Contact us via voice mail at (714) 825-8432, or by e-mail: Or write to Letters to the Editor, OC Weekly, P.O. Box 10788, Costa Mesa, CA 92627. Or fax: (714) 708-8410. Letters may be edited for clarity and length. All correspondence must include your home city or service provider and a daytime phone number.

WILL WHINE FOR FOODOC Weekly's latest example of utter ignorance of anything north of the 22 freeway is the inexcusable guide to restaurants ("Summer Eats," June 25). It seemed that most restaurants located in the southern part of the county got some pretty good coverage. However, Rebecca Schoenkopf's entry on my hometown made me want to move that much more.

Your awkwardly lame journalist who sleepwalked her way through Fullerton suggested Roundtable Pizza at the Cal State Fullerton pub for breakfast. Is it even open during the summer? I know what isn't open: my mouth for pizza in the morning. The writer did mention the Mustard Seed, but she only drank tea and made friends, so it's not exactly an endorsement of the food. And Angelo & Vinci's, a restaurant that has been around forever and does good business, has been spurned by those of us who really know Fullerton because of its bland food and poor service.

There are easily nine or 10 restaurants, many of which have opened in the past couple of years, that are far worthier for entry in a so-called alternative newspaper. They're affordable, and—not that this is apparently any criterion for the Weekly—the food is good!

—Jared Rose, Fullerton ART CRITIC

Re: Art Pedroza Jr.'s comments on Assembly Bill 222 (Letters, June 25):

For a man who considers himself a "Christian" and advocates free will amongst homosexuals, he seems to backpedal on those words and condemn their lifestyle. No. 1: we have no right to intrude into other people's lives and tell them what to do or what not to do. No. 2: Isn't God an all-loving and caring God? He created every one of us and gave us our personalities, likes, dislikes, etc. I find it very interesting that many of his fellow religious right-wingers tend to conceal their hate and resentment toward homosexuals in something called "family values." Hate or anything related to it is something I would never teach or even hint about to my kids. It seems that the whole "God-love-thy-neighbor-What-Would-Jesus-Do?" thing is such a contradiction. Sheesh!!

One more thing before I conclude: Would you consider yourself safe, Mr. Pedroza, from discrimination and ridicule if you were gay and had a job in a school or were applying for a job at a school present-day? After you got over being gay (if you did at all), I don't think you would feel secure in your job. That is why this piece of legislation is necessary. And AB 222 is not "special rights"; it's equal rights.

—Chris Kelishes, Dana Point BAGGING BUKOWSKI

Alex Nicholas' review of Howard Sounes' recent biography of Los Angeles writer Charles Bukowski was not only mean-spirited and inaccurate, but it also smacked of intellectual elitism (Books, June 25). It's sad to note that much of his "review" was a harsh critique of Bukowski the man and Bukowski the writer rather than any sort of substantive critique of Sounes' book. Nicholas appeared to revel in the fact that Sounes has uncovered several inconsistencies in Bukowski's portrayal of himself in his many novels and poems. However, Nicholas conveniently omitted from his review the fact that Sounes also mentions several situations and behaviors that are consistent with Bukowski's tough, drunken reputation.

But easily the most disappointing aspect of Nicholas' review was his constant reference to academia and its collective disapproval of Bukowski's work. Since when is academia the final measurement of good literature? The importance of a writer's work should be judged by its relevance to society as a whole, rather than by whether it fits some narrow, boring academic standard. Bukowski's writing struck a chord with the common man because of its clarity, brutal honesty and lack of pretentiousness. These are traits that Nicholas and many of his more accepted academic writers are clearly in desperate need of.

—Greg Leos, Pasadena A KODAK MOMENT

Representative Dana Rohrabacher's gossipy comments about U.S. and China suggest the theme of his congressional vote is "an eye for an eye" (Letters, June 18). His use of the word "communist" as a prefix each time he mentioned China was mindlessly repetitive. We get the message. Then, as his argument weakened, he turned to "Monica" and White House cover-ups and crimes.

Rather than waging a symbolic, leveraged protest vote against permanent normal trade relations with China and its membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO), Rohrabacher and our other legislators are obliged to demand foolproof regulations that also improve relations between the two nations. For instance, the Eastman Kodak Co.'s recent $1 billion infrastructure investment to grow market share in China is a new channel that will benefit the world's leading photography company, its employees, its customers and our nation.

A balanced trade relationship promises the United States will be allowed to profitably share U.S. ingenuity, quality and culture with developing countries as a model for fostering change. As the third-largest market for Kodak, China is home to vast opportunities, especially if existing, prohibitive taxes are exchanged for low-tariff access to U.S.-manufactured products. China will conform to international guidelines and be pressured to do business on a level playing field only if it is affirmed with normal trade relations. While China is currently romancing its own rules, membership in the WTO would advance fairness and demand enforced compliance with virtuous regulations equal to other nations.

—Mitchell Goldstone, president, 30 Minute Photos Etc., Irvine COMMIE GIRL MANIFESTO
Next Page »