CVIndependent

Mon04062020

Last updateFri, 03 Apr 2020 5pm

On this week's utterly baffled weekly Independent comics page: Jen Sorenson shakes her head at all of the recent shootings; The K Chronicles looks at how the sausage is made in America; This Modern World bemoans the end of humanity; and Red Meat gets ready for Halloween eggings.

Published in Comics

You feel it in your gut—that uncomfortable feeling of being stereotyped. A prejudicial belief that people with a particular characteristic—race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, etc.—are all the same means we don’t have to recognize others as individuals. It’s the ultimate guilt by association.

I was about 12 when it first happened to me. I used to pick up the evening newspaper for my dad every day at the guard shack at the old MGM Studios in Culver City. The guard and I had gotten friendly and exchanged pleasantries each day. One day, when my Culver City High School was slated to play a football game that evening against our arch rivals, Beverly Hills, the guard asked me if I was going to the game.

“I can’t go this time, but I hope our team wins,” I said.

“Well,” he said, “one can only hope you beat the kikes.”

I’m Jewish, but I had never before heard that term, nor had I experienced overt anti-Semitism. I lived in an area where many of my friends were Jewish, but just as many were not. I didn’t know how to respond to the guard—but I could feel in my gut that what he’d said was offensive, and that it somehow included me.

The word “kike” apparently comes from the time in U.S. history when there were lots of Jewish immigrants coming through Ellis Island. Many of them couldn’t complete the entry forms using the common English alphabet, and they didn’t want to sign with an “X,” because it seemed to represent a cross, so they signed with an “O.” The Yiddish word for “circle” is kikel, so the immigration inspectors came to call anyone who signed with an “O” a “kike.” However it began, use of that term to derogatively refer to Jews exists to this day.

Being blonde, and therefore not fitting the stereotype of what Jewish women are supposed to look like, I have often heard negative stereotypes about Jews casually thrown into conversation—things that clearly wouldn’t have been said in front of me if the speakers had known my identity, as if that should make a difference.

We’ve all had that experience, when a friend or family member drops some negative stereotypical term into conversation—“beaner,” “rag head,” “jungle bunny,” “Uncle Tom,” “chink”—usually without even knowing where the term originated. We can feel it in our gut.

All of this came to mind during the flap caused when the Trump campaign re-tweeted a post that had originated on an anti-Semitic website, depicting Hilary Clinton with a six-pointed Star of David against a background of money. It was subsequently explained and justified as “merely a star, like a sheriff’s badge.” There was no recognition by Trump nor his campaign that using an image representing an anti-Semitic image of Jews and money was, at the very least, worthy of recognition and apology.

If you don’t understand the history of how this image came to be associated as a negative stereotype of Jews, it’s easy to accept Trump’s explanation that “it was just a star.” In the Middle Ages, when the Church dominated European societies, people interpreted the Bible as prohibiting Christians from loaning money. Jews, however, were allowed to loan money, with interest. Many Jews at that time were prohibited from owning property or engaging in most means of making a living, so some of them became money-lenders. The stereotype was typified by Shakespeare in The Merchant of Venice in his character, Shylock, a term now associated with loan-sharking. As banking took off in Europe, Jews were able to finance everything from wars to exploration. However, when the time to repay arrived, some governments passed laws that non-Jews did not have to repay, or, as in England under King Edward I in 1290, the entire national population of Jews was expelled (and incidentally not allowed back as a community for more than 300 years).

This negative stereotype associating Jews with money has, obviously, survived. For anyone not to recognize the negative connotation of such a stereotype is just ignorant. For anyone implicated by such images, it’s hurtful. You feel it in your gut.

Concerns about Black Lives Matter and attacks on police officers have highlighted yet other stereotypes: police power as synonymous with the abuse of authority, and race as synonymous with criminality. We are born into a national culture that has, from its inception, valued some lives more than others, yet we react as if this isn’t a truth that needs to be addressed.

