By Erin Sherbert
By Erin Sherbert
By Leif Haven
By Erin Sherbert
By Chris Roberts
By Kate Conger
By Brian Rinker
By Rachel Swan
Nothing against whitey, but ...:Too funny. Run and hide to a renaissance fair ["Stupid White Tricks," Matt Smith, Sept. 14]?!? Classic. Perhaps these "Caucasians" you speak about can organize a neighborhood coalition, or maybe even host weekly community meetings about the importance of saving the poor animal victims of Hurricane Katrina.
Seriously, though, Matt Smith always seems to articulate what I'm thinking but can't say because minorities like myself who bag on white people's crazy actions are usually dismissed as reverse-racist angry Mexicans. Nothing against whitey, and not trying to instigate more racial tension, but people are dying in our public housing projects, and the real needs of minority youth and families are being swept aside to talk about leash laws and the "preservation of neighborhood characteristics" (i.e., keeping places like the Tenderloin and Mission low-income and drug-infested).
Ackerman being pushed out of her job didn't help anything either, and now the progressives are hollering, "This is the time to put aside politics and focus on the kids." Huh? Where were these people when schools in the Western Addition closed down? In our supposedly open-minded, "progressive" city of S.F., shouldn't we try to maintain diversity in high-level positions of government? I guess the answer is no, if diversity comes at the expense of initiating any real social change (i.e., Dream Schools, improved test scores, etc.).
Matt, don't let that liberal white guilt get you down. At least you're not a reporter for the Bay Guardian.
A letter that proves the existence of pet-cloning public relations:Our primary purpose is to clone pets, but contrary to Infiltrator's assumptions ["Send in the Clones," Sept. 14], we're also interested in the advancement of science. Pet-cloning research increases scientific knowledge of canine and feline reproductive physiology and gives us new tools for the preservation of the endangered cousins of the cat and dog.
Infiltrator is also too eager to give our money away; it's true we'll refund a client's money if his or her new pet has a cloning-related health problem or doesn't sufficiently resemble its genetic predecessor, but we won't pay double!
Sure, adoption would be cheaper, and many of our clients have adopted pets in the past. (In fact, some of the pets our clients want to clone came from animal shelters.) But people come to us for something that's not available in any pet shelter: the identical twin of a favorite pet.
The OJ defense, more or less:Matthew [Smith], you are missing the point ["Tour de Farce," Matt Smith, Sept. 7]. The urine samples being tested and claimed to be tainted with EPO: How do we know that they were properly stored and frozen? How do we know that they were correctly identified? How do we know they weren't conveniently tampered with at some point by someone who had a reason to do so -- to cause problems for Mr. [Lance] Armstrong?
There is also no second sample to test to be sure the first sample is correct -- i.e., an A sample and the B sample in hand.
And lastly -- what has happened to ethically and confidentially handling medical samples? If someone is out to get Mr. Armstrong -- and there are a few in France who are -- any kind of subterfuge is possible.
Your "follow the money" journalism is interesting, but the point is: How do we know that those samples weren't tampered with? Mr. Armstrong is the most tested athlete in the world and has yet to fail a blood test or urine test. His physiological parameters are what has enabled him to win his Tours.
He jammed his leg into my dog's mouth. My dog never bites. My dog was muzzled. My dog is toothless. I didn't even walk my dog that day. I don't have a dog:I suppose that one could analyze the configuration of certain constellations, reconnect the dots, and come up with an image of Lance Armstrong with a syringe in his left gluteus maximus. Smith's column is horribly slanted, looking for scandal where there is merely a history of high-level financial support from a man who loves cycling to the point where he is willing to base and risk his career and livelihood on promoting it to a nation of NASCAR idiots.
Obviously eager to jump on the bandwagon of the cadre of American journalists vilifying Armstrong for perverted reasons, Smith glaringly leaves out that the tests performed on the 1999 samples are "prototypes." They have not been approved by any major sporting organization or sanctioning body. A new testing protocol was needed because the old test was yielding too many false positives. This new test yields even more positives. It isn't possible that the new test is faulty also?
Smith also leaves out that Dick Pound, the president of [the World Anti-Doping Agency] -- and a zealot, in my opinion -- spoke out in support of the "positive" findings, having little scientific evidence to support the findings other than the leaked information contained in one article in one newspaper -- L'Equipe -- with a history of denigrating Lance Armstrong. L'Equipe is in fact the financial backer of the anti-Armstrong book published in France and has one of the two "journalists" that wrote the book on its payroll. He also leaves out the fact that L'Equipe is owned by the same company that owns the Tour de France.