Readers
Schadenfreude shame: Paper cut leaves scars
Recently, a number of letters have been published referring to the demise of the Tucson Citizen. With few exceptions, these letters blamed liberal leanings, liberal dosing, Bush bashing and several other terms normally used by conservative Republicans.
Some of the published letters even used terms like “good riddance” and displayed satisfaction and glee that the newspaper is going out of business.
Those who take great delight in the death of a newspaper overlook several things.
There are other pages to a newspaper than the editorial page, which apparently holds their interest.
The front section gives us news of the day; it tells us what is happening in our world. It contributes to our knowledge and in some cases gives us understanding of how other nations are reacting to events.
And there is a sports section. This is something that interests many people here. Tucson is such a great place to live that people from all over our country have moved here, and they still root for the sports teams from their original home areas.
And, of course, there is great interest in our Tucson sports teams. UA is near and dear to many Tucsonans, and news of how the Cats are doing is of great interest to most of us.
There are other sections to a newspaper that interest people, but perhaps the most important thing about our newspaper that the critical conservatives overlook: People publish newspapers.
When the Tucson Citizen ceases to exist, the people who collect the news, print the news and deliver the news will no longer be employed. In many cases they will lose their homes, their dreams of educating their children, of retirement when they’re past their working years. And they will suffer the pangs of hell: the stress of not being able to provide for their families’ well-being and not having health insurance.
It takes all kinds of people to populate our world, but I think we have too many of the type that thinks expressing their political views publicly is more important than being concerned about the well-being of some of our working people.
Chuck Cavanaugh
UA Hispanic Alumni shifts scholarship goals
Re: the Jan. 27 article “Who should apply for college aid? Every student”:
The University of Arizona Hispanic Alumni was founded in 1982 to promote academic excellence among Hispanic students at the UA, provide financial and mentoring support to qualified and deserving students, and link alumni and supporters in the professional and business community.
UAHA has awarded more than 1,752 scholarships, and this year it increased the number of scholarship recipients by 244. That’s 74 students more than in 2007-08 for a total of $500,000 in this school year.
Our goal is to increase that sum every year. Yes, we are in a growth stage.
The Hispanic population continues to grow and now represents the largest minority in the U.S. This growth, the economic downturn, the return of military personnel as students, and reduced student loan availability are some issues that have propelled UAHA to develop a new fundraising plan.
The goal is to raise $5 million through 2013 while better serving UAHA alumni and students with secured funding.
This will also help UA achieve a rating as a Hispanic Serving Institution.
This requires a minimum of 25 percent Hispanic enrollment, compared with about 14 percent now, and would bring more federal dollars to UA.
The UAHA Board will continue our dedication to our alumni, students and community. Your support as volunteers, donors and members will afford us the opportunity to succeed.
Our scholarship applications are available at www.arizona alumni.com/uaha.
Humberto N. Stevens
president
UA Hispanic Alumni Club
Using unmentionables to expose Democrats
Joan Safier wants to blame anyone but her sainted Democrats for the recession.
Wasn’t it Chris Dodd , Barney Franks and Carolyn McCarthy who were screaming that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac needed no regulation?
Wasn’t it the Democrats who forced banks to issue subprime mortgages to people clearly unable to pay them back?
She complains that President Bush didn’t ensure where the bailout money went? She hasn’t figured out that is the job of Congress! Guess who controls Congress and who blocked any attempts to monitor it last year?
The second bailout proposed by the Democrats is loaded with pork.
It includes $25 million to re-sod the National Mall, damaged during the inauguration. I wonder who trashed that? And $400 million to research global warming. What happened to the old research? Not to mention $1 billion to Amtrak, which hasn’t shown a profit in 40 years.
Now she talks about a “senseless war.”
Perhaps it has escaped her notice that Iraq recently sold 530 metric tons of yellowcake to a Canadian company. That’s refined uraniam ore. Refine it a bit further and you have a nuclear weapon.
Guess that’s not a possible WMD is it? We won’t even mention the poison gas he used against the Kurds. But then she would have said the Japanese were simply misunderstood when they bombed Pearl Harbor and the German Konzentration Lagers were an internal affair.
John F. Sukey
retired military
Letters to the Editor