Two articles from the LA Times today:

This article raises several reactions in me:

• "Hard-core tiki enthusiasts"? WTF?
• I liked that they put fresh gardenias in some drinks and served others in skull-shaped mugs.
• They gloss over the fact that the place is expensive with bad food, and in an inconvenient location. That might also help to explain why it was always empty.
• I wonder what's happening to the awesome bartenders.
• Matt needs to make field trips to local flee markets to track down the paraphernalia.
• I wonder if there are any tiki bars in DC. I know that's what 3rd Edition calls their back patio, but really not the same thing.

And this one elicits mixed emotions. On the one hand, I'm very much in favor of recognizing a population that is admittedly underserved in the area. The primary connection I've heard regarding Central American immigrants in the LA area is to violent street gangs imported from El Salvador, so the residents have a point. Also, ethnic towns and neighborhood monikers help to make some sense out of the vast and diverse tapestry that is the Los Angeles basin. On the other hand, I react strongly against the language of keeping non-Central Americans out of the area, and preventing them from opening businesses. Fighting gentrification is one thing, but promoting the continuation of racially based segregation is quite another. Of course, the deli owner they quote sounds like something straight out of Orange County. I associate him with the popular bumper sticker: "Last American out of Garden Grove Take the Flag". Why does their opposing view have to come off as a racist redneck? The whole article leaves an unpleasant taste of xenophobia.