No more Tomorrows
I'm sad that you've become another example of why allowing community businesses to become swallowed up by national or international chains is a bad idea. Did your editor have any choice about cutting the comic? Sure doesn't sound like it. Some honcho at Village Voice Media decided. Apparently doesn't matter whether comics are more popular in Denver or Houston or the Twin Cities.
I'll miss This Modern World, which helped to spark my interest in outsider politics way back in high school. This Modern World was something accessible I could be challenged by even if I wasn't yet interested in local stuff enough to read the good journalism CP used to do.
This is one less reason to pick up a copy of CP and one more reason to stick with my world wide web.
Tomorrow never dies
I was very disappointed today to hear that your paper will no longer be carrying This Modern World by Tom Tomorrow. Seeing as this was the main reason I remembered to pick up your paper every week, I imagine I won't be reading City Pages very much from now on. I understand that money's tight right now, but losing Tom Tomorrow is too big a loss for the Twin Cities!
Putting the "O" in Obama's inauguration
Nice going, City Pages. You spelled "inauguration" incorrectly on your front cover this week ("Onauguration," 1/21/09)! Doesn't your system check spelling and grammar?
Saving CP's soul
Yes, thank you, I followed a link from Lutsen, Minnesota, relative to a positive review they received from your publication. As you highlight "expression" in your header, I'll offer mine. To glorify with a header "Sex, Drugs, and Rock & Roll" (Best Of) seems a poor choice in our world today with so many lives being severely affected by out-of-wedlock pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases, alcohol and drug addiction, and the public spectacle of music idols' out-of-control lifestyles. Search your heart. Ask God what he, loving you so much, sent his son, Jesus to sacrifice his life for you (you, me, us, them, whomsoever, all) would have you do, to thank him for the gift of your life.
David W. Backstrom
Newport Beach, California
Rape cover went over the line
The artwork you chose for your cover story ("An Open Letter to the Man Who Raped My Wife," 1/7/09) is appalling. A beautiful naked woman, with hands covering her breasts? Is this a beer ad? What the fuck is the artist trying to do? Make rape more attractive? Not that mass media hasn't glorified it enough. Thanks for trivializing the author, his wife, and millions of other people's stories concerning this atrocious crime.
Shadowy hands or secret racist conspiracy?
A cover as racially loaded as that of the January 7 issue, when it neither illuminates nor is illuminated by story content, is just racist. My jaw dropped when I saw it. Given that there are eight hands, the artist is clearly working in the land of creative license and imagination. Such a representation is an irresponsible choice.
Beating a dead horse
I am offended by the word "deadbeat" to the nth degree ("The Church of the Deadbeat Dad,"1/14/09). City Pages may as well say something like, "the church is acting like a black father." When you allow pointed discrimination, you have unintended consequences. It's all wrong!
In regard to the court case, a parent should only have to reimburse what his fellow citizens, the state, is willing to pay, and if you can't afford that, then that's where the income percentages come into play. The other way around gives the states too much of an incentive to go after the profits and destroy our families and marriages. In this case, the court is riding roughshod over this family and has overstepped its boundaries into not just their private family affairs but have also intruded into all of our family affairs unnecessarily and, believe it or not, the state is knowingly doing it just for their enforcement profits.
If this story reads anything like the court record, it's unnecessary because all this information is irrelevant to the equity issues at stake, and the courts have made it more complicated than it should have ever been. If I were a betting man, I'd be willing to bet if the mom and the courts were a little more realistic and not so arrogant in their demands and allowed for the rebuttable presumption that the state statutes might be in violation of due process, these supposed mutual agreements rendered from the court of equity wouldn't be so hard for the family courts to enforce.
To me this isn't rocket science, the whole system is broke, and sooner or later someone has got to pull out the common sense card. The state statutes are only presumed to be constitutional, and the people should be allowed to question them with the judiciaries help instead of being blocked. One more thing: If the state is so sure of its procedural rights, why doesn't the state allow this man to have a jury?