Letters to the editor (01/30/13)

........................................................................................................................................................................................

Addressing two points from letter writer
Editor:
It is time, regardless of an aging weariness, to answer Dana Davis’ letter of  Dec. 12.
Davis’ letter was quite long and addressed as an answer to different authored letters, but took dead aim at mine. Therefore, since I do not think the editor will allow me two pages to answer every comment, I will address primarily, only two points.
Dana Davis attacked my stated appreciation for the life’s work of Margaret Sanger, using a single accurately quoted sentence from a whole book filled with sentences and, doing so while purposely ignoring any context (commonly used information hiding practice from certain quarters).
To start, I will use another Taliban metaphor and state that Dana Davis threw acid in the face of Sanger’s lifetime efforts for pro-life activities, definitely pro-women, pro-children, pro-family, and pro-education (especially against religiously and culturally fixed sexual and reproductive ignorance only education — tis a fact).
Here is the single quoted sentence: “Or, as Mr. Mehaffey’s bastion of honor, Margaret Sanger said, ‘the most merciful thing a large family can do for one of its infant members is to kill it.’ Sounds bad huh, even cruel, like historical family survival infanticide.
Now consider some realities of 1920 America (with some of capitalism’s extremely ugly past) and the incredibly sorry lives of working families without adequate education, while living in extreme poverty, yet with the mother having 18 to 20 pregnancies over a lifetime (causing early deaths and bad health, while often delivering a dozen living children or more into harsh poverty  and illness). Consider the title of Sanger’s chapter that Davis’ quote was taken from, “The Wickedness of Creating Large Families.”
The chapter is available by title online, free, courtesy of Bartleby.com. I recommend reading the chapter (including Dana Davis) and experiencing the context surrounding the acid in the face quote, then deciding for yourself the integrity found with Davis’s use of that single sentence, without context — for cause.
However, some prior knowledge of the period’s history is recommended, especially concerning the ensnared reality of families surviving in company owned coal mining communities and, perhaps, adding a bit of human empathy for the hard family living conditions and sicknesses described in that history, found seemingly absent in Davis’ context free comment.
Perhaps to further enlist the reader’s interest, here is Bartleby’s introduction for Sanger’s book: “The chronicle of Sanger’s decades-long battle to legalize and develop information on the prevention of venereal disease and then methods of birth control, during which she endured indictment, exile and prison.”
Oh yes, using the metaphor again, Sanger suffered rhetorical acid thrown in her face from many sources during her lifetime, thrown from countless pulpits, podiums and soap boxes, by those dedicated interests historically served by the public’s continued ignorance, especially human biological ignorance.
Second, Dana Davis mentioned Alexis de Tocqueville’s time studying this nation’s new democracy, mentioning: “All the government can do is take from one group and distribute to another.”
Then adding, “This is the danger deTocqueville warned of in studying the American government in 1835. It is this progressive push towards redistribution, the continued demonization of success, which is being used to drive a wedge between Americans.”
Oh how handy the delusional talking points from the same minds that gave us another 75 year illusion/delusion belief, that, thousands of small family farms were lost to the estate tax (the American Farm Bureau checked and over the 75 year period not a single family farm had been so lost — not one).
The con artist’s language witchcraft trick is in the phrase, “small family” — works most every time, smoke and mirrors for those hiding great wealth and power behind those two simple words. The greatest con is developed when the con artist (and followers) surrenders to an absolute, fact resistant belief in the con’s false reality.
What Dana Davis does not want is for the readers to check the statistical information concerning the past 30 years, and the numbers showing the largest redistribution of wealth from the middle and working class to the wealthiest class of Americans (275 percent versus 10 percent) (you know, factual information).
History is full of such statistics, drawn from the fall of ancient Greece to the Fall of Rome and on and on — history does repeat its self.
Because, when a nation’s wealth is held in too few greedy hands, the people, without adequate incomes, become dependent upon the government (economic cannibalism), and in the past, as now, these same words, like other successful illusions/delusions, are employed: “It is this progressive push towards redistribution, the continued demonization of success, which is being used to drive a wedge between Americans.”
That claim, fellow Americans, is B.S. — read the statistics and follow the money and watch national dependency and poverty grow, possibly to our nation’s ruin, now more 30 years in the delusional making!
However, do not raise your hopes too high because facts in some quarters do not carry the same weight as do firmly fixed, belief based storytelling.
Now for a little fun from interesting reading, using a quote from Tocqueville’s book II, chapter 12: “Here and there in the midst of American society you meet with men full of a fanatical and almost wild spiritualism … From time to time strange sects arise which endeavor to strike out extraordinary paths to eternal happiness.
Religious insanity is very common in the United States.” Gee, I wonder the context? (Yet, a few 19th century period revelations/enchantments did lead to moderate to successful modern religious sects/cults — how many can you name?)
Then too, Tocqueville’s visit took place during the height of the Second Great Awakening, which eventually led to an awakening/revival/insanity diagnosis called “religious excitement.”
Yep, have ultimate faith in opinion/beliefs based upon storytellings; humans truly played with monstrous, sharp tooth dinosaurs less than 6,000 years ago — Tocqueville’s observation still applies big time — and history does repeat its self.
Oh how demanding the intellectual investments which are so commonly made in fact resistant, skepticism free opinion/belief!

Terry Mehaffey
Los Lunas

School bullying is not just for kids
Editor:
This is in regards to the “Chavez resigns” article of Dec. 22.
We all hear about bullying in schools, but when we do, we think of students.
What example is the individual, as reported, in this case presenting to the kids of our communities.
Beyond that, what example is the administration giving by apparently condoning and not acting on this type of behavior by staff.

Scot Scurlock
Peralta

Lots of people came to help
Editor:
I want to thank five of the most wonderful, thoughtful, caring and helpful young men who ever walked the face of the Earth!
On Sunday afternoon, a pipe broke out in my husband’s shop. Jack called his daughter, Cindy, who lives here in Los Lunas, and within the hour, two vehicles rolled into our driveway.
Out piled our grandson, Austin Buck, his mom, Cindy, Elijah Dereta, Jake and Andre Sanchez and Jeremiah Carroll; they came armed with brooms and squeegees.
They rolled up their sleeves, and in no time flat, we had the water out! They accepted nothing more than our heart-felt thanks!
Guys, you are the best!  Parents of the guys, you all did an outstanding job of raising them! Thanks to you, too!

Gayle and Jack Stayton
Los Lunas