The new Weekly, filled with all sorts of simply stunning journalism, is online and ready for your perusal. Feel free to comment on its contents here.
Also, keep your fingers crossed: The plan is that by this time next week, the all-new TucsonWeekly.com will be live to the world, with an integrated blog and commenting capabilities on all stories.
Fingers crossed!
This article appears in Mar 19-25, 2009.
This letter in the Opinion section is awesome:
“Tom Danehy may scorn Father John Dear’s linking of vegetarianism and Christianity, but by doing so, he ignores a wealth of extra-biblical evidence: Think of the many times the image of Jesus has appeared on taco shells and potatoes. Whatever spiritual message is intended by these manifestations, a tacit endorsement of the food product is certainly present. So far, there have been no holy images staring up from a Big Mac. Some writers, often subsidized by “Big Meat,” point to the turn-of-the-century exclamation, “Sweet Jesus on a ham sandwich!” as proof of divine favor of a carnivorous diet. A doubtful proposition. Most scholars believe the sheer unlikelihood of the scenario gives the expression its great comic force. No endorsement of meat was intended. Garth Gould”
Hahahahaha.
I saw Jesus in McDonald’s at midnight.
Jimmy Boegle: “Confidential to Robbie: Thanks for everything. Miss you already.”
Hmmm. That’s real confidential there. So confidential that I SAW IT AND READ IT!
Let me guess — Robbie is your pet parakeet. You sold it on Craigslist to pay for your root canal, and you’re hoping somebody will line Robbie’s birdcage with your editorial so he can read your message AND POOP ON IT.
Police dispatch: “A UA officer performing a building check located graffiti painted on the sidewalk at the end of the loading dock between the anthropology building and the Arizona State Museum South. About 6 inches by 8 inches, the red-paint graffiti appeared to depict two women embracing each other. The message below the image was: “I love you.””
Was Robbie involved somehow?
One thing I haven’t seen mentioned in the “Gannett sucks” coverage is that putting the paper on life support has seriously screwed the employees who had lined up both a buyout package and a new job. I hear that in order to qualify for severance pay, the employee must be on staff on the last day of operation–not possible if the person was committed to a job elsewhere based on the original closure date. There are soooo many ways to be evil…
James Reel, I think Boegle mentioned that in his letter from the editor.
Talk about mismanagement!