David S. Bernstein’s piece on the resurgence of anti-government rhetoric in the last few months is a little unfair, particularly since it lumps together radical conservative Republican movements with the Libertarian strain of right-wing thought. In fact, true Libertarians are as small of a faction of the right wing as Kucinich/Green Party followers are in the modern left, and remained highly critical of the expansion of the power of the executive branch over these past eight years. They may be guilty of supporting a brand of laissez-faire capitalism that has had disastrous consequences for this country, but to lump them together with this ridiculous, massively hypocritical group of Republican faux-populists who are now calling themselves the next generation of anti-Federalists is somewhat unfair.
This article does ask a very interesting question. Where were all of these conservative watchdogs over the last eight years of unprecedented expansion of the “rights” of the executive branch?
Oh, that’s right, they were on the radio, defending the Bush administration.
Hunter Felt
Allston
Leave it to the Phoenix to trot out tired old establishment leftists like Lawrence Tribe to interpret the US Constitution.
The Constitution grants limited powers to the three branches of the federal government. The federal government, with the acquiescence of Congress, has usurped its powers.
The article also made reference to the John Birch Society and its opposition to a one-world government. Thanks to the likes of, among others, Strobe Talbott, Henry Kissinger, Maurice Strong, and David Rockefeller, it has been much easier to prove our point.
The Phoenix was once considered an anti-establishment newspaper. Articles like this demonstrate the opposite.
Harold Shurtleff
Regional Field Representative
The John Birch Society
Venetian blind
The exhibition review “Three’s Company: Titian, Tintoretto, and Veronese Rule at the MFA” rightly recognizes the new exhibition of Venetian painters at the MFA as a spectacular accomplishment. However, two of the review’s main points misrepresented the significance of this exhibition and underestimated the number of important paintings that were assembled for this show.
Boston has deeper ties to Venice than just the Gardner Museum, which facilitated many of the otherwise impossible loans for this wonderful exhibition. Many of the pictures have never traveled to the US and all of them possess great art-historical significance. The review’s claim that the collection of paintings on display does not include the best paintings by Titian is not only grossly incorrect, but also fails to recognize the theme of rivalry that drove the choices for the show. This is not an exhibition of Titian’s paintings, but an exhibition that explores how three of the major 16th-century artists worked with and against each other. We are lucky to be able to see these paintings in Boston.
Jodi Cranston
Associate Professor
Department of Art History
Boston University
Correction
In our dining review of Amici, we stated that the restaurant had only 10 tables. In fact, it has 21. We regret the error.
