such a ridiculous (even egregious) lack of understanding of fifth-grade U.S. history, especially by people who seem to believe they’re making some sort of clever “point.”

As for Rachel Maddow practicing “homophobia,” that’s just plain silly, lazy and inaccurate, as it presupposes that all of the teabaggers are men—they’re not. A teensy bit of thought before labeling Ms. Maddow as a “homophobe” would have been wise. And when conservatives are resorting to calling the president (as well as progressives in this nation) Hitler, a Nazi, a fascist, a socialist, a communist, a racist, a genocidal maniac, a “boy”—honestly, when they carry weapons to town-hall meetings, when they behave like boors in an obviously orchestrated attempt to disrupt the democratic process, and when they freely spread propaganda to support their agenda (“Obama’s gonna kill your grammy!”), is there any real reason to take them seriously? No.

Marie Gillies