This week I’m answering some phantom questions sent in by phantom readers…



Q: What in the world is do-si-do?

A: Remember when you were in school and when the weather was bad and couldn’t go outside? The PE teacher would make us dance country and one of the “bust-out” moves was a do-si-do. It involved no thrusts or sexually simulated moves; I think a couple of kids saved those for after school…uh not me though.



Q: What do you make of the whole Chippendale dancers thing?

A: Does it really surprise anyone that something like this happened? Well, it shouldn’t. Hello? We do live in Lubbock don’t we?

For whatever reason; past, present, and probably future city councils (will) feel that they have to legislate morality in one way or another. Why they feel they have to protect us from what they perceive as the wicked ways of the world is something I just don’t get.

By the way, before we go any further I would like to state that I have declared this space a “No-Thrust Zone”; just in case the LPD is watching.



Q: Seriously, doesn’t this further prove that Lubbock is once again behind the times?

A: I don’t know about being behind the times, but it definitely says that those in charge of the city have a particular or certain view of morality or sexuality and by virtue of their position see nothing wrong with imposing their views on those of us who live here; regardless of the image it creates for the city. The truth of the matter is that a significant number of people who live here don’t see anything wrong with shows of this nature. The fact that the 3 scheduled shows sold out should tell the city council something. Had they not sold out; had no one showed up, then that would have sent the opposite message. Look, it’s about as ridiculous as thinking that if beer and liquor stores are located outside the city limits people won’t drink alcohol!



Q: But some folks are saying that we are the laughing stock of the country; do you agree?

A: I don’t know about being the laughing stock, but we’ve certainly opened ourselves up to being the “butt” of the joke.



Q: Do you think that 7 LPD officers and some undercover cops at Jake’s was a little overkill?

A: Yes, of course it was. Although I

guess they could have called in the SWAT Team to cool down all those in attendance who in the Chief’s words had been subject to the dancer’s intent of “sexually gratifying” them?



Q: Huh?

A: I know, all this simulated nudity and sexual gratification talk makes me feel, shall we say, a little “Chippi” too.



Q: What do you mean by “sexual gratification?

A: Well I’m just repeating what Chief Jones said. He said, “You know, you're a grown up, you know what's moving towards sexual gratification”. He said “the dancers' actions were specifically for sexual gratification”.

Apparently the dancers made certain movements and “thrusts” intended to cause sexual gratification or sexual arousal to those in attendance. I don’t know if that’s true or not, or how the chief would know that the patrons were aroused. I don’t know how you can tell whether a person is sexually aroused by another person’s pelvic thrust, but maybe the police take a course in sexual arousal or excitability at the police academy or something.

By the way, I know plenty of guys who could thrust their pelvis from now until eternity; and all they would arouse would be dirty looks or at best a yawn.



Q: What do you think about the town hall meeting where the mayor refused to address the Chippendale situation?

A: The first thing elected officials seem to do when confronted with a situation like this is say something like: “I cannot comment on something that is under investigation” or something to that effect. My question would be: Who passed the law that says that elected officials or public servants can’t comment on these types of situations? It is absurd to think that they cannot comment; it’s even more absurd for them to think that we believe them or that they are fooling anybody. Truth is they can comment if they want to; they just choose not to.



Q: So what did you think of police Chief Claude Jones calling a news conference to defend his officers and the dancer’s arrest?

A: This I find un-freaking-believable. (Can I use the word freaking or is there an ordinance against that too?)

In the past year alone, at least one person has died as a result of the LPD’s use of TASERS, the city is facing at least 2 lawsuits involving Lubbock police officers and

the use of Tasers; no less than 3 individuals were murdered during a 3 day period between last Friday and Monday of this week. One police officer was caught driving a vandalized police cruiser damaged by other police officers while under the influence back in December. Did we see the Chief then? Of course not; all we got was the same old tired “I can’t comment” line.



Q: So what makes this situation different?

A: My guess is that this time, the right people complained.



Q: The right people?

A: By that I mean, the people that were there decided the whole situation was ridiculous; that the police had gone off the deep end of the morals scale and they are demanding some answers.



Q: Do you think this situation will hurt the mayor’s chances for re-election if he decides to run again?

A: Sorry I can’t comment on the ongoing assessment that is presently being conducted by the voters of this city.



Email: acruztsc@aol.com