Comment Archives: stories: Opinion
Re: “Pedersen On Sports”
Don't worry, your tweets are always top notch! ;-)
Re: “Guest Commentary”
chucki, let me 'splain something to you. The sequester is more like 8%. And yes, half from defense - 8% from defense, 8% from non-defense (with a few areas protected). Get it, now? I didn't think so.
But, there is good reason for ANYONE to not be on welfare these days - the cuts are only going to get worse. The only way to know you have a future is to be dependent on yourself. And that means yourself has to provide for you. What I read in the mayor's commentary is, "We have to get rid of the Pork. But not MY Pork!"
Re: “Danehy”
The Mexicans will get TUSD and Marana will get the sewer water. Win-win.
Re: “Guest Commentary”
We have more than our fair share of hacks and phonies because Tucson and Pima County are easy blue marks. The mayor is on the right track if he continues to make an effort to reclaim the tax money.
Ironically, the additional money will only go further toward retaining the hacks.
Perhaps the UofA will become a ''teaching university". One where the cost benefit analysis of their tuition models out based on an appropriate return for the investment. "Free market statistics" like they say they have to use when showering sport coaches with money.
Re: “Mailbag”
As a runner I have been bitten on numerous occasions by "sweet dogs". I carried mace for years and have used it on both the dog and owner. This has happened in Mich, Cali, AZ, NY, NM and OH. Each and every incident ended with police responding because the dog walker thought I was at fault, and each and every time the police sided with me and twice issued citations to the dog owner. People who do not follow the rules of common decency with their dogs don't deserve them.
Re: “Lackluster Lawmaking”
Funny thing is mj is still illegal under federal law. It really doesn't matter what the voters want until they can find a way to legalize mj at the federal level, then the states can't do anything about it.
Re: “Lackluster Lawmaking”
Yes. All the important stuff going on. The budget hasn't come up yet. Neither has the tax policy issue. The only one I like is the HCR1007 about the Cherrybell Post Office closing. So we're stuck talking about these inane bills Like the one banning me from using the empty men's room if the woman's room is occupied, even though they are identical. WTF? Who cares? I get a misdemeanor for that? Seriously. These people go too far. But they assign bills like texting while driving to three committees so it will die (I believe that was one of them) just to nick Steve Farley. It's an important issue.
The important issues get tripled in committee and the stupid crap makes it to the floor so that's what we hear and read about. So until the budget and tax proposal come out, get used to this drivel.
Re: “Guest Commentary”
The mayor keeps tossing the 250-400 number around. Let's see. The sequester reduces budgets by 2 percent, but half of that is DOD, so only 1 percent is for the rest of the bureaucracy. If 250-400 represents 1 percent of the Section 8 occupants, that means we have between 25000 and 40000 people in Section 8 housing. WOW! Right or wrong, Mr. Mayor? If wrong, how many do we have in TOTO, and don't you really believe that 250-400 of the present users just might be phonying their status just a bit??????
Re: “Lackluster Lawmaking”
Just like a journalist. All the important stuff going on and the only thing you can think about is where you are going to get your next hit. Maybe that is why somepeople think it should be outlawed.
Get high, have a blast, medicade and medicare will take care of you.
Re: “Pedersen On Sports”
As opposed to the previous weeks, which were just trash ...
Re: “Pedersen On Sports”
I really enjoyed this column. This week was a very good read!
Re: “Lackluster Lawmaking”
Don't blame the legislators folks. Blame the ignorant and corrupt population of Arizona who elect these morons in election after election.
Re: “Editor's Note”
I've been reading the Tucson Weekly since the first issue, back in the 80s, back when I feared for the safety of the writers of The Skinny, because they were so fearless. Remember? Anyone?
