A Loose Constitution
It was with deep regret that I read the latest column titled “For Sale: Land and Property. Whites Only” [Punch Line, Oct. 19-25].
This time Mr. Griego is insisting that the New Mexico Constitution is somehow discriminating against people of color in its provision requiring citizenship for the ownership of property.
Perhaps there is some salient argument possible to lobby against this provision, but I believe that by playing the race card, Mr. Griego weakens his argument considerably.
In this time of negative election ads, especially now, many are applying logic to what they see, hear and read in the media. I ignore the point of the advertisement as being pure and simple hyperbole, which I define as using some notion such as protecting our children.
Who in their right mind would vote against protecting our children? Or for domestic violence? No one.
Mr. Griego accuses the N.M. Constitution of containing “antiquated and bigoted language." He, I believe, has not sought to know the authors of this antiquated and bigoted language—the legally elected representatives of the people, the registered voters and participants in the constitution of New Mexico.
What is the racial makeup of New Mexico? White? Ha ha! Were they not so ridiculous, Mr. Griego's assertions would be funny.
You see, there are many modern countries around the world who also restrict the ownership of property to its citizens. Does Mr. Griego own property in Germany? France? No, he does not, and he could not even if he wanted to.
Now let’s forget Mr. Griego's headline “Whites Only." Do we not see ads and stories in the Alibi for properties like Mr. Powdrell's Barbecue or May Café? The population of property owners in New Mexico, both then and now, is not restricted to any race, white or otherwise. And there are some benefits to restricting property, business and other ownership options to a state's or country's citizens. Should a company founded in a foreign country (which restricts ownership to its citizens) be able to own property and businesses in New Mexico? Also, by restricting property ownership to citizens, do we not also contain the benefits of ownership to New Mexico or the United States?
But there might be some benefit to disallowing such. Especially in a small state, at least in population, like New Mexico. With a very high percentage of its population being relatively poor, people of color have roots in New Mexico and also enjoy U.N. and New Mexican citizenship rights and privileges.
As for myself, I prefer the profits and the economic benefit of property and business ownership in New Mexico to be restricted to citizens of the United States. With such a law in place, no foreign cartel, terrorist organization or other foreign interest would be able to pursue its interests in New Mexico. Perhaps an examination of this issue is timely.
But, please, Mr. Griego, do not play some simple-minded, racial play on words to indicate that this is somehow a "whites-only issue." Anyone with a room-temperature IQ understands the ownership of land and businesses in New Mexico is not now, nor ever was, restricted to whites.
Racial hyperbole for hyperbole's sake is, or should be, above you. And please, do not cheapen the foresight of our forefathers, and authors of our Constitution, with cheap racial slurs.
The Adult Section
I'd have to say that my big problem with the “¡Ask a Mexican!” column is the language that is used more and more frequently. I was shocked when he freely spoke of a (dare I say?) “blowjob'” that a girl did not ask about. After some more trash talk he is telling another one that she might have a “nice ass.” I notice he doesn't speak to men as much this way. Maybe he is figuring women will be thankful?
I know that no person is holier-than-thou, but there is a section for everything and “¡Ask a Mexican!” seems to belong more in the adult area.
[RE: Profile, “Off the Streets,” Oct. 19-25] I am very glad that Al McCly has found a job, a place and a purpose, but I have questions about his story. Something simply does not ring true in his tale of his Social Security card. Why would police confiscate his card in relation to his DWI? Why would he need a birth certificate to secure a replacement or duplicate card? I needed no such document to get a replacement card when mine was lost in several moves. And why would he need to show a Social Security card in order to claim his paycheck? His employer could not have issued a paycheck in the first place without already having a Social Security number so withholdings and various other deductions could be filed.
Putting the Pen in Ultimate Since 1992
I love pancakes, so the recipe in "Granddad's Penultimate Cakes" by Alex Brown and Evan George [Hot Knives, Oct. 26-Nov. 1] grabbed me. But I have a feeling that the authors do not know what “penultimate" means, and I can't believe it got by your editors.
According to Webster's, it means second to last. Nowhere in the short article did it clarify the title, and unless there's a new use of the word of which I haven't heard, I conclude that they thought it meant something else like, perhaps, “the ultimate" as this phrase is used in current lingo to mean "the best." Maybe it means second best?
Letters should be sent with the writer’s name, address and daytime phone number via e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org. They can also be faxed to (505) 256-9651. Letters may be edited for length and clarity, and may be published in any medium; we regret that owing to the volume of correspondence we cannot reply to every letter.