So we're apathetic when it comes to supporting the Tucson Sidewinders, according to the Reno Gazette-Journal.

The Tucson Sidewinders are playing their final season before they move to a new $50 million downtown Reno stadium in 2009. SK Baseball purchased the franchise last winter, and the move north was the intention all along.

Former owner Jay Zucker offered a $1.5 million discount if the new owners kept the team in Tucson. It was a magnanimous overture, but it didn't work. And so, after a 40-year run, Triple-A baseball in Tucson will be no more.

"Tucson is lethargic," Rick Parr, general manager and minority partner in the Sidewinders, said just hours after making the rounds to five morning radio shows touting that night's game and fireworks show. "But they've always been that way with certain things, and that's just the way the community is."

The word "Reno" did not go over well in the stands at a recent Sidewinders game. Those who come to the games -- 114,587 in 36 homes dates this year compared with 270,301 in 28 games for the Sacramento River Cats -- love the team. There just haven't been enough of them.

Tucson was last in the Pacific Coast League in attendance last season, averaging 3,983 spectators per game. Things certainly haven't been much better in this a lame-duck year. The team is again last, averaging 3,293 through Wednesday.

The buck-beer promotion got me out to the ballpark on Thursday night, but the crowd was sparse. I talked to a certain high-ranking city official who told me it was worse on Wednesday.

It makes me sad to think that we're not going to have Triple-A baseball in Tucson when the season ends, but the fault surely does lie with the lack of fan support. Jay Zucker did all he could--from fireworks to Bark in the Park nights--but Tucsonans just didn't go out to the ball game.

It also makes me skeptical that a minor-league sports franchise--basketball, hockey, croquet, whatevs--would succeed as the anchor tenant of a new downtown arena...

Michael Chihak is retiring from the Tucson Citizen, where he's editor/publisher, later this summer.

His retirement was reportedly announced to the Citizen staff earlier today, and this article just appeared on the Citizen's Web site.

Now comes the speculation as to why someone relatively young would retire from Gannett. Maybe he doesn't want to be in charge of the Citizen when it inevitably dies off. Or maybe he got sick of Gannett. Or maybe neither of these is accurate, and he feels it's just time to do something else--that something else being a job as executive director of the Communications Leadership Institute, a nonprofit organization in San Francisco.

In any case, it's interesting timing, seeing as Gannett earlier this week announced it was freezing its pension plan.

Whatever the cause, we send Michael Chihak good wishes in his retirement.

As you can see from our cover story, we've got a brand-new election blog: ScrambleWatch 08!

We hope that you'll visit often for the latest news, most insightful analysis and juiciest gossip on the ongoing election season. If you're a candidate with news about your campaign--or, hell, someone with a good tip about a candidate--drop a note to [email protected].

And hey: Be sure to use the comments to weigh in on your favorite--or least favorite--candidates.

In a few weeks, we'll be adding a list of ballot propositions to the site.

The new issue is online and ready for your enjoyment. Feel free to comment on it here.

The Mexican is being lazy again, so there's no YouTube clip AGAIN, but, hey, we have another Savage Love online extra. So enjoy!

(Letters to Dan Savage in response to his advice to Shitty Boyfriend In The Midwest)

Wow, your response to Shitty Boyfriend In The Midwest was spectacularly lacking in empathy. It doesn’t seem like it occurred to you that his girlfriend is probably depressed. She sounds isolated and is in a new environment—her behavior and personality have changed, so she’s obviously having trouble adjusting either to the area or to the living situation. Rather than kicking her to the curb after she’s followed him to the Midwest, maybe sitting down and having a frank talk about his concerns and the fact that she might be depressed is in order. If she resists and refuses to deal with it, then fine, go ahead and cut the cord for her own good as much as his.

Bree

•••

I think you missed the mark on SBITM’s question about whether or not to dump his girlfriend. I know “to dump or not to dump” was the basic thrust of his question, but don’t you think he should at least try to talk to her first about his frustration with her current habits?

