I was really torn about the proposed one-cent sales-tax increase, and then I picked up the April 22 Tucson Weekly ("Vote Yes on Prop 100").
You are right on the money. I don't want to give more money to Russell (Pearce) and the Maricopa Mental Midgets. If we don't pass the tax, they'll try to cut more taxes—and of course, they will cut corporate taxes and slam us.
Years ago, people talked about Baja Arizona—everything south of the Gila River seceding and forming a new state. Well, it may be time. We have got to do something about those idiots in Phoenix. I'm a lifelong Republican, and I sure as hell don't claim that bunch of clowns.
One other thing: If you're going to carry a concealed gun, take the class; learn the laws; get a permit. Be smart, and vote for the tax. There's no other choice.
The state's House tried to permanently cut taxes on our corporations and wealthy citizens (HB 2250). They have also been busy permanently cutting other taxes and increasing tax credits to those who give money to private schools.
In order to make these revenue cuts, they need our support. The proposed sales tax increase would help them realize these goals.
But the proposed sales-tax increase will not cover all these needs plus incidentals like K-12 education and health care.
If Proposition 100 passes, it will be the fifth sales-tax increase to ease the budget since 1951. Since so many people have kids and want them educated, these increases were sometimes called "education" taxes. Great promises were made. But the money vanished into the general fund, and education support was not improved.
If Proposition 100 passes, the Legislature will fund K-12 education so it won't totally die this year. But education will be on life support, which cannot be continued if we want to rescue these big businesses and coupon-clipping citizens.
Ruth H. Stokes
I usually enjoy reading Tom Danehy's articles, but I don't get the point of his April 22 piece. I've never been to a tea party (except when my daughter was little); I don't care much for politics; and if it matters, I'm not "white."
Here is what I got out of the article: Danehy is white; he is embarrassed about being white; he was embarrassed to see people he knew at the Tea Party (I assume they were white as well); he went to the Tea Party looking for other white people and, curious enough, black people. Then he manages to throw in a quote by Frederick Douglass and another quote from a politician about being a rocket scientist.
Do I have this right? If so, I am embarrassed for Danehy for writing something that makes absolutely no sense, and for the Weekly for printing such a "Huh?" article.
I am amazed at the coverage our state is receiving after the passing of SB 1070 ("May We See Your Papers Please?" The Skinny, April 29). I am even more stunned at the reaction toward this bill as fanatical crowds gather in Phoenix to demand the removal of this "unconstitutional, racist" bill before reading it. The 14th Amendment regarding state's rights—"No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States"—has nothing to do with it, as the bill does not target citizens.
I am also having difficulty finding the overt racism in the bill, because race is not mentioned. The elephant in the room comes in the form of roughly 460,000 illegal aliens, according to FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform), costing Arizona taxpayers an estimated $1.3 billion per year. An estimated 90 percent of these illegal aliens are Latinos. Logic would lead even the lowliest math scholar to believe that the likelihood of any illegal alien being Latino would be 90 percent. To be absurd to exemplify absurdity: If my bank was robbed by a guy in a red sweatshirt 90 percent of the time, I would be suspicious of red-sweatshirt-wearing guys in my bank.
This bill is not about race; it is about frustration and a federal government that has failed.
Eric F. Linzmeyer
Regarding "The Krentz Bonfire," April 29:
I'm one of the bird-watching lefties, and there is no way that I am going out with anything but binoculars and water. Taking a gun bird-watching is stupid and dangerous. It just asks for trouble. Krentz's guns didn't help him at all.
I've been reading these articles by Mr. Banks for the last couple of years, but they only seem to represent the opinion of the conservative fringe. How about some interviews with nonranchers or hill-hiding hermits? You know, sensible Portal folk who aren't scared to go outside.
I challenge any of the people who accuse Leo Banks of racism and slanted journalism to find one reference in his many writings to "brown people" and getting rid of them. It is so much easier to play the racist card rather than dispute his arguments in an intellectually honest way. Mr. Banks has quoted many Hispanic people in his stories who deal with the crime on the border on a daily basis. Rather than shoot the messenger, why not show where his stories are inaccurate? It's a much better and more civilized way to behave than going for the cheap insult.