What I really love in an alt-weekly are local stories and issues covered by crack journalists without censorship as to position, without a right-wing slant, without a corporate mindset. The quality of the TW took a rather noticeable editorial dive when Jimmy Boegle came in to run it, and it just seems like it's lost grit and focus. These days, I look to papers like the free, independent Chicago Weekly to stand in for what the rest of you guys used to pull off, and I just check the TW online to see the event listings, movie reviews, and maybe read a story here and there. It's been a long time since I've been stopped in my tracks by an issue of the Weekly, or an intro by the editor.
I'd love to see the kind of edge that the TW used to have come back, but now? I''m writing this instead of writing Circle K, because I stopped picking up the TW print edition a few years ago.
Re: “Editor's Note”
Tucson: It's just funny that your email address is associated with a bunch of events in Phoenix and your IP address seems to indicate you're from up north as well. Could be a coincidence. It's just odd. Thanks for the advice.
Re: “Editor's Note”
No not at all and i don't work for circle K ether. It just really upset me that a few days after talking with them, I see your article bashing them both because you cant and put your magazine in the circle k locations and yet act like your don't know why when a dozen people on this blog can tell you. I don't see you bashing any of the other publications in town. Tucson weekly has been around and will stay around. Why go out of your way and bash the new guy in town. you don't hear radio stations bashing each other like publications do. Its just sad that a editor has to stoop to that level. I just think that Tucson weekly could of dealt with it in a better way. Now you have completely burned your bridge with circle k.
Re: “Editor's Note”
Tucson Restaurant: That is a spectacular ad for AZ Weekly. It's almost like you work for them in Phoenix, instead of owning a Tucson restaurant. Almost.
Re: “Editor's Note”
Your article makes you look really bad. For a magazine that thinks AZ weekly is a boring and worthless magazine you have sure put a lot of energy in to them. Good Job broadcasting your competitor to all of your advertisers too. No such thing as bad press. I own a Tucson restaurant and have talked to them. Your right the only thing you have in common is that you’re printed on paper. If you’re looking for a rub and tug at a local strip club or need to know where to get your marijuana or local methadone shot you got that demographic covered and you have no competition. As for events and entertainment I think AZ Weekly will be a very strong competitor. Their distribution alone will out match yours. Because there a clean magazine is why there in the hotels, circle k’s , on campus, in taxi's and upscale locations in both Phoenix and Tucson.
Second there prices for advertising are very competitive and are affordable for all businesses. We have tried working with the Tucson Weekly in the past and there was nothing but headache and overpriced ads. I’m excited there's is a new publication in town. At least we have options now. Lots of your readers will become AZ Weekly readers very soon. Less of course there looking for a handy, new bong or car stereo! Your keep complaining that there not local but they are. There AZ Weekly :”Arizona” Weekly, Not the Phoenix Weekly or the Tucson Weekly. Me personally would love to know what is going on in Phoenix and have the Phoenix people know what is going on in Tucson. This will help support the local Tucson economy. At the end of the day I don’t think you’re going to lose much business to them but I do know that they will get business that will never advertise in your magazine because they don’t want to be associated with your content, advertisers or views. You have burned too many bridges over the last 30 years. Tucson business will grow because they are advertising in AZ Weekly magazine and not yours. Good job Circle K for raising your standards!!! #Circlekstandards
Re: “Simple and Tasteful”
How about do they list THC vs. other cannabinoid content like CBD? Its like the milligrams of medicine of a pill container or the alcohol percentage on beer! Many people want to know this J.M. Smith. Why can't you ever talk about it and if the dispensaries have it or plan to. I don't want 25% THC to .001% CBD in my cannabis. And it isn't just as easy as saying, "Oh you need Indica instead of Sativa." Come on!
© 2013 Tucson Weekly | 3280 E. Hemisphere Loop, Suite 180, Tucson AZ 85706 | P.O. Box 27087, Tucson AZ 85726-7087 | (520) 294-1200 | Powered by Foundation
Re: “Lackluster Lawmaking”
What they are doing is against the voters of Arizona, does that not count?