Maybe, after moving to the Midwest to be with a boyfriend who is still in school, she’s feeling depressed and isolated, and after coming home from a (probably soul-sucking) 9-to-5 job that serves only to pay her bills, the only thing she feels like doing is getting high and zoning out with the TV on. What are her alternatives? He wants to “study”—that is not an activity couples can participate in together, and when he studies, it may isolate her even more. He wants to “go out”—where? What if it’s with his friends or colleagues she doesn’t know or doesn’t feel comfortable around? Isolation again. Talking and going out with the boyfriend is something she should do, but the boyfriend should make a more concerted effort to engage her in these activities before he totally writes her off and dumps her.

While your point about dumpings being a necessary and educational part of being in one’s 20s is valid, I think you should have urged him to at least make an effort to talk to her about her habits and how they are affecting his feelings for her before he gives her the old heave-ho. Given the chance, she may decide she wants to change her ways, rather than be dumped by a self-righteous douchebag for whom she moved across the country.

I’ll be interested to see if any other readers feel the same way.

Jane

•••

I don’t think you’re being fair to SBITM’s girlfriend. I’m guessing that SBITM is in grad school from his letter. As a former grad student, I can confidently state that grad students are a self-absorbed group, especially the men. She is treating him like crap, yes, but she’s 21, got her first full-time job after college, moved from someplace possibly metropolitan to what seems likely to be a Midwestern college town, and her boyfriend probably wants to talk about … what? School, I’m guessing? He wants to go out … where? To grad-student hangouts? There’s not a lot to do in the Midwest if you don’t live in Chicago.

Yeah, I’m making a lot of suppositions. But I wonder if he doesn’t expect her to get home from a 9-to-5 job (who’s paying their bills?) and then listen to him talk about his studies. (Am I projecting much? Yes, just a little.) She’s not dealing with it well, but she’s 21. Why all the sympathy on his side?

Yes, it sounds like the relationship is doomed, but I doubt it’s just because she’s a bitch. Grad school breaks up a lot of relationships, and it’s not just because the nonacademic partner is behaving badly. It often also happens because the grad-student partner changes, too, and suddenly decides that he or she is a Thinker with a capital T.

Don’t Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Grad Students

•••

Love your column, but I think your advice to Shitty Boyfriend was pretty harsh. Having been part of a couple where one of us was in school and the other was working, I know that it’s tough, because you’re both at different places in your lives. He hasn’t lived in the “real world” yet, and doesn’t know what it’s like to be out of the safe cocoon of school. Maybe her job is stressful and takes a lot out of her, and she’s just overwhelmed. Maybe she’s only been living there a few months, and is still trying to learn her job, meet new people, and get into the swing of her new life. I mean, give her a break!

Now, I’m not advocating her behavior. Regardless of how stressed you are at work, you should be pulling your weight at home, unless the two of them agreed to this arrangement. What he should be doing is talking to her about it, not just kicking her out without ever mentioning the problem. It’s possible that she’s so tired that she doesn’t even realize what she’s doing. If he wants to stay in a relationship with this girl, then the first thing he should do is discuss the problem.

Anon

•••

There’s something I learned about recently that I want to share with all the dudes out there who are in a situation like SBITM: talking about your feelings.

It sounds funny, but I was raised a dude, and dudes are not generally given the skills that chicks are when it comes to talking about their feelings. A lot of dudes will scoff, as did I for many years, but the truth of the matter is SBITM has feelings that he needs to talk about. I don’t mean attend an empowerment rally; I mean something as simple as “I feel used” or “I feel frustrated” or “disappointed” or “angry.” It can do wonders for a situation like SBITM’s.

First of all, it gets it OUT so it doesn’t sit inside you and fester and turn into some assholish thing like hitting her or sleeping around or staying with her for 10 years and having kids with her but hating her the whole time and then dumping her and the kids for the first piece of ass you can find when you finally grow a pair. Dudes would be amazed how much better life is when you’re not walking around holding on to this stuff.

Second, it puts the problems out in the open. Women aren’t mind-readers. This woman might be a stoned, drunk bitch, but in her mind she has her own reasons for doing what she’s doing. If she’s stoned and drunk all day she’s probably not trying to spend too much time actually dealing with life as it is here on planet Earth. When you’re wallowing, you don’t usually keep track of who cleaned the bathroom last, you know? So say OUT LOUD, “Honey, you’re being an asshole” or “I’m getting tired of doing all the cleaning.” If you don’t—no matter how much of an asshole she is—you are sort of an asshole too, only the kind that expects other people to read his mind.

M.B.

