Contact us via e-mail le*****@oc******.com“>(letters@ocweekly. com), regular mail (Letters to the Editor, OC Weekly, P.O. Box 10788, Costa Mesa, CA 92627) or fax (714-708-8410). Visit our website at www.ocweekly.com. Letters will be edited for clarity and length. All correspondence must include your home city and a daytime phone number. SO MANY STORIES,

Thanks to Nick Schou for following the story of Eddie Quiones (“In the Hole,” Dec. 1). I have followed several similar stories in the Weekly—Arthur Carmona comes to mind, as well as Shantae Molina and. . . . Hey, now that I start thinking of all of them, I think, “What a shame.” Is it that easy to find Orange County stories of justice derailed?

Laura Lecaro

Re: Jim Washburn's “We Don't Need the White House: Surviving the Bush years” (Lost in OC, Nov. 24).

Perhaps Washburn does not need the White House, but I am concerned about his apparent disregard for the real human costs that a second Bush administration will inflict upon this nation. I am astounded to read Washburn's suggestions that concerned citizens respond to the prospect of a woefully unqualified chief executive and his father's band of recycled corporate henchmen as de facto decision makers with the blandishments of supporting local charities “that take on some of the social services government is abandoning.” This sounds like the kind of misguided rhetoric the Republicans offer in place of the sufficient funding of meaningful programs. What's next, the Ten Commandments in every taxpayer-funded private-voucher school? A thousand points of fossil-fueled light? A kinder, gentler executioner's hand?

Ruben C. Mancillas
Long Beach
Jim Washburn responds:Were you only a faithful, loyal, fawning-on-my-every-word reader, you'd know I'm all too aware of the dangers of a Bush presidency. So what do you propose—that we wish real hard that he'll go away? What I was suggesting is that electing Al Gore or any other daddy figure into office would only be masking the deep work we need to do as individuals—of activism, of marshaling such economic power and influence as we have into a force for change. And, if we're so correct and bitchen as we might like to think, shouldn't the true test of that be in our ability to awaken others? So get on the good foot or shut the fuck up.

I never wrote a letter to the editor before in my live, but I really enjoyed Jim Washburn's article, so I thought why not encourage you to keep on writing such important and at the same time entertaining articles? I am from Germany, and I take great interest in the election and its still-uncertain outcome. That is something some people cannot understand me saying, that because I am only here in LA for half a year, I do not need to care that much. I think that is wrong because as Washburn said, the U.S. is the most powerful nation in the world and that is why it is going to affect all of us, no matter where we live. Besides that, there are universal issues that everyone should be interested in such as women's rights, the treatment of minorities, the death penalty, etc. In neither of them I like Mr. Bush's point of view. That is the reason why even though I am laughing at your democracy right now, I am more sad that about half of this nation does not seem to see that Mr. Bush will not provide a human future for everyone in this country.

Lina Elter
via e-mail

Nowhere else have I seen such vile, despicable, salacious and scabrous things printed about George W. Bush as in Rebecca Schoenkopf's Commie Girl column (“The Naming Thing: What are we gonna call George W.?” Dec 1). She should immediately be given a huge raise.

It's more than a little late, but there seems to be an awakening to the fact that there are real-world limits to the combination of limitless arrogance, infantile entitlement and willful intellectual opacity that George W. Bush brings to the scene. Every attempt to make him look “presidential” is destroyed by either his pouting or his uncontrollable nervous tics, revealing Bush to be nothing but a broken toy of a man. Should we be asking why God may have set us up for four years of such national humiliation?

Kent Southard
Dana Point


I read Matt Coker's article on water reclamation with great interest (“Waste Waterworld,” Nov. 24). I would like to know why the media continually utilizes terms like “poop-to-tap”? I believe that if the terms “toilet-to-tap” and your new-and-unimproved “poop-to-tap” were replaced with “water recycling” and “water reuse,” the public at large would be more willing to weigh their options objectively. Southern California is located in a semi-arid region, and there are almost no new water supplies to be had.

Remember how the drought years of 1988 to 1993 affected the region. Recycling, reuse, desalination and conservation must be utilized to create a sustainable water supply for our ever-growing population.

Andrew J. Werner
via e-mail
Matt Coker responds: More people would read a story with a “Poop-to-Tap” headline than a “Water Recycling” headline. Why? Because “water recycling” is boring. But more than that, it's a broad and misleading term for something that doesn't necessarily involve human effluent. If you read past the headline, you saw that our semi-arid region and dwindling new water supplies were mentioned. The drought years of 1988 to 1993 were not included because I was reporting on a meeting, not rewriting Cadillac Desert. The quotes from proponents and opponents of the project will allow readers to weigh their options more than any headline —especially a namby-pamby one soft-selling a controversial drinking-water system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *