Feedback: Too much attention for the anti-vaxxer rocker?
Give voice to an anti-vaccine
I can’t believe your editor accepted a full page calendar post [“People Warned Me,” Aug. 15 by Randall Roberts] show the anti-vaccine madness fueled by the Joseph Arthur plot. It’s like telling her fanatic followers that it’s okay to keep drinking your Kool-Aid. Roberts even announced the time and location for the next public concert in person.
This, as your news sections continue to report the shocking and deadly increase in new viral infections, remorse deaths, and lack of hospital beds across the country.
Seemingly baffled by those who still refuse to get vaccinated, you have posted many serious editorials to convince or shame your readers.
If the real purpose of this article was to inform readers that this anti-vaccine has lost supporters, simply adding it in the little “For Registration” box at the bottom of the last page would have done the trick. case.
“Arthur’s girlfriend recently gave birth to their first child. When asked if she would receive the recommended vaccines that children receive at two months, he replied, “We are looking at this. “
This quote says it all.
For The Times to glorify Arthur (I had never heard of him) by wasting an entire page of printing on such an outlier is mind-boggling.
Obviously, Randall Roberts intended to expose Arthur’s ignorance and idiocy, but reading the article only served to give credit to the rockers’ ignorance-based BS. and, more importantly, to encourage the continued reluctance of the “no vaxxer” crowd to get a brain.
Arthur needs no voice as his ill-conceived opinions have proven to cause so much pain, destruction, animosity and death in this country.
Sylvia Lewis Gunning
Seriously? Can I think of dozens of independent artists who would love the cover and Roberts lands on an anti-vaxxer only to lose an entire page in an already puny Sunday calendar?
Wasn’t there a flat land he could have found instead?
The view of this sadly misguided man is contrary to accepted medical science and directly contributes to the continuation of disease and death. Shame on you.
Who is Mike Richards?
About “It takes two to replace Alex Trebek” [Aug. 12 by Christie D’Zurilla]: It’s a shame that the producers of “Jeopardy!” are nowhere near as smart as their competitors.
With an impressive and diverse array of possible choices to replace Alex Trebek for the daily airing of the show, they decided to go with a straight white man – an executive producer of the show with no charisma let alone charm.
Great choice, guys.
Mike Richards was obviously their choice of host from day one [“How did the choice of ‘Jeopardy!’ host become so controversial? ” by Matt Brennan and Robert Lloyd]. He was the first to try and everyone else was just there to fill in the time until he took over. It seems quite obvious to many of us that the rest of the guest hosts never had any luck and that the audience was duped.
Mike Richards was boring and shouldn’t have been picked as the new host. They lost me as a spectator.
However, I liked Mayim Bialik and will watch her episodes.
I think they overlooked the best possibility when they picked Richards as the new host for “Jeopardy!”
I think the person who showed the best results as a great host was Joe Buck. He was on top of everything and was excellent at interviewing candidates. I did some great introductions to the commercials and all the breaks did a great job.
Answer: Merv Griffin.
Question: Who is turning in his grave?
Mike Richards would be the perfect host for “Wheel of Fortune” when the time comes.
You will know when you see it
Letter describing “9 Chickweed Lane” as sweet pornography [“Calendar Feedback: Not Very Comic at All,” Aug. 8] is in my opinion far from the base. Admittedly, this comic’s airy interaction sometimes contains innuendos aimed at more mature readers, but comparing it to pornography is tantamount to calling the sly and playful jokes between Nick and Nora from “The Thin Man” dirty.
As a reader who has carefully studied the comic book section of the LA Times for over 50 years (and who remembers series as diverse as “Clive”, “Rick O’Shay”, “Tumbleweeds” and “Friday Foster” half a century ago), I think the intention of “9 Chickweed Lane” is not to arouse, but to creatively push the boundaries of comic book illustration in space. limited from the panel of a newspaper strip.
I would call it a cheeky portrayal of passion and romantic love, but the author of the letter sees it as graphic sex. This crude description is blind to the art behind the brilliant concepts and design of “9 Chickweed Lane”, which to readers like me is a daily source of inspiration.
The all-time pride month, “9 Chickweed Lane” kicked off a storyline in which its only gay lead character is transformed directly by the power of sexy female legs.
I’m not sure exactly why we have to see the gay guy having sex with a woman at different dream levels for 80 days now, but I’m pretty sure it’s not about Seth finding out that he is bisexual.
This comic continues the fanatic lie that all a gay man needs is to find the right woman and his “problem” is solved.
And yes, he cheated on his partner. It does happen, but I don’t think we’re supposed to care either, as the comic is definitely not far off yet. He’s set to tie the knot with a woman who was originally portrayed on the Strip as his homophobic rival and her living boyfriend hasn’t been mentioned once since.
It’s horrible. It is shameful.
David M Willis
Please get rid of “9 Chickweed Lane” and put one of the old bands like “Kathy” or “Sally Forth”. “Chickweed Lane” is soft porn.
Since the pandemic, confined to the house, the Los Angeles Times has chosen to discontinue the TV guide lists and has yet to restore them. It never made sense; just when we’re forced to stay home, The Times leaves us in limbo.