Golden Arches To the Editor, While I was not surprised to read that McDonald's won their lengthy, costly and ludicrous lawsuit against two anti-McDonald's activists over in England, I was astonished and quite pleased to see Tom Tomorrow's comic depiction of the quintessential burger and fries restaurant (Tucson Weekly, July 10). As a transplanted New Englander, I was shocked to see a Mickey Dees go up right across from Mountain View High School, not too long ago, without a peep from concerned parents. Back East you couldn't even open a "Mom-and-Pop" sandwich shop, let alone a fast food-type joint, across from any public or private school without someone squawking about how the kids would be spending all their time and money chowing down greasy cuisine. With 530 calories and 28 grams of fat, the Big Mac certainly cannot be considered a healthy meal. And at 450 calories and 22 grams of fat for a large order of French-fried potatoes, one has managed to consume about half of their daily caloric intake in just one sitting. Of course, one could order a diet soft drink, with absolutely no calories nor nutritional value, to go along with the greasy burger and fat-laden fries. And don't forget the foreign-made plastic replica of one of the characters from the latest Disney flick on the way out the door. What is puzzling is that it has taken so long to expose McDonald's "spend-your-hard-earned-dollars-on-our- high-fat-high-sugar-low-fiber-food-and-get-a-Disney-toy-free" brainwashing scheme. --Erin E. Ruocco Low Grade To the Editor, What's going on? It appears that the Tucson Weekly is getting desperate for items to write about. How can you justify giving this drivel your cover, four pages, five photos and all ("Fire-At-Will U," Tucson Weekly, July 17)? Where is the beef/substance? It seems that Kali Tal is a smart-ass, big-mouth, latter-day hippie with five earrings and an ugly blonde crewcut who tried to tell her new bosses how to run the ship and was "surprised" when she was fired. How could you make a major news story about all of this "much ado about nothing?" What would you do if an admitted big-mouth told you and your staff how to run your newspaper? Would you kiss them or would you tell them to "buzz off and don't let the door hit you in the behind, forever?" Regarding the whining in the article about what I call the fraud of tenure: I say hurray Arizona International Campus for having a no-tenure policy. Your article states that beginning professor salaries are more than $50,000 per year at AIC. For what earthly reason do they need tenure? If they are doing good work, and working within the AIC system, they do not need tenure. By the way, is there anyone on your staff that has tenure at The Weekly? There is no one that I know, in the real world, that has tenure. There are too many tenured university professors who know they can't get fired and who have no passion or reason to be good teachers of our children. I have been to IAC three times and spoken to about 15 of their great young students. Each and every one is enthusiastic about the education they are receiving at AIC. We are indeed fortunate to have this great start-up college in Tucson. Doug Biggers and good staff, how about finding something meaningful to the community to write about, like your thoughts on the charter government proposition? Or, how are we going to get around this town better? Or, how to get better-paying jobs for this low-wage town? I know you can do better, but will you? --Don Golos Editor's note: As Margaret Regan's article stated, beginning salaries at AIC in the first year averaged $38,000 a year, not more than $50,000. Incidentally, our July 31 edition contained two articles on the charter, last week's issue featured a lengthy story on transportation, and this week we take a look at our town's low-wage problem. Happy now, Don? To the Editor, Margaret Regan's "Fire-At-Will U" (Tucson Weekly, July 17) was both tragic and comic. Tucson really could use a small liberal arts college, where students are the chief focus. It's a real shame that a clash between two people's personal styles (both provost Fernandez' and professor Tal's) has resulted in the school's loss of educational substance, not to mention integrity. Tal's hilarious suggestion that Fernandez use knitting metaphors instead of basketball metaphors to discuss teamwork was a high point for me. It was a clash of the Titans between Fernandez and Tal, the basketball versus the knitting needle. The meek professors shall inherit the college. --Howard Salmon Swap Meat To the Editor, Regarding Janet Mitchell's article on the Rosemont Land Exchange ("Swap Watch," Tucson Weekly, July 24): Apart from a few factual errors (Happy Valley is a 520-acre parcel; the Madera Canyon parcels add up to 20 acres; the Memorandum of Understanding was signed in 1996; the $60 million resort outside Phoenix is on land that was traded for patented land), your story hit the proverbial nail repeatedly on the head. ASARCO will no doubt take issue with these details. They would prefer us to get lost in such details. But the fundamental points remain: The taxpayers stand to get ripped off big time, the latest in a long legacy of mining rip-offs. The Santa Ritas, meanwhile, are in danger of being trashed, the latest in a long legacy of environmental crimes perpetrated by the mining industry. The negative impact of this dubious deal will affect all of southern Arizona, not just some parcel inside a dotted line on a map. Furthermore, these land swaps are spreading like a virus all over the West, as timber and mining companies pursue a concerted corporate strategy to swindle the taxpayer and get even fatter at the public till. Finally, no matter what Mr. McAllister and the mining boys would have us believe, the truth is the Arizona economy is far more dependent on tourism and the scenic vistas that fuel it than on a mining industry that for decades has been steadily and consciously putting men and women out of work by replacing them with cheaper and more compliant machines. The ratio of economic impact is at the least five to one. Is this land swap in the public interest? No way! The people of southern Arizona should stand up and say "No!" to the Forest Service and ASARCO. Stop the swap! --Randy Serraglio Dire Learning To the Editor, Jeff Smith's "Elementary Lesson" (Tucson Weekly, July 10) was really good. He is one of the few at The Weekly who seems to recognize what is going on. We foothills dwellers do not want to be part of Tucson for good and sufficient reasons. We foothills dwellers do not expect to save money. It will cost more to have our own community, but we don't want to be part of the City of Tucson. The City Council would rather feed the homeless than give the police a raise. The police come first, second and third in my book. We recognize that the USA, Germany, England, Japan and other countries are developing a two-class society--upper and lower. There will be no jobs for most of the lower class and what little middle class remains will be competing for very few positions. Cities like Tucson will grow increasingly poor and unimportant in our society, the very reason for cities is disappearing. The city will be a location for the poor, the homeless and minorities. With e-mail, phones and computers our cities are not needed any more. We may not like it, but that's what's happening. One last point: If we have a two-class system, what will keep the lower class from revolting? Narcotics, of course. They are now legal in Arizona--who do you think voted for that? Nationwide, legality for narcotics is coming fast. The Border Patrol is just getting 5 percent of what comes across. The Tucson cops will tell you in private that drug enforcement is a "joke and a waste of time." It's interesting to note that in the USA, 12 percent of the upper class already live in gated, guarded areas; there are now more private police than there are the public type. Does this tell you something? The two classes will be separated in living areas, schools, business, shopping, entertainment etc. They won't even see each other. On that basis the upper class is not going to support education for the lower class. Even if they would, there won't be any jobs for them. Narcotics are the answer. I have a book, The End of the Middle Class, that has all the details of this change, but no one wants to publish it. Friends in the USA, Japan, England have read it and they say, "Yes, it is true." --Stuart A. Hoenig Editor's note: Hey, Stuart, maybe you could get your manuscript published if you just threatened to mail bombs if your demands weren't met. Worked for the other guy. We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com

Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives

		© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth