Oct. 3 2012 09:26 AM

Our readers tell us what they think

Offensive headline

A comment on the chosen title of your Aug. 29 cover story: "Nudists, Midgets, and wild Indians": I was really hoping that your article might justify its use of "wild Indians" by mentioning that American Indians would either be included in the event/exhibit, or at the very least, mentioning our community as a significant part of San Diego's history.

As writers, there's no excuse for being ignorant to the power of language. "Wild Indians" is not only outdated, unjustified, and offensive—it is a complete misrepresentation of the content of the article. You offended us and misrepresented your content.

If any of the CityBeat staff would like to meet or learn about the San Diego American Indian community, I'm happy to assist in re-educating you. Cheers to more sensitive writing in the future, as I usually enjoy your publication.

Dr. Melissa Deer, Bankers Hill

Editor's Note: The story mentioned the "Painted Desert" exhibit in the 1915 Panama-California exhibition in which Native Americans were put on display. The words in the headline were meant as a comment on how groups of people were regarded a century ago.

Romney and entitlements

About your Sept. 19 "Editor's Note," "The assault on government aid": Entitlements are a GOP wedge issue, a variation of the welfare-queen myth. In reality, entitlements have increased due to population growth, more people qualifying for entitlements due to wealth shift to the top and the recession.

In the majority of cases, entitlement recipients do not have a desire to mooch, as Romney and others assert or infer. As your Editor's Note states, Romney is tapping into populist anger about entitlements. But when Romney discusses his taxes, he says he did everything legally. Entitlement recipients likewise did everything legally, yet Romney looks down on them even though they are in need and he isn't.

Besides this double standard, Romney and others disingenuously mischaracterize some programs as entitlements when, in fact, they're insurance programs that are fully or partially funded—such as Social Security, portions of Medicare and unemployment. But it's no surprise that populist anger is being exploited, given the penchant of too many people to vote against their own interest.

It's hard to tell if Romney really is a nice guy, but even if he is, he's far too out of touch to empathize with the majority of Americans. And on policy, it's tough to tell which is the real Romney because of his changing positions.

One thing is certain: A president is a public servant, and Romney's private-sector mindset is not compatible with being a good public servant. And running government requires a different skill set than running a business; Romney's business experience does not automatically qualify him to run government effectively.

Dan Jacobs, Mira Mesa

Bring on the L.A. Times

This letter is in response to your "Crazy, stupid, U-T" editorial of Sept. 12. If for no other reason, I'm writing this letter to repeat your title—"Crazy, stupid, U-T." I recently dumped my U-T subscription and have started receiving the L.A. Times.

It's really sad that we don't have a major paper in San Diego that reports the facts. How about conducting a poll to see how many people would support the Los Angeles Times if it were to establish a local presence in San Diego County?

Ron Harris, Scripps Ranch

Write to editor@sdcitybeat.com


See all events on Wednesday, Dec 7