March 16 - March 22, 1995

Eat The Rich

To the Editor:

Though I get more conservative with age, I'd still rather be a Democrat than a Republican; read The Weekly rather than the Citizen.

One thing, though, I do hate about us liberals: we eat our own. It's as if we are so tolerant of each other that we can't stand anything that smacks of compromise or self-interest.

So I understand your recent attempts in The Skinny and elsewhere to make Rep. Andy Nichols out to be an arrogant buffoon, and--after laughing--I guess I resent it ("Double Trouble," The Skinny, Tucson Weekly, March 2).

There are 90 legislators currently meeting in Phoenix. Only 34 of them are Democrats. Of those 34, about three of them can find the men's room without a map, and one of those is a woman.

One of the other two is Nichols.

He devoted his life to helping others and has used his formidable intelligence in the cause of improving rural health. When he was thwarted from doing more, he didn't shrug it off. He decided to take on the thwarters in their chambers, the Arizona House of Representatives.

It took three tries, but he won a seat. Since then he's been working hard, against a right-flowing tide, to create legislation we can be proud of, especially in the areas of health care and child safety. He has been very effective in creating sane compromise in crazy bills.

Of course he makes errors. I would never say he is a man of the people. He's too intellectual for that kind of pulse taking. But he is a man for the people--unlike all those who are making government more "businesslike."

And all it will take to get rid of him is for the District 13 foothills dwellers to find a pro-life candidate they like.

Or for us liberals to keep laughing at him until we believe replacing him in a primary with a granola-eating Jain (who would lose with honor to Republicans in the general election) is our best alternative.

So lay off. Let's eat some conservatives for a change. They're fatter anyway.

--Steve Nash

Welcome, Matt

To the Editor:

An interesting article in a recent Tucson Weekly regarding KOLD-TV and news director Matt Malyn ("Newsplex Confidential," Tucson Weekly, February 16).

The story states: "Malyn has no doubt they're going to make a serious run at KVOA. He's been successful everywhere he's gone and Tucson isn't so different." The only trouble I have with that statement is that, according to the story, he hasn't really been anywhere. Clearfield, Columbus and Cleveland. Please! One might add Dreamsville, Ohio, after reading some of his quotes.

Case in point, "I think my one biggest strength is my ability to find and recruit talent." Keep the weekday weather guy, Matt (give him a raise), and start giving us some other personalities that we can relate to.

Problem here seems to be, these out-of-town experts tend to look upon Tucson as an out-of-touch little cowtown that is easily influenced. Meanwhile, the Tucson viewing audience just sits back and smiles and waves good-bye as another programming genius heads out of town (not necessarily for the coast).

And shame on Danehy for devoting so much space to a weekend wannabe with nary a mention of the regular weekday anchorwoman. I've watched Channel 13 weekend news and, frankly, I see no magic here. No Kristen Lee star quality, if you will.

Pity. KOLD's been trying for years and years and still can't get it right.

--Jerry Egsgaard

Female Trouble

To the Editor,

Tom Danehy is destined to do real well in our brave new Republican society where social regression is the order of the day. He got the big cover scoop, "Nosing Around the Newsplex" (Tucson Weekly, February 16), and the only description you could find for the female anchors are "petite Hispanics," "newsbabes" or "aging." Not one sentence was reserved to compare relative professional merits.

I understand this is part of the new, cool trend in reporting. Danehy presents a general picture and doesn't bother with too many details. But he's brought this style to its unfortunate conclusion by his insensitive handling of his subjects.

Danehy presented your interview with Janet Gould like a kid who can't work up the nerve to ask for a date. Perhaps if he'd spent less time staring at her teeth he could have gotten something.

He grudgingly admits Patty Weiss has most of the market (even if they are too old to be considered "real" market share) but he blew any vestiges of credibility by ending with a reference to her aging. The gorilla remark doesn't deserve comment.

What elusive element is he looking for in an anchorwoman? He patronizes them when they're young and lovely and scorns them when they're mature and experienced. I could have reduced his five-page feature into a couple of paragraphs of real story. The rest was a boorish kind of filler. Where's the journalism?

--T. Price

Chill Out

To the Editor:

Or more precisely, to the whiners who wrote nasty letters to The Weekly ("TV Indignation," Tucson Weekly, March 2) about the Tom Danehy article on KOLD-TV. C'mon people, don't get your panties in a bunch. Keep in mind that along with providing Tucson with an alternate, and often more accurate, source of information, Tucson Weekly is also there to entertain. Note the addition of more comics recently--and darn good ones at that! Just chill out and keep your perspective when reading The Weekly. You'll feel lots better!

--Glenn R. Miller

March 16 - March 22, 1995

		© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth