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.
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."
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.
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