Funny, Cool, Short
Re “Nothing Normal About It” (Cover Story, May 13).
It’s a good story. Pit bulls will be always brave and strong, and I love pit bulls. They’re really nice dogs. The story’s kind of funny, you know, it has a little sense of humor. It’s one of the shortest stories I’ve read in the Reader. I was expecting a little bit more, but it just ended with mariachi singers, which I thought was kind of funny and cool. Happy birthday, Grandma!
Laura McNeal’s story about Mr. Benjamin’s Cotillion was terrific — humorous, sensitive, and so well written (“Don’t Look Down,” Cover Story, May 6). I read it aloud to my husband and he agreed. We hope to see more articles written by this talented writer. How could any San Diego parent not relate to this heartwarming story?
Dinos In Perris
Re “Ricardo Loves Dinosaurs…” (Feature Story, May 6). The lady who did it, Jeannette De Wyze, wrote a really good article. It’s very nice. I don’t know if you’ve ever done an article on the Perris Jurassic Park, but it’s a pretty nice place to go to. I would encourage everybody to take the children there.
She’s No Group
Kudos to Naomi Wise for actually making it past the second straight review without hurling racist bile at a Mexican cook preparing food she deemed inappropriate given his heritage. Then again, this La Jolla high-society princess wannabe never lets facts get in the way of her faux hipness. In “Sensual Spa” (May 12), the song she quotes is from Little Peggy March (“I Will Follow Him,” circa 1964). She was an individual singer, not a girl group! What a wonderful world it would be if we could place Wise under house arrest and confine her to a trailer park in Lakeside for life. Jeez…
Naomi Wise responds: Wow, somebody’s got a great memory! I’d totally forgotten Little Peggy March. I assumed she was a “girl group” because I remembered the heavy vocal backup (definitely more pretty girls than one on this record). A recent compilation includes her version in a CD of Girl Group Greats, so I guess I’m not the only one to conflate Miss March with a multitude.
From The Legal Side
I completely agree with Todd Gilbert’s response (Letters, April 22) to Maribel’s depiction of the Minutemen and her characterization of the illegal immigration problem in general (Letters, April 8).
Contrary to what Maribel and perhaps many people who support illegal immigration may think, not everyone who opposes illegal immigration is racist or white.
My family legally immigrated to this country from Asia back in the 1980s. A few years ago, my parents and I finally obtained our citizenship.
One facet of the illegal immigration debate that I think people tend to forget is the perspective of actual legal immigrants. I know I do not speak for all legal immigrants, not by a long shot. I do know, however, that many other legal immigrants I have met and know share my sentiments when I say that amnesty for illegal immigrants is wrong.
There are hundreds of thousands if not millions of people all around the world who would like to come to America, many of whom are trying to do so the legal way. To grant amnesty to illegal immigrants would be a smack in the face to those would-be legal immigrants by allowing illegal immigrants, who broke our immigration laws, to cut in line in front of everyone else.
It would be akin to the loud, obnoxious family who shows up at a busy restaurant and demands seating only to have the management cave in and seat the family ahead of other people who are patiently waiting in line for their table.
I firmly believe not only that illegal immigrants should be deported but that the employers who knowingly hire them should be prosecuted as well. Under criminal laws related to illegal drugs, the government can seize a house, car, or other items used in connection with the manufacture or distribution of illegal drugs.
Similarly, I would go so far as to say the government should apply similar forfeiture laws to businesses who are caught knowingly employing illegal immigrants. I think if a business is found to be knowingly employing illegal immigrants, the government should be able to seize the property and building upon which that business does business.
Lastly, I will end with a famous saying that says if you point your finger at someone, there are three fingers pointing back at you. The Mexican government may like to point its finger at Arizona and anyone who dares speak out against illegal immigration, but the Mexican government should look at its own laws as well before it points its finger at anyone.
For example, did you know that Article 27, Section I of the current Mexican constitution states that only “Mexicans by birth or by naturalization as well as Mexican corporations shall have a right to acquire legal domain over lands, waters, and their accessories”?
Furthermore, illegal immigrants in Mexico may not even be afforded due process under Article 33 of the Mexican constitution, which states that “the Executive Branch [of the Mexican federal government] shall have power to expel from national territory, without a trial and in an immediate way, any foreigner whose presence is considered to be inconvenient. The foreigners shall not participate in the country’s political affairs.”
Those two articles are only the tip of the iceberg of Mexico’s hostility towards illegal immigrants within its own borders, so I find it incredible that the Mexican government has the audacity to accuse anyone of racism or discrimination simply for seeking to enforce immigration laws and deport illegal immigrants. In fact, there is not a single country in the world to my knowledge that does not have immigration laws. I know of no country that allows people to come and go as they please, completely unchecked.
It was nice and refreshing to read an article on Jehovah’s Witnesses that was factual and without bias (“Sheep and Goats,” April 8). Mr. Lickona did a very nice job on his article. Thank you.
Flat’s Where It’s At
I know this may be an old debate, but here we go again. I am more a fan of the old stapled binding for the Reader because it can lie flat. I know the high quality of your literature and service to the community hasn’t changed, even though a binding is supposed to project some pretense, but consider these advantages of flatness. It is easier to read whether held in the hands or on a table, since no text gets tucked in close to a binding that needs wrestling and taming and training to be flat. It can double as a placemat and consequently is always in front of you on the kitchen table (all right, I’m single— what about it?). And finally, after the week is done, or longer, the flat Reader can be kept in one’s shop or garage, and the appropriate number of pages easily removed and used for all sorts of things when you need newspaper, and they’ll still end up in the recycling bin. And isn’t flat less expensive to produce? Flat keeps you around longer. Flat is greener. Flat is where it’s at. People of San Diego, Rally around Flat!
I Flip You Off
I have not picked up a copy of the Reader for many, many months. Actually, since the “Classic Reader Format” has been reduced. Nowadays, the Reader is worthless. That’s actually a compliment. More like worth nothing, as my, and anyone’s, slow-speed thumb-flipping of the pages proves to show that the majority of the Reader is display advertisements.
Why not just stop completely the Reader and advertise— your market?
Name Withheld by Request