If asked to identify the ethnicity of one who is extremely good at math, you’re likely to say Asian. If asked about athletic prowess on the basketball court, you’re likely to say African American. If I mention a national identity associated with drunkenness, you might immediately respond “Irish.”

Organized crime translates to Italian. Blondes are dumb. Muslims are potential terrorists. Native Americans drink and gamble. Black men are well-endowed and barely evolved from animals—hence depictions of our president as a monkey. Hispanics are illegals.

Asians are secretive, easily depicted as devious or spies. Germans, despite more than 70 years since their involvement in World War II and the Holocaust, are as militaristic. Latinos are lazy—think of the pictorial image of the sombrero siesta, or depictions of Latinos as unwilling to learn English and assimilate, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

Gays do not generally mince around with limp wrists, but when that stereotype is portrayed, they feel the negative characterization in their gut.

When leaders or public figures use discriminatory stereotypes to characterize political opponents or members of the general public, they are either indicating their ignorance of the historically negative implications—or they know and just don’t care.

Either way, we can feel it in our gut.

Anita Rufus is also known as “The Lovable Liberal,” and her radio show airs Sundays from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. on KNews Radio 94.3 FM. Email her at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Know Your Neighbors appears every other Wednesday.

Published in Know Your Neighbors

Dear Mexican: I have a few questions. Why is it so wrong for Americans to expect people from other countries to follow our laws when entering this country? What reason do you have that should make Mexicans entering this country illegally OK?

Secondly, why aren’t you as concerned about the way immigrants from, let’s say, El Salvador are treated as they are making their way to America through Mexico? I was married to someone who made this trip, and I got to hear about the atrocities committed by the Mexican people against foreign immigrants just passing through. Rape, murder and incarceration are commonplace. But you complain because Americans simply want immigrants to follow our laws? There is nothing worse than hypocrisy. This country spends BILLIONS of dollars every year on people who come here illegally! Our tax dollars!

There’s a reason there is a process in place for people to enter this country. The reason is simple: If it’s not done properly, it will cause problems for people here in America! Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Donald Trump is winning for a reason: He is speaking out on what the American people are feeling inside! America isn’t in a position to be the godfather for every failing country in the world anymore! We need to focus on the condition of this country for a while and get things back to where they need to be.

Lastly, I would like to comment on the recent cover image of the OC Weekly (The Mexican’s home paper; pictured below) of a donkey fucking Donald Trump. I think it’s totally uncouth and tasteless. It shows exactly why your magazine is given out for free. How about drawing a picture of Vicente Fox violating the entire Mexican population? If the Mexican government wasn’t worthless and corrupt, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion! Then the Mexican people would stay in Mexico! But the truth of the matter is that Mexico, for the most part, sucks as a country! Instead of demeaning our political system, why don’t you go fix Mexico? That’s what I think is so hilarious about seeing Mexicans in America sporting the Mexican flag, and yelling about how proud they are to be Mexican—yet they don’t have any problem coming to America and reaping the benefits of this society that is supposedly so terrible. It’s insanity.

Anyway, I would like to say thank you for putting your paper out, for one reason only. It works great in the bottom of my cat’s litter box, and it’s free! I highly doubt my comment will be addressed or put into your trash mag, but I’m giving you permission to if you see fit.

Newt Me!

Dear Gabacho: You want to talk hypocrisies? Regarding everything you trashed Mexicans for supposedly doing, you could say the same about your (presumably) Salvadoran ex-wife and your immigrant ancestors—the border-hopping, the not staying in her country to improve it, the trashing of other immigrants. But as usual, gabachos excuse everyone except Mexicans for everything.

And forget hypocrisies: How about stupidities? Everyone knows papers like OC Weekly and the Coachella Valley Independent print version are best used as compost, because they’ll fuel your garden with truth. But, hey: Trumpbros like you seem to hate the truth, so keep wallowing in your cat’s shit.

