St. Charles' frustrated fairy's unfortunate cursing need not have left her jobless

Sugar Plum Fairy Laura Coppinger's drug test snafu need not have swelled the ranks of the St. Charles unemployed ("Festival clips Sugar Plum Fairy's wings," Nov. 12). If only the testing facility had followed the 50-page Urine Specimen Collection Guidelines issued by federal regulators, Ms. Coppinger would have avoided her fateful flush, remaining as December's Pied Piper of historic Main Street.

Just last October, Washington, D.C., bureaucrats met head on the pitfalls confronting the harried urine specimen provider. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Urine Specimen Collection Guidelines, "Inadvertently flushing the toilet does not automatically require any corrective action by the collector or a recollection." The regulation further suggests: "to guard against this action, the collector may want to place a card with instructions not to flush by the toilet handle or tape or otherwise secure the handle with tamper-evident tape." It is not often that one finds so many practical pointers packed into a mere 50 pages.

As a high school government and economics teacher I hope that the paper reports on more instances in which rigorous adherence to federal regulatory protocols would lead to less rather than more unemployment.

Finally, regarding the frustrated fairy's unfortunate cursing, surely the First Amendment extends to naughty words muttered by out-of-uniform holiday sprites.

Mark Bayles • St. Louis County

Loving role

Regarding "Festival clips Sugar Plum Fairy's wings" (Nov. 12): The city of St. Charles should rehire the Sugar Plum Fairy. I cannot believe that the city would fire someone who has put so much time, energy and love into her role.

As she said, "Everyone makes mistakes." Well, the city needs to correct its mistake immediately and apologize to her for this treatment. My grandkids and I have looked forward to seeing her this year, as we have in the past. Christmas will not be the same.

Gayle Lyles • St. Peters

A new twist

Regarding "Festival clips Sugar Plum Fairy's wings" (Nov. 12): I am one person who is happy to see her go. Her own statement in the article is true, "I even had this obnoxious, high-pitched voice that you could hear three blocks away." The character she created might have been enjoyed by some, but to others it was annoying. She ruined every Christmas Tradition marshmallow roast with her shrill voice. Our family immediately moved on when she showed up.

I hope the St. Charles Christmas Traditions committee will give someone else a chance to create a Sugar Plum Fairy character with a new twist and more pleasant voice.

Cheri Barnhart • St. Louis

Not coming back

I just finished reading "Festival clips Sugar Plum Fairy's wings" (Nov. 12), about the lady who for six years has performed as the Sugar Plum Fairy in St. Charles. I can't believe she was fired for saying a curse word that was not directed at anyone while she was at a drug-testing lab. I'm sure that's never happened there before, right?

What is wrong with the people in the city's human resources department? Don't they have anything else to do?

As much as I and my family have enjoyed shopping and dining in St. Charles before, it won't see us or our money this holiday season.

In following with the "old town look," the Sugar Plum Fairy is lucky the city doesn't still use the rack for punishment.

Bob Parry • O'Fallon, Mo.

Get organized

I believe in the right to assembly, the freedom of speech and the right to protest wrongs. These are fundamental to the American principles that were established in our Constitution's Bill of Rights.

I was and am disgusted by and angry about the abuses and apparently legalized fraud committed by the investment bankers who swindled the investors with bundled high-risk loans and investments and reaped huge bonuses and salaries leaving the taxpayers to bail out companies deemed too big to fail. It should not have happened, and it happened only because of greed and the lack of control by government agencies set up to oversee those institutions.

I share the frustration and anger of the people who invested in real estate on the basis of appreciation and the desire for a home of their own.

I understand the principles of the protests in every major city of the country. However, I do not feel that the protesters are furthering their cause by ignoring municipal codes of the cities, disrupting the use of public property for the taxpayers and creating unsanitary conditions.

I am concerned that the worthy intent of the original idea is being tainted by some who look on this as a lark, a party.

The protesters need leadership but seem to reject it in favor of disorganization. Maybe they should have started by writing their congressmen, flooding the Internet with thoughtful explanations of their concerns, holding private meetings to organize and then marched — just as other successful protesters have done.

Harold W. Kerr • Wright City

East of Indy

Too many of the 99 percent have not taken a moment to visualize the magnitude of wealth inequality. Numbers often reported (with little variance or dispute) indicate that 1 percent own 35 percent of the wealth in this country. To put that into perspective, 1 percent of the U.S. population is roughly equal to the Indianapolis metropolitan area. Imagine. if you will, if the population of Indianapolis owned every single thing eastward, all the way to the Atlantic. The remaining 99 percent of us share what is west of Indy. Got it? One percent owns everything east of Indy; we share what is weast of Indy. Put that way, it is difficult if not impossible to believe that wealth inequality is the natural result of the wealthy working that much harder or smarter or longer than 99 percent of us. No collusion? No manipulation? No corruption? No repression? Just a better mouse trap, a little elbow grease and the great American spirit, is that it? Baloney.

Now imagine that a population roughly half that of New York City owns 25 percent of the Earth, and you begin to understand our future.

Are you getting this yet?

Fritz Korte • Pacific

Boasting over a bad bill

Regarding "Senate OKs bill to help homeless vets" (Nov. 11): The Senate passed 95-0 a "bill to help unemployed veterans and government contractors that includes the first small slivers of President Barack Obama's jobs agenda that he is likely to sign into law." The story said the vote "gave lawmakers the opportunity to fly home to holiday events and boast about helping veterans and protecting jobs."

The conclusion of the news article reported "this would be paid for by extending a fee the Veterans Affairs Department charges to back home loans. Annulling the withholding law would cost the government $11.2 billion over the next decade. The legislation makes up the lost revenue by making it harder for some Social Security beneficiaries to qualify for Medicaid, the federal-state health program for low-income people."

Senators are boasting about passing a bill that supposedly is helping veterans but, in reality, will be paid for by veterans and low-income people.

Are Sens. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and Roy Blunt, R-Mo., proud of their votes?

Rosemary and Tony Petruso • St. Louis County