LETTERS

I have been a longtime reader of the Weekly, through its many incarnations—from Scope to glossy pinup-girl covers—and realized that a belated thank you is in order. Last week's issue [the March 18 road-trips issue] was, from cover to cover, a pleasure to read. The essays by Stacy J. Willis and Kate Silver were touching and beautifully written, and the overview of the Nevada Board of Regents made obscure local politics both a little less obscure and a lot more fun. It is so nice to have a publication in town whose writers are chosen because they can actually, well, WRITE. (Let's hope the Review-Journal takes note.)

I also wanted to express my gratitude for the literature issue you did a while back: It proved, to anyone who still doubted it, that Las Vegas has an amazing untapped pool of writers and artists. Maybe there's hope for that cultural revolution yet ... You have consistently provided thoughtful, intelligent, and yes, even beautiful writing to your readers, who (as evidenced by the letters column) don't always appreciate it. So I wanted you to know that at least one of them does.

Editor's note:
1.) Thanks! 2.) Thanks! 3.) There's some debate in the office as to whether this is some elaborate hoax—praise us, then bury us!—but, being typically sweet-natured journalists, we ultimately prefer to believe the best about people, so we'll accept this as genuine kudos. 4.) The R-J will not, in fact, take note, now or ever. 5.) In listing our various incarnations, from Scope to pinup rag, thanks for skipping our brief phases as a Strip escort handbill and Pat Buchanan presidential pamphlet.

I've enjoyed your mag/publication/rag/LVnewsthing for as long as my twentysomething mind can remember, but what's with the recent deluge of cover model cupcakes? Yeah, I know we are a town of Carmen, Jenna and Britney lovers, but every week? At least get us some men! There are hot-blooded female readers whose pockets are full of the same green cash just as spendable to your advertisers as the people with sausages in their pants.

Editor's note:
It's neither recent nor a deluge; four cover hotties in this year's 14 issues would be more accurately described as a steady drip, but ...

Hey, wait a minute! "Sausages in their pants"? Isn't it wrong to use the objectifying vocabulary of consumer meat products to dehumanize half the species? Is this really what Gloria Steinem battled Norman Mailer to achieve?

The following, from Las Vegas Little Theatre's Paul Thornton, arrived in response to Steve Bornfeld's final Homeowner's Diary (March 11), presented in the form of a one-act play:

Your feature is terrific! I always enjoy reading your stuff, but this one really connects! I've enjoyed reading the series and I'm sorry it has come to a close. Having gone through the same things a mere four years ago, I've been able to relate to it completely. The neighborhood had been there for 12 years already. It only took Sprint and Cox three months to get us wired after we moved into the house and after we paid a contractor $2,400 to extend the lines for us (which were supposed to have already been there).

LVLT will be doing another series of short plays for The Insomniac Project in conjunction with the May production of The Philadelphia Story. Will you give us permission to do this piece?

Editor's note:
Bornfeld's play, Welcome, Putz, will be performed May 14-16 and 21-23.

The following provocation arrived in response to last week's cover story, Chuck Twardy's account of being an older dude checking out the club scene:

Excuse me? What are you doing printing Chuck Twardy's article? You have got to be kidding? Was it a spoof? Listen, I am 53 years old … balding … separated … major problem with commitment … and a full-time resident in Las Vegas. Married a quarter of a century … raised four kids … and I can tell you a few things I believe about Chuck.

One: He never did LSD in high school!

Two: He saved his virginity for his marriage!

Three: He has never been to a strip joint before.

Four: He never made the Tijuana scene in his teens.

Five: He buys his wife flowers for no reason!

Six: He is some kind of yuppie executive … votes Republican … but is a closet psychodemocratic wannabe!

Seven: He does not know what the words "doobie" or "woodie" mean!

Eight: He is a really great guy!

Nine: Personally, female looks mean nothing to him … it is the personality that counts!

Ten: He only knows one dirty joke … and he is saving it for the right person.

Good effort on the boring article though ...

With my background of honest, hard-working parents, I believed Bush to be an honorable man. I supported the war on Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq and believed when Bush said he would restore honesty and integrity to our government.

I am now watching with horror as the truth is unfolding before my eyes as, one by one, people high up in the Bush Administration are coming forward to demonstrate that I, together with Congress, have been deceived. Rather than protect us from terrorism, President Bush has been pursuing his own vendetta against Iraq while completely neglecting terrorism and Bin Laden.

The testimony before the 9/11 Commission evinces that they are trying to blame the Clinton Administration, when in fact the Bush White House ignored all warnings, including Clinton's—except for Ashcroft, who refused to fly on commercial aircraft in August, and Bush, who fled to his ranch for the month of August, and members of the Senate who cancelled their travel plans for 9/11. The White House denied all requests for funding intelligence operations against Bin Laden and other anti-terrorism expenses, and has appointed its own commission to investigate itself.

I am not going to be fooled again!