E-mail Story
Print Friendly
Journal North: Home | Sports | Opinion | Obits | Entertainment
Sunday, March 07, 2010
Letters
Preserve Better Under Park Service
I appreciate the March 3 Journal North editorial that refutes some of the claims of the current management board of the Valles Caldera National Preserve.
The board's claim in the March 2 story in the Journal North that the preserve under National Park Service administration could lose its new Educational Center is completely absurd. Our National Parks are leaders in the areas of environmental, historical and archeological education. If anything, the NPS with its broad research expertise could very well expand on current student educational programs at the center and the preserve.
Another very important factor is that under the existing administration and management of adjacent Bandelier National Monument, the (cost of) administering the preserve probably could cost significantly less than the current annual operating budget of $3.5 million. Certainly the availability for public use would increase.
Don Dayton
Santa Fe
Look at Facts Of Wireless Pollution
Re: your Feb. 14 editorial, "Wi-Fi Phobes Hold Us Hostage":
In the name of truth and sanity let's do some corrective surgery. It is a widely held but erroneous popular assumption that scientific studies massively weigh against wireless emissions being anything but benign — or nothing to worry about, where it comes to our brains and bodies. The fact of the matter is that just the opposite is true — there are actually "more" professional studies conclusively exhibiting adverse effects and harm.
Also you clearly displayed very shoddy journalistic acumen by calling GQ "that leading scholarly publication" because scientific information from it was cited by the opposition. Rather than being educational you instead supplied your readers with a very slanted pile of hype on this crucially important issue.
Staying on track, you could have balanced matters with such real world facts and accurate knowledge that radio transmissions before the age of cell towers and Wi-Fi were broadcast in less harmful analog than the even more harmful digital-pulse transmissions plaguing us all from Wi-Fi and wireless sources today. This unceasing Chinese water torture bombardment is scientifically proven to damage our innate energy fields, cells and DNA, leading to brain and body impairment and disease such as cancer. Even by 2004, there were more than 15,000 scientific studies documenting the hazards of wireless technologies and at least 66 epidemiological reports showing the increase of brain tumors in human populations.
Hypersensitive or not, the burden of electro-pollution is compounding annually faster than our 401(k)s.
Richard Dean Jacob
Santa Fe
What About Health Care for Rest of Us?
Health care for a U.S. senator: Free for life, no additional cost, includes dental and psych.
Health care for person committing crime and serving prison time: Free, no cost, includes dental and psych.
Health care for me: $2,500 deductible, can be dropped for pre-existing condition, co-pays, speciality services additional — no dental and psych extra, with limits.
I'm done with this broken system. Those currently in office are not doing the job we need them to do. They have broken our system of government, so for the next election I will be voting to get rid of all of those currently in public office both in the Senate and House — Republicans, Democrats or Independents. We need new blood or someone who can get past this bull and will listen to their boss, who are you and I.
Myke Moreno
Santa Fe
Depends Which Activist Judges
For the past nine years, the Republican Party has been very outspoken about the danger of what they call activist judges. They claim that liberal judges are making new law from their decisions rather than ensuring that laws passed by local, state and federal legislators are staying within the constructs of the Constitution. They have also voiced great concern that the federal government goes too far in passing laws that infringe on individual states rights to govern themselves.
I'm sure you have noticed that outcry has been considerably muted since George W. stocked the Supreme Court with ultraconservative judges who are now doing Antonin Scalia's bidding. It all started in 2000, when the court appointed a president, stopping legally mandated recounts and declared Bush president in spite of his popular vote deficiencies.
In 2007, they declared that the concept of "eminent domain" could be used by government to seize the property of private citizens and then be turned over to commercial developers to use for their own profit, thus eliminating your rights to own property as guaranteed by the Constitution.
They also decreed that they had the r ight to invalidate laws passed by local governing bodies that were intended to rectify local situations, thus invalidating any claims that states' rights advocates might have imagined they had. In that decision Scalia declared: "The enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy decisions off the table." That says they can decide which laws we are allowed to pass to deal with situations we have that they are totally unaware of and unconcerned about.
You are, of course, familiar with this year's decision with which they declared that corporate entities have as much right as individual citizens to select and elect people to offices. The fact that they have resources and influence not available to individual citizens is strictly our bad luck. They refused to require that those corporate entities even bother to ask their stockholders if the CEOs opinions and political agendas in any way reflected the desire of the investors.
I would suggest that the Tea Partyers, who claim to be advocating for the return of rights to the individual, might do well by starting with a much closer examination of George W. Bush's Supreme Court.
Robert Barry
Questa
You also can send comments via our comment form
|
|
