alibi . march 3 – 9, 2005
The Messiah’s Senator
By Jim Scarantino

On Valentine’s Day, Republican state Sen. Mark Boitano, who represents part of Albuquerque’s Northeast Heights, joined opponents of gay marriage in a press conference to promote “pro-family” legislation. The Albuquerque Journal photo showed a tense Boitano surrounded by gay rights activists. What the story did not mention is that for 30 years Boitano has been a follower of Rev. Sun Myung Moon, who calls gays “dung eating dogs” to be “eliminated” or “burned.”

Boitano is so loyal, he helped crown Moon the Messiah in Washington, D.C., last year. …

Americans have the right to hold any religious belief. But when an elected official participates in crowning a self-declared Messiah while advocating so-called “pro-family” laws, it’s time for vigilance. Because Moon wants the U.S. Constitution replaced by “Godism,” to be administered by himself, it’s wise to at least question the agenda of all elected officials in his camp. We have every right to ask how they can uphold the Bill of Rights when the man to whom they swear fealty desires dictatorial theocracy.

At issue before the Legislature is not, and must not be, religious doctrine. It is the question whether two adults may form a particular contract. You only need a lowly county clerk to seal the civil contract called marriage. Religious unions, by the same token, are not government’s business. If it’s holy matrimony you want, the person to see is a minister, priest, rabbi, or even the True Father?especially if you’d rather not choose your spouse.
—–
Scarantino is an Albuquerque attorney and served recently as president of Mainstream 204, a national organization of moderate Republicans.

Kudos to Scarantino for writing this. Yes, you have the right to worship (or not). You don’t have the right to undermine the Constitution with your faith. mjh

Quirky Burque: Chris & the meaningless Rock

Social engineering, folks, for a more sophisticated audience. An audience that will soon think it rebellious to become a church-going Corporation Man again with a perky little stay-at-home wife.

ABQjournal: Points and Counterpoints on Dendahl

Use of Column Questioned
JOHN DENDAHL’S incomprehensible rant on topics ranging from Marxist theory to Sen. Jeff Bingaman’s voting record would be laughable had it not appeared on the op-ed page of a major daily newspaper. Was it the Journal’s intent to make the conservative right look like complete morons? Are there really so few arguments against Head Start and rapid transit that one must resort to linking them to communism? And most importantly, does the editorial staff of the Journal really expect the paper to be taken seriously if it prints this sort of nonsense?
MICHAEL KARGAS
Albuquerque

Dendahl Good for a Smile
I WANTED TO let you know how much I enjoy John Dendahl’s column. He never fails to make me smile. I particularly enjoyed his “Marxists Liked Ideas Like Pre-K, Bullet Trains” article. I am very much looking forward to his next column, wherein he makes the sterling argument that Marxists enjoyed drinking milk. Gasp! And so do most Democrats. History urges caution. Anyway, I hope Dendahl keeps up the good work. It’s great to have a humorist of his caliber featured in a hometown paper.
JACKIE RUSSO
Albuquerque

I’ve been railing against Dimdahl for years. Now people are openly mocking his dim-witted world view (good guys vs communist-socialists). mjh

mjh’s blog — Search Results for Dimdahl

Take a Walk on the Wild Side By JIM DOHERTY

Call it the grizzly test. Require all would-be developers to take it. If you want to drill for oil in the refuge, first you have to spend a couple of weeks roughing it there. No guns, no phones, no guides. Just you and the bears. Let them look into your heart. If they’re reassured by what they see, you pass; if they feel threatened, well, according to Ave Thayer, there are worse ways to go.

Those who survive the grizzly test earn the right to submit their drilling proposals to Congress. But who knows? Perhaps a solitary stint in the refuge is enough to make even the most avaricious developers think twice. Once they’ve discovered for themselves how magnificent the refuge is; once they’ve watched caribou lope across the tundra, listened to wolves howl, beheld the mesmerizing effects of light and shadow on limestone mountains riddled with caves and turreted with hoodoos – once, in short, they understand why so many folks consider the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge sacred ground, they might undergo a change of heart and decide to leave it the way it is. Which is to say, undisturbed.
—–
Jim Doherty is a former editor at Smithsonian magazine.
—–

