By Chuck Strouse
By Scott Fishman
By Terrence McCoy
By Ryan Yousefi
By Ciara LaVelle, Kat Bein, Carolina Del Busto, and Liz Tracy
By Pepe Billete
By Ryan Yousefi
By Kyle Swenson
INSULTS FOR EVERYONE, EXCEPT DETECTIVE CHRISTOPHER
Kudos and congrats on one of the most boring articles I've ever read by New Times ("The Case from Hell, Part One," September 11). Maybe if Aimee's mother hadn't been such a devout Catholic and so worried about bad outside influences, none of that ever would have happened. But no, there they are on the cover looking oh-so-victimized and wasting newsprint with their stupid case.
As for Michelle Porras and her husband, they are probably the most disgusting individuals I have ever read about. Greed and lies are the only things they know, and they'll probably laugh if they get to read this - it's the only reaction I'd expect from lowlifes such as these. The HRS is also disgusting. It seems to me that they are more than willing to believe every little word out of a child's mouth, which wouldn't be that bad if they weren't such incompetent, bumbling, and dangerous fools. The only person I won't insult is Det. Ellen Christopher, who did a decent job on the case. It's a shame the Metro-Dade Police Department didn't have the brains to read the report she made on the case. But then, they have about as much brains as a cactus plant. The article should have been called "The Dorks from Hell."
A CALL TO ARMS FOR PISSED-OFF PARENTS
Why all the media fuss the past few months about the atrocities committed by HRS ("The Case from Hell, Part One")? How is their behavior different from any other bungling bureaucratic arm? The IRS has used Gestapo-like tactics to have its way for decades, but hardly a whimper from the general public who keep voting the statists into office year after year.
Hey, people! Don't you know that the reason a bureaucracy is set up in the first place is for our protection? How can you expect it to operate efficiently if the enforcers have to worry about trivialities such as individual rights and due process? After all, even the proponents of such government admit from the outset that "mistakes will be made along the way" in order that we can eliminate all of the world's woes. One of the favorite lines used (particularly by the MADD mothers) is, "If one life can be saved, it will be worth it."
Doesn't anyone remember what happened a while back when the media blared out the HRS errors that resulted in the deaths of a couple of children? Even though the parents were remotely responsible, it was the HRS that took all the heat for "failing to prevent" the tragedies, and the government employees involved were disciplined. In the end, there were the usual cries for more HRS funding and strengthening of their powers.
Collectivists have long since won the basic argument that says: In this day and age, outmoded principles such as "innocent until proven guilty" no longer apply. Faceless bureaucrats, subject neither to vote nor court, have unlimited power to issue whatever decrees they deem necessary to accomplish their special-interest ends. The chickens are coming home to roost; let's see if anyone out there has the guts to face down the HRS Brown Shirts with an armed gang of pissed-off parents. Full-page ads in the newspapers aren't gonna do it.
Gregory J. Winters
WHO, US BLASPHEME?
I'm not sure which appalls me more: Bush's lies or Kosova's (New Times's) naivete that anyone in this town might give a damn about the truth ("Whoppers," September 4). If I had to choose, though, it would be the latter. Keep up the good work anyway. I suspect you'll be accused of blasphemy, so batten down!
CALLAHAN: WRONG ON RIGHTS
Regarding T.J. Callahan's response to "Politics and Power" ("Letters," August 28): Contrary to Mr. Callahan's ignorant and bigoted beliefs, lesbians and gays are treated as second-class citizens.
The right to marry is one of the most basic personal rights in our society. There are over 100 automatic marriage-based rights, all of which we are denied. These rights cannot be duplicated by contracts or wills drawn up between an unmarried couple. Married couples have the automatic right to be on each other's health, disability, life insurance, and pension plans. Married couples jointly receive special tax preferences. Marriage enables a couple to jointly own real and personal property, and to protect such property from creditors. The denial of these rights to protect couples in long-term committed relationships is an incredible act of discrimination.
I do not want, as Mr. Callahan says, "special consideration or additional rights under law for rights already guaranteed under the Bill of Rights." I simply want the same rights a free-thinking, open minded individual like Mr. Callahan has. The equality he proudly speaks of denying me.
On May 3, Sheriff Nick Navarro raided two popular gay nightclubs on the pretense that these clubs were drug havens. Approximately $150,000 was spent to raid those clubs, and the net result was six arrests between both clubs. That's $20,000 of our tax money for each arrest. Didn't Mr. Callahan know faggots pay taxes also? Oh yes, I forgot, he does know. He, upon hearing that homosexual couples have a higher income, suggested our county commissioners consider a "gay tax." He will condemn us, call us "disgusting" and "biologically incorrect," but he is more than happy to take our money right along with our rights.