Letters for November 8, 2012

Despite this excellent observation, nothing will happen. No one is going to put the automotive [industry], aftermarket parts [manufacturers] and their associated unions or trade associations out of business. The only solutions are if the Mayans were correct, or if there really are other benevolent life forms in the universe, that [they] take pity on us!

Kirk Leonard

via email

To reach the conservatives, censor curse words

Re “Question: Why vote?” by Nick Miller (SN&R Feature Story, November 1):

We are up against a hard time with this election, holding our nose while trying to vote for President Barack Obama. We realize the election system is freaky and not a direct measure or indication of the people’s sentiments. I don’t think we can change how it works. People with influence are too uptight to think of making a change.

But I just wish that in [this story], you had the grace to say … “Republicans truly believe their s—- doesn’t stink.” But you spelled the words out (because you are a weekly newspaper, you can say any bad words you want), which makes the SN&R look like the crazy one.

When speaking to or about Republicans, speak their language. Say “s—-” and “f—-” and also “st—-” for stink. This will rile them and make the rest of us laugh. The language is right, and the message is clear.

T. Gould

Sacramento

SN&R should support real options

Re “Question: Why vote?” by Nick Miller (SN&R Feature Story, November 1):

It would seem that if the Green and Peace and Justice parties are pretty but impractical options, it is precisely because of the behavior of our perhaps lamentably influential mass media. If Jill Stein or Rocky Anderson were given the same level of attention accorded the corporatist party mascots in the press, neither of the latter would stand a sliver of a chance at garnering significant popular support or of winning a fair election and possibly of avoiding retribution for treasonous financial chicanery or a war-crimes tribunal.

My curiosity is as to whether in its “news” aspect your publication is meant to be an effectively journalistic one, or one whose default tendency is to promote general public adherence to the hairbreadth spectrum of consideration on offer from other ad-funded outfits and to contribute to the prevalence of deeply uninformed opinion that continues to render our meta-shady mafia-style government safe from real public scrutiny and censure. I guess throwing in a weekly digest of stories from publications that don’t accept corporate funding, or maybe just from writers not beholden to the status quo parameters of political discussion, could get you into trouble with the market, huh?

Ho hum.

Butch Hastily

Sacramento

Prop. 36 is anti-victim, not cost-saving

Re “Let the time fit the crime” (SN&R Letters, October 25):

Here we go again. Proposition 36 is another attempt by the George Soros-funded, anti-victim crowd to water down the very effective three-strikes law. Violent crime is down in California since the law passed. The revolving door of justice has been slammed shut. The (overinflated) costs of incarceration have been more than offset in savings to law enforcement, the courts, attorney fees and victim restitution. The law continues to perform just as it was always intended—to protect the public.

The anti-victim crowd, having failed on numerous occasions to win the fiscal argument, are now seeking to bring back the “pizza thief” argument. But this time, there is no mention of the 1996 [People v. Supreme Court (Romero)] decision, which already permits any defendant to petition the court for dismissal of prior strikes in the interests of justice, prior to, during or after trial. Judges who fail to utilize proper discretion when ruling on Romero motions can be easily voted out and/or recalled.

But why has there been only token opposition to this initiative? I believe we have not heard from the American Bar Association or the California Correctional Peace Officers Association because they both stand to score big should 3,000 felons be returned to court for resentencing and subsequently returned to the streets. Follow the money.

Of course, we mustn’t forget about the corresponding increase in crime and the grand reopening of the “revolving door.” Unfortunately, this Proposition 36 big “win” will turn into a big loss for law-abiding Californians.

Richard W. Copp

Sacramento

Be nice, please!

Re “Pack your bags” by Becky Grunewald (SN&R Dish, October 18):

Your description of your fellow diners whom you felt were unsophisticated-looking (due to their deep Southern accents, I wonder?) was a very unkind thing to say. I am very disappointed to read such a mean comment in SN&R.

Kelly Randolph

Sacramento

Give him the claw!

Re “Yes on T and U” (SN&R Opinions, October 11):

I’m sorry to see SN&R fall into believing the city’s happy talk about tree leaves. SN&R readers should go to the grand jury’s 2011-2012 report to find out about the mismanagement of ratepayers’ money in the Utility Department (www.sacgrandjury.org/reports/11-12/2011-2012-Report.pdf: Read pages 33 to 44).

It has been our right to have street pickup of green waste since 1977, and the bureaucrats have been trying to overturn the will of the people ever since. No one asked the city to go out and buy 100,000 tubs to implement their citywide “test program” or to add a fourth set of garbage trucks to pick up the third tub (real garbage, recyclables, green waste) and the existing truck to follow the claw.

I have some big trees, and one-time-a-month pickup during the city’s “leaf season” will not hack it. My tub will be so heavy, it will break the hydraulic tub lifter. The claw has capacity that is unmatched.

Steve Otis

Sacramento