Ask the Mexican at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; be his fan on Facebook; follow him on Twitter @gustavoarellano; or follow him on Instagram @gustavo_arellano!

Published in Ask a Mexican

On this week's exploratory weekly Independent comics page: Jen Sorenson tries to avoid the xeno virus; The K Chronicles goes hunting for fossils; This Modern World watches as Doctor Who fights the Brexit; and Red Meat misplaces a diary.

Published in Comics

When it comes to conservation, energy and many other issues, Donald Trump’s presidential campaign has been a lot of hat and not much cattle. But his son, Donald Trump Jr., recently offered some insights into what his father’s natural-resources policies might look like.

While speaking at June a media summit organized by the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership in Fort Collins, Colo., Trump Jr., an avid hunter and angler, defended keeping federal lands managed by the government and open to the public. He also reiterated his father’s strong support for U.S. energy development, proposed corporate sponsorships in national parks, questioned humans’ role in climate change, and criticized Hillary Clinton for “pandering” to hunters with “phoniness.”

U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson, D-California, spoke for Clinton’s campaign at the summit a day later, providing plenty of contrast between the presidential candidates.

Trump Jr. has served as an adviser to his father on natural-resources issues and has even joked with family that, should his father win, he’d like to be secretary of the interior, overseeing national parks and millions of acres of federal public lands. In Fort Collins, he said he’s not “the policy guy,” but repeated his frequent pledge to be a “loud voice” for preserving public lands access for sportsmen.

Trump Jr. also mocked some gun-control measures, such as ammunition limits, boasting, “I have a thousand rounds of ammunition in my vehicle almost at all times because it’s called two bricks of .22 … You know, I’ll blow … through that with my kids on a weekend.”

Trump, the presumptive Republican candidate, partly distinguished himself among other GOP candidates during primary season—not that that was a problem for the New York real-estate developer—by balking at the transfer of federal public lands to states or counties. While Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and others expressed support for public-land transfers, kowtowing to some Western conservatives, Trump rejected the idea. Speaking to Field & Stream in January, Trump said: “I don’t like the idea, because I want to keep the lands great, and you don’t know what the state is going to do. I mean, are they going to sell if they get into a little bit of trouble? And I don’t think it’s something that should be sold. We have to be great stewards of this land. This is magnificent land.”

Trump Jr. reaffirmed that stance—but also supported more input for states as long as those efforts don’t jeopardize public access.

Trump, however, did attack the Bureau of Land Management and its “draconian rule,” writing in an op-ed in the Reno Gazette-Journal, also in January: “The BLM controls over 85 percent of the land in Nevada. In the rural areas, those who for decades have had access to public lands for ranching, mining, logging and energy development are forced to deal with arbitrary and capricious rules that are influenced by special interests that profit from the D.C. rule-making and who fill the campaign coffers of Washington politicians.”

Rep. Thompson called Trump’s somewhat muddled stance of federal land management a “dangerous position to take,” saying Clinton unequivocally opposes public-land transfers. As far as Clinton’s sporting cred, Thompson said the Democratic candidate doesn’t pretend to be a hook-and-bullet enthusiast, but “she gets it” when it comes to access issues.

During a campaign loud with proclamations yet nearly vacant of substantive policies, the most in-depth view into Trump’s resource agenda came during his May speech at a North Dakota petroleum conference. Trump pledged to “save the coal industry,” approve the Keystone XL gas pipeline, roll back federal controls limiting energy development on some public lands, and withdraw the U.S. from the Paris global climate agreement. A Republican National Committee spokesman recently said more details on Trump’s energy and environmental policies should be coming soon. His son reiterated the campaign’s “very pro-U.S. energy” position, although he did say agencies should have some role in regulating energy development on public lands, referring to the Bureau of Land Management’s proposed fracking rule that was recently rejected by a federal judge.

