By Lindsay Toler
By Chad Garrison
By Brett Koshkin
By RFT Staff
By Lindsay Toler
By Riverfront Times
By Danny Wicentowski
By Pete Kotz
FEATURE, NOVEMBER 19, 2009
ABOUT A GIRL
No saint: I am absolutely amazed at the fact that this woman terrorized her family — and her neighborhood — and yet thinks she should get away with it because she's "changed" ["Babe 'n Arms," Nicholas Phillips]. And I'm amazed that the transgendered community seems to be embracing her as a hero. I'm not denying that transgender individuals may have profoundly stressful experiences, or that they're discriminated against by most of society and that the status quo should change. But Rachel's not being prosecuted for who she is; she's being prosecuted because she was in possession of an illegal explosive device. She was abusive to her children and spouse. And she doesn't deny that. So why is she some sort of martyr?
Jen, via the Internet
DAILY RFT, NOVEMBER 18, 2009
Height of slights: Chad, the arrogance of your headline proves once more that it is the elitists in this country who are out of touch ["Re: Sarah Palin's Book Tour of Bumblefuck, U.S.A., Coming to Sam's Club Far From You," Chad Garrison]. The places listed on Palin's book tour are great American cities and towns. How dare you portray them as less than that.
Kwaite, via the Internet
Let Sarah see what spring is like on Jupiter and Mars: I see she's visiting Roswell, New Mexico, on December 1. Maybe if we ask the UFOs nicely, they'll come down and take her back home?
Blizzard, via the Internet
News flash from Bumblefuck: Some of us live in Bumblefuck. Typical elitist — coming from a nobody libturd like you.
FightTheSmears, via the Internet
From sea to shining sea: The most important aspect of my geographical location is that it is in the United States of America. I reject any assertion that small towns are filled with unsophisticated hillbillies and hilljillies, and that big-city residents are godless sexual deviants without a sense of community. All too often people try to divide us as Americans with political code words: red states, blue states, guns and religion, welfare moms and real America. My community is America. Wherever I go in these United States, whether it is San Francisco, Joplin or Boston, I always find myself among neighbors.
Scott, via the Internet
DAILY RFT, NOVEMBER 12, 2009
DON'T KISS OFF JERRY
Born to schmooze: I've known Jerry Berger for seventeen years, and he always kisses everyone he sees ["Jerry Berger Banned From Post-Dispatch for 'Inappropriate Behavior,'" Chad Garrison]. He is an equal-opportunity kisser (and hugger, by the way). If you don't know that about him, then you do not know him. I can't speak for the person(s) whom editor Arnie Robbins refers to as the "victims," but I can't imagine anyone in the newsroom who does not know that about him. It's part of his character.
Carolyn Fernandez, via the Internet
Innocent smoocher: For the five-plus years I was at the Post, one thing was constant: Berger visited, he kissed, he hugged, he schmoozed. "Hi ya doing, babe?" That's Jerry's greeting, followed by a wet one. Although I wasn't sitting around anticipating Jerry's smooches, I also never thought about running to Arnie to complain. I suppose I better not stop and chat with the guards outside anymore. Considering the paranoia at that place, it might be considered inappropriate, and I'd be banned from the whole block.
Sylvester, via the Internet
Punishment deserved: Jerry is nothing more than a lewd, offensive gossipmonger who for years has demanded gifts and gratis meals from St. Louis businesses. Refusal meant a scathing — albeit untrue — "item" would appear in Berger's gossip column. His unwelcome sexual advances toward the male staff of the P-D are well known, and this is certainly not the first time his actions have been condemned. It's just the first time the P-D brass has meted out a severe and fitting punishment.
Anon, via the Internet
FEATURE, NOVEMBER 12, 2009
LIPKIN SHOULDN'T HEAD DISABLED THEATER
Able-bodied have no business running the show: I've seen a presentation of Ms. Joan Lipkin's DisAbility Project several years ago ["Thespians on Wheels," Aimee Levitt]. The skits were entertaining enough, and the intended messages were delivered. I looked at the presentation, though, with my devil's advocate attitude. I sat there with my totally blind wife and whispered in her ear, "Why is an acting troupe focused on disabilities with disabled actors run by an able-bodied person?"
I have a lot of respect for persons with disabilities. My wife, for example, would be considered the breadwinner in our household, as her salary practically doubles mine. She has a managerial position in her job, whereas I do not. She is, in my opinion, a great example of a disabled person living a normal life. We have had many arguments in our nearly 30-year relationship, essentially about me getting out of her way and letting her do things in her own way. She usually wins.
I noticed that Lipkin has the final say on material she thinks might offend people. Why, after all of these years, does an able-bodied person get to determine what is offensive in a message that disabled people are attempting to deliver?
I appreciate Ms. Lipkin's good intentions and her innovation. The analogy is if the St. Louis Black Repertory Company were run by someone other than an African American. It's not that it could not work, but if you don't have the perspective of the people giving the message, how can you make determinations about the material?
It seems to me that at least Ms. Lipkin may want to transition completely to an administrative or consultant role. Back away and let the people with the disabilities run the operation and make the decisions. This company, in my opinion, should be about them — and only them.
Terry B. Moses, Marlborough