Tucson CitizenTucson Citizen

More Letters to the Editor

How did Scott McClellan last 3 years?

Scott McClellan is expressing the wrongs while working for the Bush administration.

My recent government job as a tobacco prevention specialist lasted 42 days. For two weeks of this, Chipper, my chocolate Lab, and I slept in the camper of my little pickup truck. A couple of times the temperature dropped below freezing.

Like long-distance truck drivers, I took truck-stop showers. My living circumstances were definitely not the “norm” for the polished-hired-health-gun, but I was able to endure with contentment while getting paid for doing what I had done free for many years.

However, it only took a few working days to realize that my restless nights were not coming from my lack of housing, but from the immediate need for me to compromise my passion to play “soft” ball for my state pay check.

Can’t imagine how poor Scott lasted three years.


executive director

I Will Never Use Tobacco Inc.

Birmingham, Ala.

Column on strike fighter was hatchet job

Re the May 28 guest opinion, “Joint strike fighter unproven after $300 billion, 7 years”:

Writer Ben Nelson should check his facts before he launchs his next hatchet job on his former service. The entire development program is $40 billion and the total program is priced at $276 billion.

The article’s title and main premise infer that the Air Force has spent $300 billion so far to develop the jet and will spend another $240 billion over 20 years to complete the buy of 1,500 to 2,000 jets.

The fact that they aren’t able to buy them in large enough quantities each year and the buy will take 30 to 35 years to complete is a major factor in the admittedly outrageous program cost. If they could buy them faster, the total program and unit cost would come down dramatically.

By the way, the Army isn’t buying the F-35 so it’s understandable that it hasn’t begun development of its variant.

What exactly did Nelson do in the Air Force?



Effort for better dog care on right track

Re: the May 29 story, “Group after better care of dogs in S. Tucson”:

It’s great someone is looking out for the animals. Of course the racetracks don’t like it, but they don’t care about the life of the animals. The animals are only to make money for them.

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated,” Gandhi said. It never hurts to protect the innocent, animals or children from who want to use and/or abuse them.

Wanting to make money from other people gambling should not be what motivates us. Taking care of any living creature should be our motivation. How else can we call ourselves civilized?



These letters to the editor appear online and not in the Tucson Citizen’s print edition.

Citizen Online Archive, 2006-2009

This archive contains all the stories that appeared on the Tucson Citizen's website from mid-2006 to June 1, 2009.

In 2010, a power surge fried a server that contained all of videos linked to dozens of stories in this archive. Also, a server that contained all of the databases for dozens of stories was accidentally erased, so all of those links are broken as well. However, all of the text and photos that accompanied some stories have been preserved.

For all of the stories that were archived by the Tucson Citizen newspaper's library in a digital archive between 1993 and 2009, go to Morgue Part 2

Search site | Terms of service