Page 12


Left-wing sentimentality’ I just received the renewal notice on my Observer subscription. In the past, I have responded to these requests and attended Observer benefits because of a sentimental attachment to what the paper was years ago and a vain hope that it would regain its former health. I’ve now had it with left-wing sentimentality. The Observer has become a sorry piece of journalism. It lacks the serious level of political analysis of Southern Exposure, which has no advantages in locale or finances over your paper. It lacks the guts and style of New Times, which achieved these qualities by realizing that even our allies need some hard criticism on occasion if the left is ever to graduate beyond a defeatist club which toadies to liberal celebrities. And what is it about your prose? Lordy, I git nervous as a treed raccoon tryin to figger it out! Maybe it has to do with E. B. White’s rule #9. As to your political reporting, I can do my own job of clipping the daily papers and listening to gossip at Scholz Garten, thank you. E. P. Black, 2009-A Cheshire, Austin, Tex. 78723. Predictable I read The Texas Observer with interest and delight. You provide an excellent service by keeping abreast of the 1 e s sthan -conservative element and reporting its activities. But your editorial comment is another story. I knew what you would say about John Connally before I ever got the issue \(Obs., but how you’d say it. I guess you’re getting too predictable; a fault you find often with the American-Statesman and The Dallas Morning News. Come on now: I don’t mind being able to predict what Lloyd Doggett, Sissy Farenthold, et al., will say about something, but why do ya’ll have to be so dogmatic in your views? Keep The Texas Observer coming. You know the problem with us conservatives has always been spending so much time reinforcing our own opinions among ourselves. I really would like to understand why you feel the way you do about issues, but you never tell me. Dennis R. Parrish, 4645 Ocean Dr. #12F, Corpus Christi, Tex. 78412. Puts down labor Labor has no legitimate reason to knock “you liberals” \(see Obs., Riedel’s defeat for the DNC was worth labor’s withdrawal from the Democratic Telethon, then labor ought to have some appreciation for the solid liberal support IDialogue for Leo on the SDEC. If labor had supported the other two liberal candidates for the SDEC \(Eddie did Leo, we could have elected Leo and Eddie Bernice along with Alicia. The labor to Leo and Claudia Brummet and Lois Ham were enough \(when combined with one liberal vote from Brownsville that was traded for three conservative votes for we gave Guadalupe County \(a solid member in Lem Allen. In the Con-Con it was “you liberals” who stood firm against right-to-work, when the so-called labor people flattered and wavered. “You liberals” have fought labor’s battles, have marched at labor’s side for la huelga and minimum wage, and have taken the abuse of those who think labor is synonymous with “red” or “racketeer.” Without George McGovern’s organization, many labor people would never have made it to the state convention in 1972, or ’74, for that matter. Surely, all of these concrete specific examples ought to show labor that in Texas, anyway, the only friends it has are “you liberals.” If we were wiped out, labor’s influence would be so isolated as to be almost unworthy of notice by the state power structure and we would be back to the days of the Rangers in short order. Ed Cogburn, SDEC, Senate District 13, Harris County, Tex. KERA corrects I was surprised to note in the Aug. 8 issue, under “Political Intelligence,” the disturbing news that “KERA-FM, the non-profit radio station in Dallas, is dropping its public affairs format . . . in favor of an all-music format.” The reason given was that “some of the station’s executives think that public issues are ‘a bringdown.’ ” First of all, it just isn’t true. We have tinkered with the format somewhat, but the amount of public affairs coverage on KERA-FM remains the same. The Dallas City Council meetings are broadcast in their entirety and will continue. The unions of the Dallas AFL-CIO are partially underwriting the broadcasts. We dropped the Bill Porterfield show because in our judgment it was not as good as we wanted it to be, not because it dealt with public issues. The faceless KERA-FM executives who think public issues are “a bringdown” are unknown to me. Actually, I’m the only executive on the staff of nine, and I have never used the word “bringdown” in my life. I think your intelligencer might have done well to check his rumors with me, as I am the only one who could make such a decision. Anyway, the facts are, our public affairs programs are getting better, we’re doing more of them, and your report is a bringdown. Bruce G. McKenzie, Station Manager, KERA-FM, 3000 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, Tex. 75201. Uncommitted unwise If Billie Carr runs her uncommitted slate in the Texas primary, Bentsen and Wallace will get every last delegate. People vote for a name, a face, a perceived image of a live, named, flesh-and-blood candidate. The great, great majority of Texans won’t vote for some murky, amorphous something called “Uncommitted.” Like in the ’68 California primary, when Robert Kennedy was shot there was a strong, active, identifiably pro-Humphrey slate listed on the ballot as “Uncommitted.” It got only 11 per cent of the vote \(to Kennedy’s 47 per cent and won’t vote for nobody. Worse still, other uncommitted slates spring up like wildfire. This happened to LBJ in ’68 in New Hampshire: he polled 48 per cent to McCarthy’s 41 per cent, but LBJ’s votes split up among three different “Uncommitted/LBJ” slates. McCarthy got almost all the delegates. Wow! Why ask for these troubles?! At best, an uncommitted slate would furnish a vehicle for a symbolic protest vote, i.e., the same old Texas Democrats playing their intramural war games. Does anybody outside the Bentsen camp understand that the White House is at stake? We need a pragmatic, delegate-maximizing strategy, formulated in light of national political realities: Texas is not a realm unto itself. How can we zap Bentsen if we don’t win some delegates in the primary? History and common sense tell us that the uncommitted approach won’t work. That’s reason enough to try something else. Ralph Noyes, 3705 Red River, Austin, Tex. 78705 September 5, 1975 15