•••

Just wanted to tell you that I really appreciated the advice that you gave to SBITM in this week’s column. As someone who has been in a similar situation, I can say that you really need someone to tell you that breaking up with the drunk is the best course of action. If you don’t, you’ll spend months, if not years of your life, attached to a person who doesn’t respect you. On top of that, this person will most likely alienate most of your friends and you’ll spend the next year of your life rebuilding bridges that this person burned for you. Again, Dan, just wanted to commend you on a spot-on piece of advice this week.

Proud To Be An Ex

•••

Longtime reader, first-time commenter.

While your point about the merits of dumping someone is true, I’m not sure the situation described by SBITM is dump-worthy. Back in college, all I wanted to do when I got home after a day of classes and reading in the library was to cook lots of yummy food and spend quality time talking to people about Ideas. Now that I work an 8-to-5 job, I get home, and all I want to do is eat some shitty microwave dinner and crash. The problem described in SBITM’s dilemma might be simply a “grad school” vs. “working life” situation, especially considering that it’s his girlfriend’s first year working, and in a new city, to boot. So maybe it’s not time to DTMFA yet.

Sushu

•••

I wanted to say thank you for your carefully selected words to SBITM about dumping his girlfriend and the repercussions. As a girl who has had her heart irreparably broken, I am still thankful that the relationship ended (although I didn’t feel that way at the time). It IS best to end things before any more time is wasted on a bad relationship. And also thank you for recognizing that a small few of us are never able to mend a broken heart.

Shattered Heart

Over the weekend, I wrote about Arizona Secretary of State Jan Brewer sticking it once again to Pima County regarding election-security issues. Last week, Brewer sent out a press release along with her 11-page letter to Pima County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry admonishing the county for the 133-page report Huckelberry and his staff prepared that's full of security measures and proposals--some they have already put in motion, and others that need approval from the Pima County Board of Supervisors. 

Well, Brew is being Brew, but she is also the Secretary of State and has the final authority on all things elections--and she is steamed. Her own press release describes the letter as terse.

So professional, yes? 

Well, no. From Huckelberry's perspective, the whole thing is a bit self-serving on the Brew's part. When I called to get comment, he said he was left scratching his head a bit and wondering if he and Brew are “living on the same planet.” 

He’s particularly perplexed by the timing, which arrives at the heels of Judge Michael Miller’s final ruling on May 23 that the county release the remainder of election database files going back to 1998. The decision ended a year-long public records lawsuit that oddly put a Democratic-majority-led county government against its own political party. 

Huckelberry says he plans to address Brew's views in a report for the supes' June 17 meeting. There are certain pieces of his original report he feels confident Pima County can continue to move forward with.

The fanfare of the letter sent to media outlets--including that press release--remains troubling to Huck. 

“It all seemed a little self-serving,” he says. “It seems like she is turning this into a political game, but this isn’t a game, this is for real.” 

Pima County election integrity activists Jim March and John Brakey released a 21-page response to Brew’s letter, going through her comments point by point, which you can read here. This time around, for the most part, the activists stand by Pima County, although they agree with her on a few points. 

“If Jan Brewer’s highest priority was security and reliability of elections she wouldn’t have exposed herself to conflict of interest criticism by accepting co-chair position of the Bush reelection campaign in 2004,” March and Brakey write. 

From their perspective, Brew’s letter is flawed and makes exaggerated claims. 

As of this writing, the Democratic Party is also waiting for the release of the database files Miller told the county to turn over. The county came up with a release plan, but those involved in the handover aren't sure if they agree. 

More to come, folks ... more to come. 

UPDATE: Brakey asked us to post this updated document, to take the place of the previously posted Word doc.

Looks like the Phoenix Mars Lander science team finally has had a breakthrough with that clumpy Martian soil. At today's press conference, scientists from the UA's Lunar and Planetary Lab said that the enough soil had finally fallen through the screen to fill Oven No. 4.

Here's today's press release:

NASA's Phoenix Lander Has an Oven Full of Martian Soil

TUCSON, Ariz. - NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander has filled its first oven with Martian soil.

"We have an oven full," Phoenix co-investigator Bill Boynton of the University of Arizona, Tucson, said today. "It took 10 seconds to fill the oven. The ground moved."

