If you have ever read my blog before, you may know what I think of John Dendahl, aka Dimdahl. In spite of his puckish & jovial manner, he is one nasty character. It is not remotely possible, in his mind, that he is ever wrong. Worse, his opponents are not simply misguided, they are “insipid” and not to be trusted in the least. To Dimdahl, any public money spent for any cause he doesn’t love is socialism. To Dimdahl, global warming is a naturally occurring phenomenon to which human contribution is nil. Ad nauseum.

So, we might all wonder about the temperature in Hell when I sit down to write a defense of Dimdahl. What set me in that direction is the following letter to the editor:

ABQjournal: Letter to the Editor
Dendahl Should Exit New Mexico

JOHN DENDAHL’S columns are obviously anti-Hispanic and now anti-Spanish language. … New Mexico is bilingual, as our county is becoming, and what is wrong with that.

The most successful democracy in the world which avoids wars and according to a worldwide poll was found to have the most satisfied citizenry, has three official languages. The United States, on the other hand, has one recently declared “national” but not official. We are the only country in the world which sends ambassadors around the world who don’t speak the language of the country to which they are assigned.

Dendahl is an unhappy separatist influence in the most ethnically stable state in the union. Why doesn’t he go some place where Hispanics will not irritate him.

MIGUEL ENCINIAS
Albuquerque

Encinias, like all of us, is entitled to his opinion and the free expression of that. I would not try to silence him or the odious Dimdahl. However, I think Encinias goes too far (right) with this. His conclusion is nearly identical with the old right wing battle cry of the 60’s: Love It or Leave It. It is painfully close to the bigot’s “go back where you came from.” Ironically, Dimdahl comes from New Mexico. Now, I have met home-grown bigots in New Mexico (and everywhere I’ve been). I don’t know whether Dimdahl is a bigot, but his argument for English, which I do not agree with, is not sufficient proof. THIS is not the reason to run Dimdahl out of town.

Still, before I could compose my defense of Dimdahl (I had a lot of bile to suppress), I saw him again on The Line and hated what I saw so much I could hardly follow through with this (everyone laughed at him when he cited Michael Crichton, fiction writer, as THE authority on global warming — kinda like worshipping L. Ron Hubbard). Is Dimdahl a bigot? I don’t know. Jackass — without question. But he is New Mexico’s own and it would be wrong to export him — the rest of the world has its own problems. mjh

PS: Keep reading for another letter to the editor that illustrates a clearer instance of a bigot in public. Every time a bigot opens his or her mouth, they prove their ignorance. And yet, somehow, it keeps getting passed on because, at its root, it’s all human nature.

Continue reading In Defense of Dendahl (gag) →

Home on the Range: A Corridor for Wildlife – New York Times By CORNELIA DEAN

[T]he naturalist Aldo Leopold wrote more than 30 years ago:

“One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds. Much of the damage inflicted on land is quite invisible to laymen. An ecologist must either harden his shell and make believe that the consequences of science are none of his business, or he must be the doctor who sees the marks of death in a community that believes itself well — and does not want to be told otherwise.”

[via dangerousmeta!]

ABQjournal: Letters to the Editor
Brave New Education

I WAS DELIGHTED to read the story about the drug searches at Rio Rancho High School. The value of this educational opportunity is incalculable. It is absolutely essential that our young adult students understand the importance of these exercises.

Not only do they learn the importance of obedience to the law, they also now have a better understanding of law enforcement’s need to do warrantless searches and seizures whenever there is the slightest chance that drugs might be involved.

They also received valuable instruction in the need for quiet, unquestioning obedience to all dictates of anyone in authority. We are preparing these students for life in the 21st century. All citizens will need special training in these concepts as the new police state emerges.

JOE GABEL
Albuquerque

Bravo, Joe.

The Radical Right speaks constantly about “respect for the law” even as they push laws, like South Dakota’s abortion ban, that neither respect precedent nor the citizens. The Radical Right can’t stand all those “illegals” demanding — demanding! — rights. The Radical Right can’t stand the courts, where reasoning has standards, evidence and proof — those damn unelected activist judges; those frivolous lawsuits. The Radical Right hates government, compromise and nuance but loves obedience to absolute authority (the bible). The Radical Right clings to a dim-witted strongman who feels free to interpret all laws any way he sees fit. We’re one terrorist attack from martial law.

Just shut up, get in line, and do what the men in uniform tell you to do — or else! mjh

PS: As an aside, sarcasm is tricky in writing or verbally. Some never get it; some hate it. In the same section, I think Gary didn’t handle it quite as deftly as Joe, though he makes his point even so.

Drought Does Not Compute Continue reading Brave New Education →

Going Nuclear
A Green Makes the Case
By Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace

In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That’s the conviction that inspired Greenpeace’s first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.

Look at it this way: More than 600 coal-fired electric plants in the United States produce 36 percent of U.S. emissions — or nearly 10 percent of global emissions — of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change. Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely. …

Today, there are 103 nuclear reactors quietly delivering just 20 percent of America’s electricity. Eighty percent of the people living within 10 miles of these plants approve of them (that’s not including the nuclear workers). Although I don’t live near a nuclear plant, I am now squarely in their camp.

And I am not alone among seasoned environmental activists in changing my mind on this subject. British atmospheric scientist James Lovelock, father of the Gaia theory, believes that nuclear energy is the only way to avoid catastrophic climate change. Stewart Brand, founder of the “Whole Earth Catalog,” says the environmental movement must embrace nuclear energy to wean ourselves from fossil fuels. On occasion, such opinions have been met with excommunication from the anti-nuclear priesthood: The late British Bishop Hugh Montefiore, founder and director of Friends of the Earth, was forced to resign from the group’s board after he wrote a pro-nuclear article in a church newsletter.

There are signs of a new willingness to listen, though, even among the staunchest anti-nuclear campaigners. …

The 600-plus coal-fired plants emit nearly 2 billion tons of CO2annually — the equivalent of the exhaust from about 300 million automobiles. In addition, the Clean Air Council reports that coal plants are responsible for 64 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions, 26 percent of nitrous oxides and 33 percent of mercury emissions. These pollutants are eroding the health of our environment, producing acid rain, smog, respiratory illness and mercury contamination.

Meanwhile, the 103 nuclear plants operating in the United States effectively avoid the release of 700 million tons of CO2emissions annually — the equivalent of the exhaust from more than 100 million automobiles. Imagine if the ratio of coal to nuclear were reversed so that only 20 percent of our electricity was generated from coal and 60 percent from nuclear. This would go a long way toward cleaning the air and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Every responsible environmentalist should support a move in that direction.

pmoore@greenspirit.com

Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, is chairman and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies Ltd. He and Christine Todd Whitman are co-chairs of a new industry-funded initiative, the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, which supports increased use of nuclear energy.

ABQjournal: Letters to the Editor

Questioning Terrorism War Near Treason

Those who call for the exit of the president of the United States, whoever he/she is, are the cause of the more than 2,000 deaths of our brave service people in the Middle East. It’s tragic that those who put greed for power ahead of the safety of this democracy keep delaying the victory against terrorism. That’s called treason.

FRANCES DODD
Albuquerque

Bush Should Stand by His Words, Resign

IN PUBLIC statements, the president said anyone who leaks information “will no longer work in his administration.” Now is the perfect opportunity for George Bush to honor his own word and resign.

MICHAEL G. ROSENBERG
Albuquerque