Mailbag

MOCA ‘Controversy’ Yet Another Example of Republicans Trying to
Control Personal Lives

Over the past decade, I’ve been continually amazed by how members of
the Republican Party concoct stories, with no basis in the truth, to
further their political and social-control agenda. Now we have the
national drama playing out in our own backyard (“Bunch of Dicks,”
Currents, Oct. 22).

While extreme-right Republicans claim to want less government, they
actually want more government control over our personal lives and
values. They continually talk about personal responsibility, yet their
actions and agendas try to control personal choice and expression.

The recent actions toward MOCA by Bruce Ash and his like-minded
party members remind me of the Stasi in East Berlin before the wall
came down—censorship by the government. As a matter of fact, one
of the more recent Republican rants has been, “Fascists are loose in
the White House.” Interestingly, fascism forbids and suppresses
openness, and that sounds more like today’s Republican mantra. Who are
the fascists here?

As Jim Nintzel and Margaret Regan pointed out, there was no factual basis for any of the claims that were made by Ash. As usual,
they were baseless claims that demonstrate the need for these people to
try to control our personal expression and basic human freedoms.

This country is built upon the right to free speech and freedom of
expression. Art offers society a reflective mechanism through which we
understand ourselves at a deeper level, and that may not always be
comfortable, but it is necessary for a civilized society. Art has
always been the first target for fascist governments with a censorship
agenda, because artists speak truth, which is untenable for those
desiring control. Drawing the line is a recipe for a devolving
society.

If you don’t like the art, don’t go see it.

Truth prevails in this local drama. Ash and his supporters were
caught with their pants down.

Leslie Bromberg

Comments From Readers at TucsonWeekly.com

Regarding “Tucson Needs to Look in the Mirror and See Its True
Size,” Messina, Nov. 5:

The best comment I ever heard about Tucson and development was at a
spring training game (remember?) where one local seated in front of me
leaned over to his visiting parent and said, “Tucson thinks it can
avoid growth by ignoring it.”

Scarpia, B

Regarding “On the Field,” Cinema, Nov. 5:

No offense, James (DiGiovanna), but I’m not sure we lived through
the same decade. As I recall, the ’70s were a time when people wore
clothes from Old Navy, and Red got angry every time Kelso stole one of
his beers. I was born in 1986.

alanj

Regarding “Michael’s Sad End,” Cinema, Nov. 5

Bob Grimm, you are such a donkey! I guess you think that you know
more than the (Los Angeles) coroner, who spent more than eight years in
medical school learning how to determine the pre-death health of
victims (in) questionable deaths. … (He) declared in his autopsy
report that Michael Jackson had been in an excellent state of health
for a man his age, except for slight inflammation of his lungs. …
Where, if I may ask, did you get your medical degree, and what is it
that qualifies you to give us a medical diagnosis of Michael Jackson’s
health state during these final rehearsals of his?

You are absolutely full of cr*p! I and millions of others watched
(This Is It), and I will trust my own eyes and ears, as well as
my three-plus years of health-care practice, in judging Michael
Jackson’s final health-state before I listen to the hate-filled rants
of a medically illiterate fool like yourself, or have you tell me that
Michael was sick and on the verge of death during his final
rehearsals.

Did you even watch the movie at all? None of Michael Jackson’s
speech was incomprehensible; I heard everything the man said loud and
clear. It is not unusual in movies to sometimes subtitle an actor’s
speech, and the false as well as weird conclusion you arrive at from
these occasional subtitles only exposes your deep-seated hatred of
Michael Jackson, and your ultimately futile attempt to paint him as a
man past his prime.

We, his devoted fans, will do all we can in our lifetimes to keep
both his memory and artistic glory fresh and alive forever, and there
is nothing that Michael Jackson haters and disparagers like yourself
can ever do that will change that or end our goodwill toward this Great
King of Pop. The more your depraved kind attack and insult this great
man, the more we will glorify and revere him, so eat your stinking,
loveless, hate-filled hearts out! … Your spiteful and disrespectful
review … only unmasks either your own disgraceful ignorance about how
Michael Jackson prepared for his concerts, or it reveals your
deep-seated hatred of the man, and is a vain attempt to rubbish his
final artistic efforts, thrash his reputation and deny him his
well-deserved final hurrah!

And you know what, imbecile? People like me who have always given
Michael Jackson a fair shake (even during the darkest times of his
unwarranted child-molestation trials) will never let wicked people like
you get away with your filthy lies.

Just parts of a 1,374-word comment from John Odeh

This article appears in Nov 12-18, 2009.