Doug MacEachern, aka, "Mr. Provincial," Takes a Swipe at His Betters at The New York Times
Is it just me, or is MacEachern looking more and more like the old dood from Family Guy these days?
Here's a big surprise, the Republic's lead curmudgeon Doug "Mossback" MacEachern doesn't like it that the New York Times recently labeled Cactus Country a "State of Fear," due to our loss of Janet Napolitano's veto to keep the Mexican-haters and wing-nutty legislators in check. I'm no great fan of Nappy, but it is correct for journalism's Gray Lady to point out that the Napster has vetoed some of the more extremist brown-bashing ideas to flow from the noggin of neo-Nazi-hugger Russell Pearce (now a state Senator) and his reactionary cohorts. Though, she's signed some of them, too.
I myself have quibbled with the Times' positive assessment of Napolitano. She's hardly a defender of human or civil rights, whether for Hispanics, gays or just ordinary schmoes. In fact, she's mostly the defender of her own fanny. It would be best for the country and for Sand Land if the U.S. Senate rejected her nomination to be head of Homeland Security, and she were forced to wait out her term as Governor. At least, she would offer some minor check on the Republiloons in the legislature. 'Cause with Jan Brewer as Guv, the floodgates will be open, and the GOP piranhas will be on the hunt for all the victims they can cram into their ravenous little mouths.
But I'm not delusional, I know Nappy will be confirmed barring any major stink raised by the nation's Hispanics and liberals. And that does not seem to be in the cards. So come late January, Republican rule in AZ will be absolute. The barnacle-encrusted MacEachern is mostly on the side of the crazies, so that suits him just fine. But what he really objects to in the Times editorial is not that it's absolutely right when it labels Arizona a "State of Fear." No, what gets his union suit in a twist is his perception that the Knickerbockers are looking down on Sand Landers like him. So he's gonna prove that he's as urbane as they come, daggummit!
"I've long argued that the Times editorialists are a shallow bunch," sniffs The Crusty One in his Sunday column, "not much deserving of the influence they wield. I've spouted this at countless cocktail parties: For sound liberal arguments - based on, you know, research - the Washington Post's editorial pages are consistently the best, in my view. Or maybe the Boston Globe's, if they wouldn't prattle on at such length."
"Countless cocktail parties"? Where, up at the old folks' home in Sun City? Or maybe you whoop it up with wealthy alter kockers in Scottsdale? The reality is likely, neither. The only cocktail party this baldpate is spouting off at takes place in his cranium.
And here's a news flash for you: The guy who writes these editorials for the Times has visited Arizona and is familiar with all the players in the immigration debate here. I know because I've met him at events he was eyeballin'. When the Pruitt's donnybrook was in full swing last year, did MacEachern get off his duff, hop in his Mercedes (or Lexus, or whatever), and roll over to where this face-off between the nativists and the pro-immigrant crowd was going down? If so, I never saw him, and I was there most of the time. The fella who writes the Times' unsigned editorials on AZ? He was there. Know why? Because he actually gives a fig, Douggie. I would even venture to say that he's more up on this subject than you are, and you live here, ya putz!
The New York Times' scrutiny is welcome and needed. And we require more, not less of it. Indeed, it would be helpful if other national media outlets would pay attention to the 21st Century Alabama we dwell in. Too much of our local press (or what's left of it, after layoffs) is ensnared in a go-along to get-along attitude, as well as a smarmy allegiance to mindless boosterism. Do you think MacEachern, right-wing prig that he is, will be writing about how undocumented children are being ripped from their families, or how whole neighborhoods live in fear of law enforcement?
Nah, because he's a moth-eaten, ofay elitist, and is well-paid for his prissy, pompous screeds. The people he writes for sleep well at night, and fear for nothing. Quite unlike those who are in the firing line of AZ's new Republinut regime.