Other than that, I love your publication.
It is the parties who would be wise to seek out the opinion of the Indies and want us in the primaries. Personally, I'm pretty happy with what the opposition is coming up with this year.
The Internet capacity to deliver video on demand isn't there yet, especially for high-definition content. For fans of high-definition content, a high-quality video disc is a perfect fill-in. Once you've had full 1080p, you can't go back. The difference is as stark as that between AM radio and a CD.
As for Blu-Ray itself, it is superior to HD DVD. While the formats are essentially the same, Blu-Ray is a more durable disc, has better transfer rates and has more storage capacity.
As far as monopolistic control is concerned, the Blu-Ray Disc Association is a coalition of 18 major players in film and electronics--far from a Sony monopoly. Competition between Blu-Ray players that will be made by nearly every consumer electronics manufacturer will drive prices down in short order.
Danehy has no reason to be so grumpy. The consumer has really won, mainly by now knowing that the high-definition disc player they'll buy is the future of high-definition; they don't have to take a gamble. Sony gets a feather in its cap and reaps huge rewards, but gets far from a monopoly on the next generation of discs.
As for me, I own a Panasonic Blu-Ray player, and I'm proud of it.
But let's not split any hairs here. If you want to save the environment, you obviously need to buy a gun, drive through miles of urban sprawl until you get to some wilderness, and then shoot lead bullets until you have something to bring home. And it's better if we each do this individually, instead of hiring professional hunters. Who cares about efficiency, right?
Perhaps Al could follow up by giving us some recipes for javelina meat and tips on environmentally safe ways to get blood stains out of car upholstery.
Holy Angels School has always been small in size but staffed with sisters of great dedication and overflowing hearts. From the first days in 1956, when the four original sisters (Mother Ita, Sister Carmel, Sister Frances and Sister Patricia) arrived to teach in facilities that were temporary and below modern standards, to today, the sisters have given freely and generously of themselves to provide a quality education to the children of this area.
Thank you for recognizing their spirit and self-sacrifice.
J.P and Martha Skamel
The article conveniently leaves out the fact that Tucson tap water is tainted with 27 different contaminants, many of which were dumped into our environment by mining and aircraft corporations. Arsenic, an endocrine disruptor, was recently found by researchers at Dartmouth University to inhibit the effects of progesterone and estrogen in women and is linked to infertility. Radium 226 and 228, radioactive byproducts of uranium, are known to cause bone sarcomas and kidney damage. Throw in the pharmaceuticals recently discovered in the water, and you've got a cesspool of potentially harmful toxins.
We citizens of Tucson, female and children in particular, need to know the real truth about the present dangers of Tucson's toxic tap water. As stewards of the truth, Molly McKasson and Dave Devine have an obligation to deliver "the whole story" regarding the real impact of the polluted water supply on Tucson's public health. The issue is not a future concern regarding flavor (and equipment/pipe damage); Tucson's drinking water presently is downright unfit for human consumption.
Furthermore, I am opposed to greedy mining companies, many of which are not based in the United States, raping the land. These large and well-funded multinationals could care less about our air quality, water quality, safety and--most importantly--the destruction of environmentally sensitive land. Residing within the Coronado National Forest are rare and endangered species of wildlife, including birds and other species that cannot survive in a polluted open-pit mining project.
I am strongly opposed to the proliferation of new mining claims in Southern Arizona, especially near urban areas such as Sonoita, where pollution could cause public-health hazards. It is common knowledge that mining projects, similar to the proposed Rosemont copper mine, have resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of public-health hazards in rural communities, which are threatened by outdated mining laws. For example, a recent report (by the Environmental Working Group, covered) in the national news media, revealed that hard-rock mines have been the nation's "No. 1 toxic polluter for nine straight years, ever since reporting has been required," because of the chemicals disposed of near excavation sites.
I say no to mining in Southern Arizona, and no to the proposed Rosemont copper mine.
Douglas J. Downing