On climate change, Trump Jr. said U.S. and global policies shouldn’t penalize industries, and while acknowledging the strong scientific consensus on climate change and its causes, he added that humans’ and industries’ roles in global warming have “yet to be shown to me.”

Trump Jr. also offered mild support for the Endangered Species Act, saying it had achieved some successes, but argued the law has served as a “Trojan horse” to entirely prohibit development in some cases. He also suggested national-parks management and budgets could benefit from increased corporate partnerships. Trump’s son declared his own affinity for the backcountry and described national parks as being “a little bit too ‘tourist-ized’ for myself,” but he said, “I think there are ways you can do (corporate sponsorship) in a way that is beneficial” without installing flashing logos on natural features or commercializing the parks.

Clinton has shared several detailed policies on the environment and energy so far, including a white paper on land management and conservation that lays out support for a national park management fund and increased renewable energy development on public lands. Those proposals signal Clinton will “double down” on protecting public lands and preserving access, Thompson said.

Thompson also lauded Clinton for taking “a risky public position” on energy development—referring to her previous statement that she will put lots of coal mines “out of business”—and said “she hasn’t backed away from it. She understands there are better ways to generate the energy resources that we need.”

This piece originally appeared in High Country News.

Published in Environment

Dear Mexican: Tell me one thing Mexico is good for.

MAGA Man

Dear Gabacho: Paying more taxes than Donald Trump. Read on …

Dear Mexican: The other weekend, I met a Mexican girl at bar. Hoping to score some points, I pretended that I, too, was Mexican. Between my nondescript ethnicity (Eastern European and Vietnamese … chabacho, perhaps?), my command of Spanish, and some carefully timed quotes from Blood In, Blood Out, I managed to pull it off … con mucho éxito.

It got me thinking: Do Mexicans ever pretend to be other ethnicities? Do light-skinned jaliscienses ever go undercover as gabachos? Do Mexicans sometimes set aside their orgullo to go the Lou Diamond Phillips route? I’m dying to know.

Carlos Chan

Dear Chinito: All the time! When Mexicans hang out with Middle Eastern folks, we like to boast that we have an uncle who looks just like Saddam Hussein; when we’re with Jews, we say that our grandmother observed weird rituals, like lighting candles on Friday and never preparing pork. The lighter-skinned among us continually claim that we had a Frenchman in our family tree who decided to stay in Mexico after the Hapsburg occupation; Xicanxs with full beards will attend Native American powwows and boast they’re a direct descendant of the last honest tlatoani of Tenochtitlán.

That’s the thing about Mexicans: We’re everything … except Salvadoran.

Dear Mexican: I teach a volunteer class to kids in the ’hood, most of them Latinos (many of them Mexican). I like the kids a lot—but how can I justify teaching kids who may be illegals over kids who are legal? Shouldn’t I cater to kids whose parents have been paying taxes for years? Shouldn’t we “take care of our own” first?

Gabacho’s Moral Dilemna

Dear Gabacho: Since you’re volunteering your time, you have every right to be a pendejo in your private life. But refry the following frijoles: Primeramente, the Supreme Court’s 1982 decision in Plyler v. Doe found it unconstitutional to deny public education to undocumented kiddies, so if you’re doing this via a school, you’d better keep your bigoted views to yourself, lest you get a lawsuit.

Also, don’t forget that “illegals” pay un chingo of taxes; a report released this year by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found undocumented immigrants pay about $12 billion in state and local taxes despite their lack of legal status. “Undocumented immigrants’ nationwide average effective tax rate is an estimated 8 percent,” the report said. “To put this in perspective, the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay an average nationwide effective tax rate of just 5.4 percent.” That’s probably more than Donald Trump!

Finally, study after study shows that those illegal kids are more driven and smarter than “legal” kids. Besides, these are children we’re talking about; hating on kids trying to get ahead in life is all we need to know about our modern, paranoid 21st-century ’Murica.

With morals like yours, the U.S. deserves our future Chinese overlords sooner rather than later.

