By Ray Stern
By Ray Stern
By New Times
By Amy Silverman
By Stephen Lemons
By Stephen Lemons
By Monica Alonzo
By Chris Parker
As it turned out, everyone won in this situation. There was no armed robbery in the store. The investigation revealed that the car was not stolen. The person who was detained shortly was let go. No one went to jail. No one, including the police officers, were hurt. How can you knock that?
It is apparent that Mr. Graham has a deep-seated desire to portray Scottsdale and its police department as racist. Look at the facts and draw your own opinions. Don't let slanted writing form your opinions for you.
If an article is going to be about what happened at a jewelry store, use illustrations that support that. It is unfair to the City of Scottsdale and the Scottsdale Police Department to use a sensationalistic illustration that has nothing to do with the content of the article.
Longing for John
Senator John McCain is the only Arizona elected leader who has taken a meaningful stand for campaign-finance reform. In the May 14 article ("Waiting for McCain," Amy Silverman), the senator was criticized for not leading the charge for our ballot initiative. The fact is, he wasn't even informed of our effort until very recently, which is our fault, not his.
I worried aloud with Ms. Silverman that he might not like our approach, but I certainly hope he does. He is the national leader on this issue, and his help would be a great asset to our work.
The issue of campaign reform has gained prominence and made progress because of his leadership. We want to meet with him soon and see what he thinks. If we had been wiser, we would have put him in the loop at the start. The only reason we didn't is because we wanted the McCain-Feingold bill to be resolved before we raised the subject of a different kind of reform with him.
Arizonans for Clean Elections
Attorney Jay Dushoff is right on the money regarding condemnation to provide for private business ("Slummin' in Scottsdale," Tony Ortega, May 21). The Arizona Constitution spells out in explicit detail the exercise of eminent domain, including railroads and power lines. Conspicuously absent from the list are baseball stadiums (remember Beatrice Villareal and the 23 businesses displaced for BOB) and department stores. Furthermore, Article 9 section 7 expressly forbids special treatment or subsidizing of any private enterprise.
Unfortunately, Mr. Dushoff is apparently absent the financial wherewithal or the tenacity to pursue this matter to the U.S. Supreme Court. He obviously doesn't have a prayer here in Arizona.
It is ironic that all the pro-property-rights conservatives are dead silent when these issues arrive. Of course, they are usually the ones propagating the unproven and purely subjective economic benefits of subsidized business. At least your "slobbering, rug-chewing, liberal" counterparts are redistributing wealth to ostensibly needy people rather than institutions like Nordstrom, Dial Corporation and Jerry Colangelo. Shame on the whole bunch of you!