Letters

Janovy: “The Surreal Life,” September 18

I have to finally say something somewhere, so The Pitch gets to catch my verbal fodder. I am not a Democrat, nor a Republican. What I believe isn’t important, which hopefully will validate my point.

In the media, whether it’s newspapers, radio or TV, everybody has their own views and opinions on all of our candidates. That’s what makes us us. My issue is that if somebody in a position of influence has to communicate to the public, they are just voicing the praises of the party that they back. They don’t offer equal views, and they sure as hell don’t try to show readers/viewers/listeners both perspectives.

Every time I turn my head, it’s Obama wants to raise taxes and is a Muslim, or McCain has his nose up the ass of special-interest groups, or Palin drop-kicked a baby seal. I would mention Biden, but he’s boring. The point is, it should seem a failure to society that we can’t turn to our people in the media to get a fair telling of our candidates. So we are left to our own devices and begin to formulate our own, uneducated opinions, which are no better than the biased crap we get from MSNBC, FOX News, CNN or, hell, even The Daily Show. It sucks, frankly, and what sucks more? The public doesn’t seem to care. They are just happy chewing on the bullshit that is fed to them from “trusted” sources. Everybody is out to bash everybody else, which is just us being who we are. Screw it, I’m voting for Yosemite Sam. At least he carried a big stick.

Joseph M. Shelton, Kansas City, Missouri

I compliment C.J. Janovy on her observation that John McCain’s Rovian political campaign does a disservice to his hero’s stance as a POW. However, I have a few more points: (1) Wouldn’t it be better to compare the John McCain rally to an Adolf Hitler rally? (2) In reference to the “Bridge to Nowhere,” shouldn’t Janovy have pointed out that there was a three-mile Road to Nowhere built at the cost of $24 million, which is useless without the Bridge to Nowhere that was rejected? Sarah Palin insisted on using the earmark for the road. Common sense would lead one to believe that if you can’t have the bridge, why spend money on the road after the fact? How can Palin divert money earmarked for the bridge but not the money earmarked for the road? Janovy should have pointed out this Janus-faced action by Palin. (3) How can Janovy scourge Kit Bond for using the L-bomb and then turn around and use the R-bomb? (4) If Janovy wants to do something, why not have a column every week devoted to analyzing political ads from both parties and measuring them for truth? (5) I’m not smart enough to write a column, but Janovy is. I have read her columns since the mid-1990s and have observed her on KCPT Channel 19 and have nothing but a healthy respect for her intelligence. Why not serve the truth impartially and do a greater service to her readership?

Robert M. Keyserling, Odessa, Missouri

Feature: “The Curse of Union Station,” August 28

During my brief tenure as director of collections at Union Station and the Kansas City Museum in 2007, it occurred to me that rather than blaming the current management for the ongoing economic woes, our energy would be better spent identifying the ways in which this institution (and, more specifically, the collection) can best serve Kansas City’s residents.

The issues facing Union Station are manifold. They continue to draw attention away from the best efforts of Kansas City Museum Director Christopher Leitch and his excellent staff and the Museum Advisory Board, who are revitalizing the Kansas City Museum. The Kansas City Museum Collection is a great foundation for the kinds of educational exhibitions the community needs, yet the resources are scarce.

With proper support and attention, the educational opportunities that only museums can provide to Kansas City’s public schools could emanate from the Kansas City Museum. Any support, including and beyond the financial, is long overdue.

I would propose the establishment of a Kansas City Museum Association Trust — separate from Union Station and the city — with all the collections united in purpose and for stewardship’s sake. The hope would be that new opportunities would arise to aid the underfunded efforts now under way at Corinthian Hall, unhindered by Union Station and Science City’s significant issues and by any discord that might remain between the Union Station and the city.

This would allow the museum trust to, among other things, more freely solicit and receive contributions and continue to acquire, conserve and maintain the collection in accordance with the standards set forth by the American Association of Museums in service of its stated purpose and mindful of its significance to the community.

Andrew Wallace, Iowa City, Iowa

Click here to write a letter to the editor.