Ask the Mexican at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; be his fan on Facebook; follow him on Twitter @gustavoarellano; or follow him on Instagram @gustavo_arellano!

Published in Ask a Mexican

On this week's particularly independent weekly Independent comics page: Red Meat engages in some unconventional bathing; Jen Sorenson ponders George Will's politics; The K Chronicles gets an unexpected check; and This Modern World examines 12 months of Trump.

Published in Comics

Dear Mexican: I have visited other countries. None would appreciate me waving my flag in their country.

It all comes down to this, MI AMIGO: If you enter this country from any other country, you must have the necessary paperwork to allow you to stay and/or work here. If you enter without paperwork, you have committed a crime. It’s called ILLEGAL ENTRY. All over the world, this law will send you back to your country of origin. Why the hell do Mexicans think for a minute that they are excluded from this law?

Donald Trump has some muy loco ideas. There will be no wall or his other mierda. But be prepared: Should he become the boss, he will look very closely at criminals, reoffending, running back to Mexico and coming back—at the very least. It can’t keep going this way.

You will all work yourselves out of your American dream. I’m sick and tired of Mexicans thinking that this land belongs to them. NOT ANYMORE. Get in line in the legal way. Everybody needs to stop using and abusing the American system. We are now in so much debt that poor citizens don’t have jobs and money to support their families. STOP that CRAP NOW. If you don’t belong here, go back to your country.

Tool for Trump

Dear Gabacho: Don’t blame Mexicans for the national debt; blame the Iraq War and Reaganomics. Don’t blame Mexicans for coming into this country, with or without papers; blame NAFTA, capitalism and the people who hire unauthorized Mexicans. Don’t blame Mexicans for saying the American Southwest belongs to them; blame an unjust war. Don’t blame Mexicans for using and abusing the U.S.; blame an American system that has encouraged cheating every step of the way ever since the Boston Tea Party. Better yet, blame EVERYTHING: That’s all Trump supporters do, anyway.

Man, I haven’t come across a whinier bunch of CHAVALAS since hearing Mexicans defending the use of “puto” during soccer matches.

Dear Mexican: How do I keep my Mexican friend from stealing all my shit?

Amigo de Aztlán

Dear Gabacho: Coat your stuff in condoms—that’s like kryptonite to Mexican men!

Dear Mexican: My co-worker donned a poncho and sombrero for Cinco de Mayo and got totally wasted. He said he had no bad intentions and does not understand why Mexicans get so upset when he embraces Cindo de Drinko. Oh, and he does not understand why “Cinco de Drinko” is offensive, because it’s an American holiday, anyway.

Can you help explain why some Mexicans get offended when a gringo wears our attire on Drinko de Cinco?

I’m the Mexican in the Office Who Brings Tamales During Christmas

Dear Pocho: At this point in America’s history, I say let the gabachos dress up as gross caricatures of our raza. They have little else going for them: Birthrates are down; death rates are skyrocketing; and all their daughters are shacking up with paisas. They’re tilting hard for a new identity, so now’s the time to enact the final stage of Reconquista: Get them borrachos while wearing sombreros and bigotes, then sic la migra on them. Just like it was prophesized in the Florentine Codex, you know?

Ask the Mexican at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; be his fan on Facebook; follow him on Twitter @gustavoarellano; or follow him on Instagram @gustavo_arellano!

Published in Ask a Mexican

On this week's mournful Independent comics page: Jen Sorenson watches as pundits spew; The K Chronicles ponders a proposed gun ban; This Modern World considers when America was great back in ... 2000?; and Red Meat celebrates Milkman Dan's new uniform.

Published in Comics

On this week's zesty and zingy Independent comics page: The K Chronicles pays tribute to Muhammad Ali; Jen Sorenson compares Donald Trump and a Muslim cleric; This Modern World ponders toddlers killed by guns and bathrooms; and Red Meat claims it does not know where that smell is coming from.

Published in Comics