Where's the Outrage Over Limbaugh's Treasonous Comments?

I appreciated Tom Danehy's column regarding oil speculation and its effect on gas prices, and I particularly enjoyed the comments on the role that the rotund oracle of bigotry, Rush Limbaugh, played; however, I believe Danehy was much too kind.

Where's the outrage regarding this buffoon? Why is the press so silent, so apologetic and so cowardly? A year ago, it was revealed that Barack Obama went to a church with a pastor who sputtered the words, "God damn America." The country was then subjected to ranting, righteous indignation from the conservative nation. Bill O'Reilly bellowed because Obama didn't quit the church immediately; "he is damaged goods and un-American," shrieked the opposition candidates. This mantra was repeated by every right-wing pundit with a media outlet.

Today, Obama is our president, voted into office by a true majority. His administration and our country are faced with unprecedented challenges, wars of dubious purpose and origins, global terrorism, financial collapse, record unemployment, housing foreclosures and bankruptcies--and all of this is combined with an active vocal stumbling block, the original architects of the mess, the minority party. Yet when Limbaugh interspaces his usual bluster of misinformation, bigotry and intolerance with, "I hope he (president Obama and, by definition, our country) fails," there is hardly a ripple of media indignation. Nobody challenges his patriotism; there is no public admonishment from either side of the aisle, no apologies and no outrage.

The real enemy of bringing our nation together is on your AM radio and, sadly, a silent press seems unable or unwilling to expose that which is truly offensive to our country and treasonous.

Tom Nicholson

Law-Enforcement Officer: Dobyns Is a True hero

I've known Jay Dobyns both professionally and personally for 22 years, and during that time, I've grown to admire and appreciate Jay as an outstanding, forthright and genuine human being and law-enforcement agent, without pretension or agenda ("The Good Guy, Feb. 5).

His expertise and diligence (as well as his sometimes eccentric ways) set him apart from your regular, run-of-the-mill undercover cop. Jay's ability to go above and beyond what was expected and think on his feet set him apart from others. Jay is a legend in law-enforcement circles, not only because of what he's done in his career, but because of how he continues to persevere, regardless of how he's treated by his own agency and the criminal fringe that he attempted to bring to justice.

None of what he has done and accomplished, even at the risk of his own life and his family's lives, seems to matter to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' management. It's sad that cops like Jay are tossed aside or forgotten when their agency no longer considers them an asset or trophy to parade around after their usefulness is over. Don't rock the boat, as Jay has done, unless you're prepared to go all the way--and that's exactly what has happened. He's been cast as a pariah by ATF and others, because he chose to speak out and defend himself when no one else would. Shame on all of us, cops included. His infiltration of the Hells Angels criminal organization serves as a textbook example of undercover brilliance and courage.

The word "hero" is so often recklessly thrown around, but in Jay's case, it fits him perfectly. He would be the first one to downplay it or reject it outright. He was just doing his job.

Name withheld by request

Arizona's Senators Let Us Down by Rejecting the Stimulus Package

I watched with dismay as each of Arizona's senators turned their backs on the stimulus plan, and doubled-down on the traditional Republican economic theories that ruined our country ("The Bucks Stop Here," Feb. 5). Championing a government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich must now take a back seat to the rescue of our economy.

The fact that our senators failed to rally behind our president, and instead tied their political fortunes to the economic failure of our country, is not just disappointing; it is outright alarming. Now that they are politically and intellectually dependent upon further economic collapse in order to justify their positions, their future assistance seems even less likely. Who can fail to be haunted by the chilling words of the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, claiming to have learned tactics from the Taliban?

As a life-long resident of Arizona, I had high hopes that our senators would come to the aid of their state. Given their enormous combined seniority in the U.S. Senate, they could have leveraged the bill to significantly revive Arizona's economy. But it seems that helping Arizona is incompatible with their personal objectives. Would Carl Hayden, John Rhodes and Mo Udall have stood by during an opportunity to financially support the state of Arizona?

In 2010, John McCain will need to explain why he turned his back on Arizona in its time of greatest need, even as he continued to support the agenda of the wealthiest in the nation.

Michael McNulty

Phelps Should Have Stood Up for Pot

Many people may share Jimmy Boegle's disgust with the Michael Phelps/bong controversy ("Crank Case, Editor's Note, Feb. 12), but I am disgusted with the disgust.

Why is it OK to look the other way when Phelps breaks the law, while a large percentage of our prisons are filled with Americans caught with a joint? Is it because they are not the color of America? Or perhaps because privately owned prisons need to be filled to make a profit?

I agree that a war on a naturally growing weed is ridiculous, and so do many, including Michael Phelps. Why did he not show some courage instead of apologizing? Phelps could have paralleled Muhammad Ali's opposition to the Vietnam War by taking a stance on this issue that affects millions; instead, Phelps' future is probably going to include a just-say-no campaign.

Abie Morales

Danehy's Rodeo-Protester Remarks Were Absurd

With the Tucson Rodeo upon us once again, it's time to address Tom Danehy's comments from Dec. 18, 2008 ("The Rant Issue").

As the organizer of rodeo protests for the last 10 years, I'll begin by correcting the inaccurate premise that all local rodeo protesters are members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Indeed, some of us are PETA members, while some are members of other animal-protection groups. The Arizona entities that have protested the rodeo include the Animal Defense League of Arizona and Supporting and Promoting Ethics for the Animal Kingdom. Closer scrutiny of several local TV-news broadcasts showing our undercover rodeo footage of the horses and bulls being routinely shocked should have made that obvious to Danehy.

Addressing the childishly offensive and absurd: Implying that we "dorks" want people to wear "cardboard shoes," and that vegans have a "blank stare" is pathetic. The "you-must-live-as-we-do-or-you're-evil" accusation wallows in its own pool of fear-based guilt. We are all challenged by others to be more compassionate, more progressive, less racist/species-ist, less violent, more "green," etc. Movements against animal abuse, child abuse, environmental destruction, etc., are essential for social progress.

Gary Vella


A photo accompanying "In the Year 2034" (Feb. 26) actually shows Rodd Lancaster, and not his brother, Brad. We apologize for the mistake.


Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Latest in Mailbag

  • Mail Bag

    • Dec 19, 2013
  • Mailbag

    Reactions to Tom Horne's suckiness and Tom Danehy'
    • Oct 31, 2013
  • More »

Most Commented On

Facebook Activity

© 2016 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation