Thank you so much for including me in your article about Albuquerque Etsy shops [Feature, “Etsy-Querque,” Nov. 18-24]. I have enjoyed the Alibi for so many years. I really appreciate your time and consideration. Etsy has been a great venue for me to sell my hand-knitted items in addition to local arts/crafts shows. It is a great community of hand-creators.
I read David D. David’s column on the topic of Susana Martinez [Opinion, “The Liberal Shades of Our New Guv,” Nov. 11-17] with great interest only to find that, after doing so, I had severe indigestion. It isn’t often that I read political commentary, mostly because, like eating a ream of cotton candy, the content is stimulating but lacking in any real nutrition. I decided to take a chance with Mr. David’s column because I was genuinely curious to see if it was going to actually offer me meaningful political discourse. Unfortunately, it did not. Instead of making a case for changing my opinion of Gov-elect Martinez, the column offered a couple of bland facts about her past while simultaneously rubbing the reader’s face in her victory much like a drunken sports fan might do after the Super Bowl when their team has won. Is this really where we want our political discussion to go?
I’m sorely disappointed in the Alibi’s choice to run this column, though I do applaud your decision to at least give some face time to the other side. Despite that, it still saddens me that we have to go through this ridiculous cheerleading every election cycle as fans of each team keep close track of the scores, repeat content-less banter without considering what it even means and watch the opposing fan’s faces to see if they can spot tears when the results come in.
Mr. David might respond that it was indeed the opposing team that started the name-calling, or at least continues to propagate it, but that would betray potentially willful ignorance of the point I’m trying to make. Politics should be about reasoned, fact-based discussion, not about name-calling, cheerleading and overzealous dedication to one’s team. Claims should be supported with more than rhetoric and anger, and should at least have some manner of precedent or data as their foundation. Until that actually happens and people earnestly begin to educate themselves about the issues beyond the 10-second sound bites, then we are never going to make much progress at all.
In closing, bravo Mr. David, you have successfully kept the bar on political discussion as low as ever. Good luck in the 2012 Election Bowl!
Editor's Note: We're not sure which team you think David D. David bats for, but we're pretty sure he swings both ways. —Marisa Demarco
Regarding Don McIver's letter on bicycles and stop signs [“Bikers Beware,” Nov. 11-17], this has been dealt with rationally by saner authorities. Idaho, for instance, has a model law in which bicycles must slow down only to yield-sign speed and then may proceed. This is a reasonable compromise—how good politics is done. The statute and details are easily searchable (Idaho bike/bicycle law). I'd like to see local bike groups push for this; otherwise cyclists are subject to foolish harassment as Mr. McIver elaborated.
Relatedly, it's darker earlier now and I'm seeing some nearly invisible cyclists without lights or reflectors. My question is: Do you really want to die young (and stupidly)?
I wish Ms. Martinez luck in solving our state's many problems (and hope she will support Rail Runner and other forms of transportation). However, I believe that Ms. Denish could have won the election if Gov. Richardson had put aside his ego and given her information and a few chances to show what she could do. Unless he feared indictment, he should have stepped aside months before the election to benefit his party.
Another of the United States' national holidays is about to arrive. I call it Un-thanksgiving Day.
The image of the holiday is Anglo "pilgrims" sharing a meal with Native Americans—that was the beginning of white European people stealing the land, slaughtering most of the Native Americans and putting the few survivors on "reservations" (essentially “prisons”).
Native Americans wisely don't celebrate "Thanks"-giving. It is the National Day of Mourning—a reminder of the massive killing and continued suffering of the Native Americans, who lost their peace and freedom on their own land long ago.
[Music, “There’s a Ph.D. in the Mosh Pit,” Nov. 11-17] Personally, I outgrew punk rock when I outgrew high school. I couldn't find enough in the stark minimalism of punk to keep me interested beyond that, especially knowing there was a vast world of music beyond it to explore. One could argue that I was never a true punk fan, and I would probably agree in order to end the boring discussion as quickly as possible.
My sister and I were dining at Frontier the night of the Bad Religion show, when 20 to 30 punkish people began trickling in with their T-shirts, patches and buttons. I saw the logo, which featured a Christian cross in a red circle crossed out. I am familiar with the sophomoric premise of Bad Religion's ideology, and I understand the line of thinking. I would personally cite economics as the reason for the world's strife and turmoil, with ideology (usually created by wrenching a religious premise out of context) tacked on as a rider to justify wars and oppression. The real culprit for human conflict is the scarcity of resources.
This is a digression, however. On to the kernel: What struck me as amusing was that the cross was the targeted symbol for the band's logo, while there are plenty other major religions at which to throw stones. I've studied enough sociology to understand the reason for this singling out of Christianity. It is, after all, the dominant religion of the Western hemisphere, and as the Western hemisphere has enjoyed global hegemony for several centuries, it's a case of the underdog cornered by the wolf.
However, with a wry smile I noted mentally that Muslim iconography was strikingly absent from the band's logo. Now why would this be? After all, Islam overtook Christianity in the ’90s as the world's most popular religion. Christians are easier targets, I suppose, for their proclivity to be relatively permissive of criticism. After all, a tenant of Christianity is that persecution should be suffered willingly and patiently, while retaliation is discouraged. How much spine does it take to slap someone who is taught to "turn the other cheek"?
What I used to admire about punk rock was its boldness. It had an in-your-face willingness to say what everyone else is afraid to say. Yet, I see Bad Religion still tiptoeing very obviously around the world's most popular religion by leaving it off of its merchandise. Why don't they just change the name to Bad Christianity?
That's my two bits. I'll leave the exorbitant price of admission ($23 dollars for a punk show?!?!?) out of it.
Enjoyed your article in highlighting the fact that diabetes type II is very much overlooked in the media [Opinion, “Insulin Shock,” Nov. 4-10]. It's not a fancy or flashy disease as some of the infectious disease you mentioned. I applaud you for spotlighting this major health problem.
I personally do not have diabetes, but have loved ones who do have it and instead of seeing your article as a blame game, I rather see it as hopeful. It is hopeful in the sense that unlike some diseases, those with impaired fasting glucose (aka pre-diabetes) can actually stop its progression into full-blown diabetes. I don't know about you, but that leaves me hopeful in that I can actually change the outcome. If one does indeed progress to full diabetes, then one still has hope in turning things around by changing lifestyles and eating right.
That's how I saw your article, as a fun resource with facts and truths throughout. The hope is in the details.