Boynton leads the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer instrument, or TEGA, for Phoenix. The instrument has eight separate tiny ovens to bake and sniff the soil to assess its volatile ingredients, such as water.

The lander's Robotic Arm delivered a partial scoopful of clumpy soil from a trench informally called "Baby Bear" to the number 4 oven on TEGA last Friday, June 6, which was 12 days after landing.

A screen covers each of TEGA's eight ovens. The screen is to prevent larger bits of soil from clogging the narrow port to each oven so that fine particles fill the oven cavity, which is no wider than a pencil lead. Each TEGA chute also has a whirligig mechanism that vibrates the screen to help shake small particles through.

Only a few particles got through when the screen on oven number 4 was vibrated on June 6, 8 and 9.

Boynton said that the oven might have filled because of the cumulative effects of all the vibrating, or because of changes in the soil's cohesiveness as it sat for days on the top of the screen.

"There's something very unusual about this soil, from a place on Mars we've never been before," said Phoenix Principal Investigator Peter Smith of the University of Arizona. "We're interested in learning what sort of chemical and mineral activity has caused the particles to clump and stick together."

Plans prepared by the Phoenix team for the lander's activities on Thursday, June 12 include sprinkling Martian soil on the delivery port for the spacecraft's Optical Microscope and taking additional portions of a high-resolution color panorama of the lander's surroundings.

The Phoenix mission is led by Smith with project management at JPL and development partnership at Lockheed Martin, located in Denver. International contributions come from the Canadian Space Agency; the University of Neuchatel,Switzerland; the universities of Copenhagen and Aarhus, Denmark; Max Planck Institute, Germany; and the Finnish Meteorological Institute.

WEBLINKS:

http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu

http://www.nasa.gov/phoenix

Project White House, Tucson Weekly's first Reality Journalism competition, won third place in the Innovation category at last weekend's Association of Alternative Newsweeklies conference. While it's my name on the award, there's no way I could have done it without the help of Hector Acuña, TW's former art director and my frequent partner in crime, and Dave Maass, who's currently working as a staff writer for the Santa Fe Independent. And, of course, I gotta thank all the candidates who campaigned for the presidency of the United States; editor Jimmy Boegle, for saying yes to the crazy idea in the first place and letting me run with it; and the Arizona Legislature, for having such loose ballot requirements.

Speaking of blogging, we've got something new coming your way today. Details soon!

The story: Students at Shasta High School in Redding, Calif., ran a front-page photo of a student burning a flag in the school newspaper, with an editorial about First Amendment rights and the Constitution's protection of flag burning. Everyone then flipped out, and the administration cancelled the paper for the forseeable future.

My take:

-- No current event in Redding prompted a story about flag burning, so it wasn't newsworthy. As my brilliant colleague Mari Herreras suggested, the picture should have ran with the editoral ... on the editorial page.

-- While not timely, or extremely relevant, teaching students about free speech and their rights, is always relevant.

-- Is California still a blue state?

-- They are high school kids; they're going to make mistakes. An adviser should have advised the students to move the picture. The students should be allowed to test boundaries and experiment in a safe forum, and should be praised for at least caring enough to write an editorial about constitutional rights and not about the miracle of texting, or something else stupid.

The superintendent, Mike Stuart, is a U.S. Army veteran, and said he was personally offended. The principal, Milan Woollard, said the budget was tight, and the school was already looking to cut the funding for the Volcano, regardless.

As one astute blogger put it: "I wonder what's more offensive to the general public: Printing a story in the Shasta High School Volcano which has maybe 200-300 daily viewers. Or printing a story about a story in the Shasta High School Volcano (front page news, mind you) that offends people in a paper which has several thousand daily viewers?"

Ha.

The students shouldn't have published the photo on the front page when it wasn't relevant to their school at the time, but they should still be allowed to discuss their rights as citizens in their public forum, the Volcano. They ultimately suffered from a poor adviser and a money deprived administration. Bring back the Volcano, and viva free student speech!

People in L.A. have no choice when it comes to cable companies. One cable company spans from San Diego to Ventura to Riverside ... a damn monopoly.

It's gotten so bad that the city of L.A. is suing Time-Warner.

I so resent it when people don't have choices. In Tucson, we don't have a choice, either. You either live in the Cox area or the Comcast area for cable.