I’m calling about the article “Deported” in your October 11 issue. Not only is it incredibly slanted, but it absolutley makes no sense, and here’s what I mean.
Elizabeth Gonzalez paid a coyote a sum of $3000 to lead her into America when she was 17. I assume she spoke Spanish. Yet, when she was deported, she said, “When I first got [to Mexico} I could not speak Spanish at all.” What? She completely lost the ability to speak Spanish in the 20 years she was here? I can see that you’d forget a lot, but not speak Spanish at all? In the interview, it said “Elizabeth’s accent is thick, but her English is good.” To me, that makes it sound like English is her second language.
So, what do we have? We have someone who came here when she was 17, couldn’t speak English. Yet, when she was deported she couldn’t speak Spanish! And now, when she speaks English she has a very thick Spanish accent. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. That’s what I mean, it’s very slanted. You have this poor person deported back to her own country, yet supposedly she can’t speak the language. As if that would stop a deportation.
I’ve got no problem with you guys writing articles about deportation, and whether it should or should not occur, but don’t slant the facts; don’t twist them. And it’s quite obvious that they were in this one.
In response to the U-T takeover of the North County Times (News Ticker, October 4: “North County Times Writers Quit Before Getting Fired”) and the evolution of the U-T — I’ll continue to get my best information from the Reader.
I am cancelling my subscription to the newspaper for the following reasons.
1) The front page is for news, not your owner’s personal messages about how he feels the city should be run (or advertising). This is not news; it belongs on the editorial page.
2) There seems to be less and less U-T content in terms of local articles and reporting from U-T staff. The majority of the articles are from news services like the AP and the New York Times. I can get that from Google. Then there are the numerous guest authors that seem to be a hand-picked bunch of mouthpieces that are not presenting both sides of the issues.
3) The ratio of advertising to news is higher than it ever has been. That includes the much-too-frequent promotion of the website and U-T TV. There are times when I turn the page and only see advertising on both pages of the paper.
4) I’m tired of having to unwrap the paper to get to it. Sticking the half-page wrap on the front page with a sticker to make me handle it is not a good thing. Or sticking something I want (like the comics) to the heavy paper ad for a mattress I don’t want.
5) The intentional layout to make it difficult to read the paper in any format but laid out flat. It used to be the fold was a natural division of the layout of articles. And those loose half sheets and quarter sheets are annoying; they fall out when reading.
All these indicate to me that I am viewed as just a subject for your marketing and salesmanship not as a loyal/devoted reader for 25 years.
Regarding the irony of the News Ticker item, “Switch Hitter” and “Smarter Cities Richer” being on the same page (October 4). We have La Jolla billionaire and Qualcomm founder Irwin Jacobs who “donated” $2 million dollars to the super Pac supporting the president (“you didn’t build that” Obama), and our Democrat president carping at his opponent that he is rich and out of touch with the people — whomever “they” are. Why does our Democrat president attack a mere millionaire, Romney, while not attacking his excessively wealthy, billionaire supporter or, for that matter, Bill Clinton and others, such as Hollywood celebs? When you point a finger at someone, there are three others pointing at you!
“Smarter Cities Richer” lists heavily Democrat, voter-enhanced cities of San Jose, San Francisco/Oakland, Boston/Cambridge and San Diego. Washington D.C. led this roster but one could suspect income is skewed by annual/perennial interlopers, representatives, senators and their minions, and not minority residents.
After all, why would Democrat Obama send his children outside Washington D.C. public schools to a private one? D.C. schools are prevented from vouchers, which would permit parental direction (as Obama has). I’m certain that security for the president’s children would be effective! If not, how about the rest of us? Both articles beg the issue, if being a multimillionaire like Romney makes him an ideal attack subject, why not billionaire Irwin Jacobs who, according to the Reader has supported a Republican for San Diego mayor? Perhaps Mr. Jacobs has seen the light.
Quoting a UCSD “economist” is also revealing. Three of the noted smarter cities have UC campuses, and we all know how Democrat they are.
As an independent voter, I try to vote for the best people running for office, and if I don’t have enough information to vote intelligently I will not vote. It seems to me that Democrats have let us down ever so slightly. I don’t like Romney! But Democrats have proven to be anything but centrist, and unions which are heavily Democrat are totally out-of-touch with reality, except when reality is money. They’ve had their way with two — no, make that all three — branches of our government and have utterly failed. It’s time for change! But, probably, Obama doesn’t want to use his hackneyed call to arms.
Thanks to the Reader for presenting a clear, ironic, publication.
A constitutional centrist,
Fred J. Crowe
Keep Cuff Alive
I’ve been reading the Reader for over eight years and have always enjoyed the Off the Cuff interviews, but in the last year or so I’ve noticed a decline in its presence. I’m applying for the job if there is an opening. I’m a people person and talk to strangers everywhere I go, sometimes annoying my wife and kids! I will be prompt and meet deadlines always. Just asking for a chance to prove myself and keep a part of the Reader alive. I have a reliable car, camera and computer.