Simple Math

To the Editor,

Regarding the budget shortfalls for the City of Tucson and Tucson Unified School District: According to the Pima Association of Governments, Tucson-area motorists drive nearly 20 million miles each day and pay a total of $500,000 ($.025/mile) in fuel and license taxes toward road maintenance. The actual daily cost of road maintenance is about $700,000 ($.035/mile); so area taxpayers subside automobile travel to the tune of about $200,000 per day ($.01/mile).

A little simple arithmetic shows that ending the auto subsidy would free up more than $50 million for other uses. Maybe it's time to face up to our automobile addiction. Think about it!

--William C. Thornton

Paternalistic Society

To the Editor,

Regarding Teresa Dedoph's "Bad Company" (Mailbag, May 17): Sheesh ... the nerve, hmm? That Tom Danehy, attacking poor Camryn Manheim with his damned misogynistic opinions again, fully aware of the fact she subscribes to the Tucson Weekly, and every Friday her first priority is looking up Danehy's opinions because she really, truly cares what he thinks of her. No, she doesn't. You care. You care a lot. You live in Tucson, and you read Tom Danehy every week. Not because you like anything he says, but because you think he's an idiot, and this attracts you to his silly articles. You can read them every week and know in your heart that he doesn't know what he's talking about. That someone needs to put "silly, simple, stupid Tom" in his place. That must be you, "informed, sophisticated, intelligent being." You, who lets Danehy's opinions make enough difference in your life to write him a letter that he'll never pay attention to.

This is most likely because you are a single mother yourself; thus spawns your defensiveness and dedication to finding meaningless "current" percentages (1998) that really wouldn't mean much to anyone other than those trying to justify their cause.

Granted, Tom Danehy is a complete ass. I've read his articles, and I can tell I wouldn't get along with him. He's the old school coach who can't talk about hip-hop music without throwing some "funny ebonics" slang in there to be "wittingly patronizing." He's the old nobody who laughs at fart humor and blonde jokes in his spare time (half-time hour). It's very rare that he's well informed on any subject other than his "bag," sports. It's also very rare that he cares whether or not his facts are straight.

However, I can usually read the mailbag first thing when I get the Weekly, and there I find yet another individual taking the responsibility of "humbling Tom Danehy." Why? He doesn't care, and your clever hate mail (as he calls it) means absolutely nothing. Wasted words, wasted time. Everyone knows Danehy is in the Weekly because he speaks before he thinks, and gets that "fun negative attention." You only end up looking like "Tom's hate mail of the week." Congratulations.

Note to Dedolph: You've also managed to completely miss the point. He's not saying women aren't capable of raising children on their own. He's not saying deadbeat dads aren't a problem. He's more or less objecting to the fact that some women today are completely rejecting the idea that a child might benefit from having both a Mother and a Father. He's objecting to the fact that we live in a society in which "Baby's Daddy" has completely replaced "Father."

Fathers mean a lot more to a child than "that guy I throw baseballs with." Unfortunately, because Mommy and "baby daddy" don't get along, Mommy takes it upon herself to make a completely selfish decision. "I don't need him, so my child doesn't need him either." Wrong. That's hateful and it's spiteful and it has nothing to do with your baby, and everything to do with yourself. The child is going to witness every situation you involuntarily place them in from the time their eyes open. They're not just sitting there drooling. They're learning, and you're teaching.

Two parents are not always completely necessary, but it is definitely important that the first relationship a child sees other than his own, is a healthy one. A child needs to learn to relate to a man and a woman, so they'll later understand that love and warmth can come from both, not just, "Mommy loves you, and occasionally, when Mommy needs to satisfy her own loneliness, her new boyfriend pretends to love you too."

Your comment about "throwing baseballs" was obviously defensive and completely ignorant, and you brought yourself down to the level of "Evil Tom Danehy."

--David Ryland Chance