Big WheelTo the Editor:
As a friend, former assistant to, and a past co-worker in Bruce Wheeler's last two successful campaigns for the westside Council office, and a volunteer in his present quest for mayor, I am compelled to respond in writing to The Skinny's continuing unprincipled attacks against Bruce and the Wheeler campaign in general.
Last time The Skinny criticized Bruce, it was for taking a city-funded trip to Minneapolis so he could see his former girlfriend. The only trouble with that story is that it never occurred. Nor did any retraction appear in The Weekly after you were notified of the error. Now, The Skinny says that it has "confirmed" that the Wheeler campaign has enlisted the services of Ron Caviglia, implying he will serve the same role as he did in Ed Moore's campaign, as a "non-paid campaign manager and fund-raiser" (Tucson Weekly, April 20). The problem with this story is that it isn't true. You also state that Mr. Caviglia "was a steady presence in Wheeler's last campaign." Again--a complete fabrication.
A check of campaign contributions for Wheeler's last campaign will verify that Ron Caviglia donated a total of zero dollars to Wheeler. A discussion with any Wheeler campaign worker will confirm that Caviglia was not involved either in the strategy, fund-raising, petition gathering, or any other aspect of the campaign. These are the facts. For The Skinny to attempt to link Bruce Wheeler in any way with Ed Moore--politically or financially--would be laughable if it weren't so irresponsible.
Finally, The Skinny claims that "the Wheeler campaign has yet to bring in any first-string financial supporters." Since the deadline to file the first campaign finance report isn't until the last day of June, this exemplifies another unsubstantiated claim. And what, may I ask, are "first-string" financial supporters anyway? Perhaps the "Diamond"-studded developers that support George Miller?
A retraction is in order, and so is an apology. --Scott D. Egan
The Skinny believes our "attacks" on Wheeler are rooted in principle. We hate sleaze. And we hate sleazy politicians. But we must admit we do love to write about them whenever we get the chance.
Our allegation that Wheeler had quietly asked Ron "The Hustler" Caviglia, longtime friend and Ed Moore associate, "to enlist support" for his upcoming mayoral campaign was based on sources who verified the story.
After receiving your letter passionately denying Caviglia was ever involved in past and present Wheeler campaigns, we contacted Caviglia at his home. After some hesitation and denial, Caviglia himself stated his role was to raise money for Wheeler's last campaign. In response to our contention that two individuals had informed us Caviglia had personally solicited campaign contributions from them for Wheeler, he responded "If you have two people who say I asked them for a contribution, I won't deny it."
He went on to say that the only thing that troubled him about raising money for Wheeler was that he wasn't able to raise enough.
As for Wheeler's mayoral campaign, Caviglia said he would not be involved. After exposure in The Skinny we can understand why. "I just don't need the publicity," said Caviglia. "Not good publicity. Not bad publicity. I'm saying I want no publicity. I don't need it."
As for the other issues you mention in your letter, we stand by our stories.
Buggerin' ReviewTo the Editor, Regarding Zachary Woodruff's "Virile Specimen" (Tucson Weekly, April 20): The thing I hate most about your publication (no wait, let me count the ways...) is that even your movie reviews are P.C.
I saw Rob Roy last night and it was a fine film--wonderful Scottish highlands and worthy performances by everyone. As for Liam Neeson, I'd drink his bath water any day, a whole loch full.
And Zak, if all the "buggerin' " and "shaggin' " offended your sensibilities, well, that's how those people talked. Perhaps you would have enjoyed the movie more had they inserted "alternate consensual sexual pathways" or "orthodox penile/vaginal intercourse."
But despair not, amigo. I hear they are hiring down at the Octopus Car Wash. Maybe you could write on windshields in soap. --Margo Lennon
Robbed RoyTo the Editor, Movie reviews are rarely worth the paper they're printed on. I find it difficult to get excited about one person's opinion concerning what is or isn't a good movie. I can make up my own mind, thanks. But when critics attempt in their writing to make the precarious jump from the murky realm of opinion to the comparatively crystal-clear realm of fact, some critics flounder--or lose their bearings altogether.
Such, alas, is the case with Zachary Woodruff, who, in his review of Rob Roy (Tucson Weekly, April 20), quotes a Scottish clansman as joking: "Why don't the English shag standing up?" This is incorrect, and changes the context of the dialogue entirely. The line was: "Why don't Calvinist's shag standing up?" From a historical perspective, a significant difference. It's not too hard to remember these things. I only saw the film once and didn't find it too difficult to comprehend the dialogue. Please ask your critic to get his quotes right.
Hoop De DooTo the Editor: Right on, Jeff! Hansen doesn't have to go to games sponsored by casinos ("Hoop Steamed," Tucson Weekly, April 20). I'll try the Wildchairs, and live poker--the rest does not a casino make. Greg's vitriol reminds me that the real organized crime elements are in the state Capitol.
| © 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth