Rejected letters to People Magazine, princess dandling edition

Dear people who knead People (Magazine):

Please bear with me. It’s been awhile since I’ve written and I have a lot of pent up thoughts and feelings. Also, in kind of a new thing for me, this letter will cover two topics, so you may want to break it up and run it as two separate letters. You can use a fake name on one or both of them, so it doesn’t look like I am the only one writing to you, even if that may be true. 

OK, topico numero uno: You’ve got Princess Kate DANDLING on the cover. Question: When is it appropriate to show a princess dandling? Answer: Never! I don’t want to see a princess dandling, and I’m pretty sure the rest of America doesn’t want to see it either. It’s disgusting! Ix-nay on the incess-pray andling-day!

I am pleased that Kate has a new nanny though. Thank God!

Topico numero two-o: Yes, we know Mickey Rooney was a horndog! His “many legendary loves?!” Who are you kidding? We know what you are getting at here with your sneaky coded language. You’re implying that just because Mickey was shortish and banged a lot of broads, that makes him a wee oversexed freak. So I suppose William Powell was just fulfilling his height-determined erotic destiny by plowing the fertile fields of Hollywood’s starlet farms? Listen, I have it on good authority that Mickey Rooney was a gentleman, not some love-’em-and-leave-’em roué. He made sure his ladies were satisfied—all the way satisified, if you know what I’m saying—which is more than you can say for Glenn Ford!  

Sincerely,

M. Ravid Lichlard

PS. If you think my nanny comment warrants it, you can break this into three letters instead of just two.