Here we see the classic Liberal weakness: those we disagree with can be persuaded by the same things that persuade us (while they call us enemies and dismiss us with contempt — no interest in converting us). My bet: someone who is pro-drilling would come back from the Arctic wanting a condo on the spot; let’s build roads, drill and develop. Understand, I’m not saying Liberals and Conservatives can’t agree on defending ANWR (another Liberal weakness is the need to clarify and refine a point — the worst Conservatives despise that). It’s developers vs the rest of us, but Conservatives leave business free to do anything while fixating on social groups they can’t stand. Conservatives used to believe in “live and let live.” They’ve assumed power through “live as we do.” mjh

PS – similarly, I regret one of the arguments used for preserving Otero Mesa: a big, big aquifer. Just wait: that argument will be thrown back in our faces in support of gated communities; Otero will be surrounded by development and sucked dry. Preserve Otero because we need to preserve something.

I don’t usually cross-post among my 5 or so blogs, but I have to ask you: Do you know who Jeff Gannon is? If not, please follow the link.

mjh’s Dump Bush weBlog: Where’s the OUTRAGE over Gannon/Guckert?

Gannon is the latest evidence that we have been taken over by amoral Enron-quality corporate executives who view everything in terms of marketing and (personal) profit. Cumulatively, this really should fuel a populist uprising — take back America from the corrupt corporations that rule us! mjh

Welcome to uExpress featuring Richard Reeves — The Best Advice and Opinions The Universe!
IMAGINE WATERGATE 2005
by Richard Reeves

It was the persistence and courage of the press that made the difference 30 years ago [during Watergate]. Above and behind the often confused and sometimes inaccurate young men were the publisher of the Post, Katharine Graham, and her editor, Ben Bradlee, who hung tough when it counted. Would that happen today?

I seriously doubt it. Under today’s rules of the game, Nixon would have survived the rape of the Constitution and various counts of burglary and perjury. The American press is being driven into the ground like a stake by courts and government attorneys arguing that there is no such thing as constitutional recognition of any legal protections of news-gathering.

The American press is barely being protected by its own owners, many of them entertainment corporations prone to erase any facts inconvenient to those who write tax laws and approve mergers and acquisitions. The straight American press, and most of it is, is being nibbled to death by a Greek chorus of know-nothing mouthpieces mocking anyone brazen enough to question the orthodoxy of the day or the cut of the emperor’s wardrobe.

Imagine Watergate 2005, with Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly preaching their sermons on the patriotism of a 29-year-old reporter who was close to being fired for forgetting where he abandoned rental cars (private property) and whose parents were both communists — that would be Carl Bernstein. Disney and Viacom and Fox have their virtues, I’m sure, but they are no Graham and Bradlee. Graham bet the company on journalism. I think she would be laughed off the business pages today — and, in fact, over a lifetime she did decide to (or have to) plead for Wall Street’s forgiveness for her own brave brand of Americanism.

Now the laughers are in charge. In the last year, the White House has explicitly stated that it believes it has no obligation to deal with the press as anything but another special interest. In the past week, federal judges have ruled that Time magazine and New York Times reporters should go to jail for what they know, even if it was never published. Another federal court ruled that the governor of Maryland has the right to order state employees never to answer questions posed by The Baltimore Sun.

So it goes in the land of the free.

Crossmap News| ‘Simpsons’ Animates Homosexual Marriage, Stirs Debate

L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Parents Television Council, criticized “The Simpsons” for addressing the issue of gay marriage, though he cautioned that he had not seen the episode. A parental advisory preceded the broadcast.

“At a time when the public mood is overwhelmingly against gay marriage, any show that promotes gay marriage is deliberately bucking the public mood,” he said.

“I’d rather them not do it at all,” he added. “You’ve got a show watched by millions of children. Do children need to have gay marriage thrust in their faces as an issue? Why can’t we just entertain them?”

THE SIMPSONS – Parents Television Council Family TV Guide Show Page

PTC Summary:

This long-running animated production focuses on the daily life of a suburban family living in the fictional town of Springfield. Despite its early timeslot and animated format, The Simpsons is not recommended for younger viewers. The show ridicules entrepreneurs, religion, educators, and law enforcement officials, and has occasionally incorporated foul language into its dialogue. The cartoon sends a mixed message on parenthood: while the father is a bumbling idiot, the mother is a loving and patient wife and role model.

mjh’s Blog: Bless the Simpsons!