Steamed About Rice

While Judith Lewis’ article regarding Condi Rice’s recent confirmation
hearings was generally on target [“Protocol
for Lying,” January 28—February 3], I do not agree that the soundbites used
by the mass media portrayed Barbara Boxer as “a nippy little harpy.”
Dr. Rice impugned her own integrity by contradicting herself repeatedly over
the past four years. Senator Boxer simply called her bluff — something that
should have been done a long time ago. Rice’s responses (or lack thereof) exposed
the new secretary of state as being outwardly confident but, at the same time,
in over her head.
I wonder how Rice resolves the cognitive dissonance that must surely arise from
the mixed messages that she’s programmed to deliver.

—Mary Shaw
Norristown, Pennsylvania

Erin Aubry Kaplan’s “Rice
and the New Black Paradigm” [January 28—February 3] is racist in origin,
attesting to the left’s rage and impotence at their loss of political power.
Kaplan’s venom for Rice mirrors that of a plantation owner’s when his favorite
“darkie” jumped on the underground railroad. Democrats have long viewed blacks
as their personal domain, and when a Ward Connerly, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell
or (gasp) Condi Rice make their God-given choice to embrace the other side,
they’re viewed as pariahs by their putative masters. Kaplan embraces house Negroes
like Maxine Waters, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson et al. who’ve “not forgotten
their base” (Is that a noun or an adjective?). The reality that individuals
might, for less than base reasons, have core beliefs that don’t reflect Kaplan’s
worldview appears not to have entered her mind.

—Stuart Weiss
Los Angeles

“Rice and the New Black Paradigm” was quite entertaining, but just that and
nothing more. Isn’t it interesting that a “sistah” who professes such high-pitched
moral indignation over this complete farrago could not find anything in the
way of facts to reveal to us, the malleable public, to enlist our similar outrage,
let alone the encyclopedia the subject sorely deserves? I guess sistahs give
sistahs a pass. Right on! Solidarity.
I mean, it’s not like journalists don’t know their job, is it? Or is it?
After all, with the Eternal Supinity Factor now a staple among “liberals,”
one understands that newspapermen/-women are easily bought into agreeable positions
by shows of power intimating that any true dissenter will be the next target.
Ah, the fourth estate! Let’s see now, whence did Orwell say the true oppression
would come? Hmmm, if I think about it long enough . . . I’m sure it will come
to me.

—Marc S. Tucker
Manhattan Beach

Sweet Smell of Secession

I agree with you, Joe Donnelly [“Leaving
Home,” January 21—27]. California can do quite fine on its own. I
know plenty of folks who cannot support this fraudulent, immoral Bush “junta”
any longer. Turns out the secession idea is catching on: I read in The Nation,
for example, that there’s a group in Vermont seriously working on it for
their state.
It’s time to do something that will cut into Bush’s plans for continual war.
We can also create our own Bill of Rights and nix this idea that evangelical
ideology should govern law.
We’ve got to convince Governor Arnold to go elsewhere, though. He has proved
himself to be against most of us and for wealthy interests only. Folks, follow
his deeds on Speakoutcalifornia.org
or Arnoldwatch.org.

—Jan McQuain
Northridge

Josh Mintz’s depiction of a diabolical neocon Vulcan [Image
Control, January 28—February 3] is just the right-on icon for the
next dismal four years. While I would personally object to the transmogrified
flag, and believe that Mr. Spock would also find it somewhat offensive, it nonetheless
sends a message that belies all talk of creating a spurious “democratic zone
of peace.” The headline could just as well have been “Lie Long and Prosper.”

—Robert A. Rowland
Los Angeles

Action Speaks Louder Than Words

It’s good that the Weekly is criticizing Democrats who
are spending so much time and money on think tanks where all they do is try
to come up with strategies that will win over Americans in 2008 [“The
Next Four Years: A Survival Package,” January 21—27]. I mean, instead
of spending millions of dollars on ideas that will convince people that Democrats
really care about people, why don’t they instead spend that money on actually
taking care of people? What a novel idea! But then, aren’t all you Weekly
pundits doing the same thing?
I can remember back in the early ’80s when the Weekly had a large and
visible agitprop section where each week its readers could see where a demonstration
or a fund-raiser or a project to save a school or clinic was going on. Many
of the Weekly staff were actively engaged in those efforts. The Weekly
needs to take inventory of itself now. Is it going to just continue to write
about what needs to be done (and bitch about party politics) or will it try
to be an active part of the solution? I’d like to challenge the Weekly and
its creative and intelligent staff: Enough with writing about possible strategies
. . . DO SOMETHING!

—Rhabyn Epstein
Los Angeles

Correction

In last week’s music picks, the wrong date was listed for the Mignon show at
the Parlour Club; the correct date is Tuesday, February 15.

Advertising disclosure: We may receive compensation for some of the links in our stories. Thank you for supporting LA Weekly and our advertisers.