LEO welcomes letters that are brief (250 words max) and thoughtful. Ad hominem attacks will be ignored, and we need your name and a daytime phone number. Send snail mail to EROSIA, 640 S. Fourth St., Louisville, Ky. 40202. Fax to 895-9779 or e-mail to [email protected]. We may edit for length, grammar and clarity.
The photo caption in last week’s Connected Diss column mislabeled Annette from the Farmers’ Market at The Temple on U.S. 42. She was pictured on the right in the photo.
In reference to the LEO cover story “The Sultan of Spin” from the Nov. 14 issue: As a reader who assumedly cares about DJ Eric Sanders’ triad of ritzy cell phones, I resent being pandered to. Materialism exists in this country as a growing and malignant force; hip hop is at the vanguard of materialism among youth. So long as these mainstream hits and hit makers perpetuate societal misconduct, what is less worthy of front-page publicity than a man’s ascension to prestige among “urban music’s elite”? Perhaps while Sanders serves as a representative in his Heavy Hitter hip hop fraternity, he can wield his influence to repress the roles of homophobia, misogyny, gun glorification, materialism and unabashed narcissism in this highly provocative subculture.
Simon Meiners, Louisville
The Erosia section from the Nov. 14 LEO really left me scratching my head. I often do that when I read the thoughts of liberals these days.
In one letter, Angie Cahill questions why children, who do not have to pay taxes, would be in favor of the library referendum, whereas adults, who do have to pay taxes, voted so decisively against it. Perhaps the next referendum should seek to change the name of the library from the Louisville Free Public Library to the Louisville Taxpayer-Supported Public Library, which would be a much more accurate description. If that referendum passes, then maybe people like Angie will be able to understand why most of us are less inclined to be in favor of things that cost money versus those things that are free. Actually, it’s a pretty simple concept, isn’t it?
And then Paul Whitely discusses the need for more “economic equity” in our nation. First off, I think that was tried previously for about 70 years in the former Soviet Union, wasn’t it? I don’t believe the concept of “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” worked out too well, or at least it didn’t seem to, because I don’t recall millions of illegal immigrants trying to sneak into the old U.S.S.R. Second, Paul points to John Edwards as the only presidential candidate to even raise the economic equity issue. Of course, if you believe Edwards’ own story of his life, then one might realize that he is the poster child for someone who grew up as a “have-not” but was able to become a “have a lot.” Someday maybe people like Paul will be able to understand that the U.S.A. has never been, nor was it intended to be, a land of equality, but rather it has always been a land of equal opportunity. Once again, it’s a pretty simple concept, isn’t it?
Rick Robbins, Sellersburg, Ind.
On my first reading of Cary Stemle’s insightful analysis of the library tax referendum (LEO, Nov 14), I saw immediately that he was onto something. He raised some very interesting points that I don’t remember reading anywhere else.
Most notable among them was his observation that many voters seemed to feel like our so-called “local opinion-leaders” were trying to tell us what’s good for us — as if they know better than everyone else. Instead of selling us on the idea of a library tax, it seemed like they were trying to spoon-feed it to us.
So, we endured a long parade of personal endorsements from supporters of the library tax in the newspaper and from TV commercials. There seemed to be little if anything memorable out of it all.
Isn’t there a better way? For example, think about those informational booklets that Metro United Way distributes during their fundraising appeals each year. In these booklets, you find plenty of well-organized data about goals, accomplishments and “outcome measurements” (numbers, statistics and charts).
These folks appear to work very hard at describing the actual need for our contributions and demonstrating their efficiency in using the dollars we give them. The library tax supporters may have distributed similar materials. If so, that information obviously did not stick in my mind.
Maybe the library could learn a few things from Metro United Way.
Tom Louderback, Louisville
I don’t think Sherry Deatrick was at the same play I attended (Pandora Productions’ “Arrangement for Two Violas”). While this critic is entitled to her opinion, I take issue with her false assertion that the audience’s “heads were nodding — but not in approval …” The audience, myself included, was alert, attentive, and clearly enjoying themselves. Again, Ms. Deatrick is entitled to her opinion. However, I take issue with her broad assumptions about mine.
Craig Hubbuch, Louisville
Bury the Hate
We have just elected a new governor and a bunch of progressive people to lead Kentucky. But what is more important is that we proved that “hate is not a family value.”
We are glad to know that Pat Boone is not dead, but we wish that his practice of making “homo-hate” phone calls was dead.
Family values should include such things as job opportunities, affordable healthcare, comfortable retirements and help for those who need it. Included are the impaired veterans who are returning from Bush’s war. We wonder how many more years it will take for the professors at the religious seminaries like Asbury and Southern Baptist to learn how to say the word “gay.” Could it be that “homo-hate” and the preaching of that long “H” word is so much more profitable than preaching about God’s love for all his children?
Vic Dungan, Louisville