Letters for September 4, 2014

No cross-dressing before breakfast, please

Re “Being Mark S. Allen” by Jonathan Mendick (SN&R Feature Story, August 28):

I stopped watching Good Day Sacramento because at 4:30 in the morning I want news and weather, not Mark S. Allen in high-heel pumps and a black micromini. Maybe at 2 in the morning, but not at 4:30. For God's sake.

Victor Morales


Bogus Ferguson editorial

Re “Ferguson’s lessons” (SN&R Editorial, August 28):

The lesson I draw from your dreadful editorial is that you folks are either very stupid or very dishonest. Anyone who wants to go to the trouble of looking at the Wikipedia article on the Michael Brown shooting will find that there are claims for evidence that would support the police narrative as well as the narrative that you uncritically endorse. When the eyewitness and physical evidence is carefully examined, it will be time to form firm opinions on who did what. Certainty at this time is unjustified.

After the insurrection following the first trial of the officers who beat Rodney King—and being old enough to recall the riots in big cities every summer—I do not believe that a firm response to rioting should be called a “militarization” of the local police. Failing to control rioters was a big reason we wound up with Nixon and Reagan. We have seen how New York City went from crime-ridden to the safest big city in America with a firmer hand by the police. The harm to the citizenry by crime totally eclipses that of real and imagined police misconduct. Reasonable efforts to keep the police playing by the rules are fine, but I seriously doubt that’s what you want.

Frank Grober


Stop assuming Michael Brown innocent

Re “Ferguson’s lessons” (SN&R Editorial, August 28):

The problem with your editorial is you assume the kid was innocent and the officer had nothing better to do than shoot the kid. The facts are somewhat different. The kid had just robbed a store, beaten up the clerk and was carrying the stolen goods when he was stopped. The cop has injuries to his face. The most likely thing was the kid was assaulting the cop, and you can get killed if somebody is assaulting you. Why would he assault the cop? Most likely he thought he was going to jail and did not want to go.

The real hero in this situation was the black guy who stopped the thugs from destroying his neighborhood store. That took courage and conviction. The kid was just a young thug. The other guy was a true hero.

Michael Fellion


Why the Whole Foods hate?

Re “Wholly unaffordable” by Rachel Leibrock (SN&R Editor’s Note, August 7):

I’m not quite sure why you guys are zeroing in on Whole Foods as a corporate evil when there are so many other chains that most of you and your readers probably shop at every day. Are you all purists? You never go to Target?

I’m a self-titled, working-class vegan, so I shop where the deals are, including Whole Foods on occasion, for certain items. Anyone who has to bargain shop to survive knows you have to shop the sales. For the most part, the co-ops in Sacramento and Davis have gotten quite expensive all around, so I only buy a few things there anymore, like nutritional yeast. My farmers market is ridiculously expensive, but I’m lucky to live near produce stands that have great bargains.

Whole Foods actually has a few well-priced health and beauty items, among other things, under their store-brand label, which I understand are sourced from the highest quality ingredients. They are very clear with their labeling, and they are leaders in the natural-foods industry with a pretty good mission statement. I’m not in love with them, and I’m sure they have issues like all corporations do. Anyway, I’m not sure why you wouldn’t want more natural and ethically sourced options in Midtown. I’ve yet to meet anyone who exclusively shops at independently owned stores for every single thing in their entire life. So, what’s the deal?

Arie Pike

via email