Letters

'Its incredulous that Dave is so hateful. The fact that Rex was caught with marijuana paraphernalia at an airport should have made him a "hero" at the "weakly," but you allowed Dave to trash him'

Letters may be edited for clarity and length. E-mail to letters@ocweekly.com, or send to Letters to the Editor, c/o OC Weekly, 1666 N. Main St., Ste. 500, Santa Ana, CA 92701. Or fax to (714) 550-5908.

REXY, YOU PERPLEX ME
The Hudler bit was brilliant; I laughed out loud no less than seven times [Dave Wielenga's "Why We Work," Sept. 1]. I was just sad that you didn't ever reference the fact that he has pink lips. Well done.
Jason Estopinal
Via e-mail

REXY, YOU'RE SO SEXY
Has Dave Wielenga ever played baseball? His attack on Rex Hudler is ridiculous. A guy who played 21 years as a professional baseball player is somehow less informed than Dave? The fact that he is for the Angels and the personnel that staff the organization makes him less credible? The fact that he is a "color commentator" explains why he is "blathering" on and on—much like Vin Scully. I'm not writing that Rex is in the same league with Vin, but who is? It's incredulous that Dave is so hateful. The fact that Rex was caught with marijuana paraphernalia at an airport should have made him a "hero" at the "weakly," but you allowed Dave to trash him. If your staff, "Dave," had any baseball background, I'd be truly surprised. Hey, Dave, T-ball doesn't count.
M.A.
Newport Beach

Dave Wielenga replies: When I was a kid they hadn't yet invented the wussy, playdate bastardization of baseball that is T-ball. We faced live pitching, kept score, and learned that losing hurts and winning doesn't come easily, like boys who wanted to grow up to be real-world men—in baseball and beyond. None of that comes through in Hudler's sunshiny, sycophantic observations of Angels games. His bias toward all things Angels makes you feel good? If you know anything about baseball—or, more to the point, if you want to learn anything about baseball by tuning in an Angels game on TV—Hudler's self-serving, sucking-up dishonesty ought to piss you off. As a broadcaster, just as when he was a player, Hudler is a marginally talented guy who's tap-dancing as fast as he can. His marijuana bust was a perfect example of his spinelessness—rather than speak out for the uncounted numbers of people who, if he is to be believed, smoke the plant for medical purposes, Hudler apologized and groveled until he got his job back. By the way, anybody even a little familiar with me wouldn't find it at all "incredulous" that I wrote something hateful. My hate killed Bob Hope.

I LOVE TAQUERIA GUADALUPANA
Best food article ever [Gustavo Arellano's "This Hole-in-the-Wall Life," Sept. 28]! The thrift store stories and everything. I think you had the exact same life growing up as me. The one thing I hate is how the pollos [wabs] have taken over parts of Orange. Good read.
Arturo Garcia
Via e-mail

WTC WAS THE BOMB
Citing the screening of 9/11 Revisited: Keeping Up With Jones, a presentation of the theory put forth by Brigham Young University physics professor Steven Jones regarding the collapse of the WTC buildings [Matt Coker's "9/11 at 5," Sept. 8], Matt Coker asks: "Who planted the bombs?" Professor Jones' theory is that the WTC towers 1 & 2 and WTC 7 were brought down by deliberately planted implosive devices, hence Coker's question. Coker ponders that terrorists might have planted the implosive devices, but I offer a different theory. First, it would be incredibly difficult for Muslim terrorists to gain jobs that would allow them into WTC construction infrastructure or have professional expertise in large building implosive devices. As Jones states, "Only four companies in the world have this knowledge and capability." Who planted the devices? My answer is the CIA. Why would the CIA plant these bombs? Because knowing the WTC buildings were targets for destruction, to bring them straight down into their building footprint would lessen the loss of life. The devices were planted for "the greater good" but kept secret so that people working in the buildings would not be apprehensive about their potential demise. I would imagine there are multiple other implosive devices implanted in other vulnerable buildings and national monuments around the country. Besides, the terrorists didn't need to plant bombs in the WTC buildings: they already had the airplanes as their weapons! The CIA and National Security Agency [NSA] would have the ability to both complete this project and keep it secret from the public at large. The fact that none of the WTC buildings toppled to the side but instead fell straight down into their construction footprints has a probability of one in a trillion, according to Underwriters Laboratories Inc., which conducted tests on the fire endurance of trusses similar to those in the WTC towers. Assuming the above is correct: Who would give the orders to set off the implosive devices? These orders would have to come from the highest authority: Bush or Cheney. Bush was flying around the nation in Air Force One; Cheney was in the White House underground Command Center. Cheney's personality and aggressive character are also more like former Secretary of State Alexander "I'm in charge here" Haig, so my bet is Cheney. It is interesting to note that WTC 7, which also collapsed into its footprint, despite not being hit by an airplane and having only minimal paper fires, and had been emptied of all personnel, housed a secret CIA New York City office. This is my theory, and as Americans, we should call for a scientific review of the collapse of the WTC buildings, as the engineering aspects of their collapse do not fit the political statements of the Bush administration and such review is generally absent from the 9/11 Commission Report.
Jacquelyn Beauregard Dillman
Newport Beach

 
My Voice Nation Help
0 comments
 
Loading...