Laughter won’t make the world go ‘round...

Laughter won’t make the world go ‘round

The Daily Pilot article on Tuesday about the Costa Mesa man, Scott

Day, and his plans to use laughter to bridge the gap of language on a

trek around the world is amazingly naive, as well as his travel plans

(“Cue the laugh trek”).

Americans are not in favor in many places around the world today

no matter how big your smile or how funny you are. Asia, Europe and

South America are not welcoming Americans as they once did.

I was in Vietnam when the Chinese shot down the American spy plane

a few years back, and the chant was “Kill Americans.” American

tourists have been spat upon in many parts of Europe recently. And

$200 in ransom money wouldn’t free a big toe in Columbia.

Day’s trip to Vietnam will be easy as far as entering the country

is concerned, but there are many countries that are not allowing

people into their countries if they have visited Vietnam, and then

there are other countries that will quarantine travelers from that

country and others that are in the throws of the Severe Acute

Respiratory Syndrome outbreak, for which there is no cure.

To travel and think that laughter will bridge cultural and lingual

gaps is mistaken. A sense of humor is a distinctly cultural attribute

that changes from place to place. What is considered funny in one

place can be considered offensive in another place. A big honest and

sincere smile, at the wrong moment or in the wrong place, can be

considered aggressive or rude. No matter how pervasive American

television is around most of the world, American humor is seldom

cherished or respected.

My advice to Day is travel, see the world, enjoy and learn. But

there is an old axiom: “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” If you

can read between the lines on this one, you will be better off.

Rather than imparting your humor and wisdom on your host countries, I

suggest you listen and learn, and of course film your documentary or

whatever. Very good advice indeed when traveling to many countries,

and good advice not to travel to others.

PAUL JAMES BALDWIN

Newport Beach

Council needs to keep voters in mind

Call me crazy, but I still believe in the electorate deciding who

represents me at the local level of government.

Having stated the obvious, I also believe that the current Costa

Mesa City Council should not use personal agendas to influence whom

will represent the voters to serve out the balance of Karen

Robinson’s term of office. I don’t want someone who has not fully

debated the current city issues in a public setting to represent me

until the next election, the next election for that seat being

November 2004. Nor do I want some one who was barely on the radar

screen in some distant past election.

If there had been one more vacant seat to be filled in the last

election, the person representing me would be Linda Dixon. Am I a big

supported of hers? Not especially, but having those currently on the

City Council do the right thing with regard to representative

government does mean a lot to me.

Come on, City Council, compromise and doing the right thing for

Costa Mesa should be paramount and be more satisfying than ignoring

thousands of voters and pushing your personal agendas forward. Do

this one strictly for the voters.

MARK ALLEN

Costa Mesa

Waiting for an election will hurt Costa Mesa

It is time the Costa Mesa City Council shows that it is working

for the good of the city and not the personal agendas of its members.

If the council fails to select from among the two candidates

remaining to fill the vacant seat, then a special election must be

held, costing the city thousands of dollars that could be better

spent on improvements to the city.

Mike Scheafer would seem to be an ideal candidate given his years

of community service and concern for the future of Costa Mesa. As a

family man with kids growing up in the City, Scheafer, in my opinion,

would represent the needs and concerns of Costa Mesa families.

Scheafer has worked with all areas of the city and does not have a

set agenda to concentrate on only one area. Allan Mansoor, on the

other hand, is backed by a Westside group intent on redeveloping the

Westside. He has already faced one conflict of interest charge, and

now, he is backing a campaign volunteer, Eric Bever, for the open

City Council seat. Is it a coincidence that the most qualified

candidate he can come up with is someone from his own campaign whose

political agenda parallels his own?

I do not see Mansoor changing his support, which leaves Chris

Steel as the swing vote that can prevent the city from wasting

thousands of dollars. If Steel continues to back Bever, then we are

looking at a special election. If Steel instead agrees to a

compromise by selecting Scheafer, then we will get a neutral council

member with a real concern for the future of all of Costa Mesa

(including the Westside).

Do the right thing, Councilman Steel.

MARK LES

Costa Mesa