Plus Letters to the Editor
In case you haven’t noticed, there’s a great deal happening locally these days. For starters, Occupy Santa Cruz has been generating interest for weeks. Of course, after the recent riots at an Occupy Oakland rally, it’s hard not to step back and take a broader look at the Occupy Wall Street movement that has swept the nation. (In an odd bit of timing, the new futuristic film In Time—not the best, but not bad—mirrors what’s happening in the country right now and addresses topics such as redistributing the wealth. Sound off on the matter with us online at goodtimessantacruz.com. You’ll find a number of blogs there about the local movement. In the meantime, turn to News this week (page 8), where the matter is addressed more thoroughly.
From the protests, we move on to another local matter capturing a great deal of attention—the proposal to re-route Pacific Avenue in Downtown Santa Cruz into a two-way street. And just in time for the holidays. This week, Executive Director of the Downtown Association, Chip, writes about the matter and brings up some provocative points that suggest the idea is not a bad one at all. Economically, could it change things for the better? The matter heads to City Council on Tuesday Nov. 8. Send us your thoughts at le*****@gt******.com .
That’s enough to make you take pause and think. But maybe it’s best to do that inside, which is what Kim Luke, the author of this week’s cover story, might suggest. Behold: the ultimate guide to doing things inside—told in a way only the candid Ms. Luke could tell. Enjoy the levity.
One last note: The Nexties 2012 is fast approaching. Be sure to visit santacruznext.com to learn about this annual awards ceremony, which honors locals doing amazing things. Nominee deadline is Nov. 10.
Thanks for reading. Have a fun, safe and prosperous week …
Greg Archer | Editor-in-Chief
Letters to the Editor
About Those Missiles
I just read Gil Stein’s letter, (“Missiles and More, GT 9/22, and it’s the same old character bashing of anyone not pro Israel. Palestine vs. Israel is like the bully problem in the U.S. schools, only this bully has all the war toys and the “big one” too.
Israel, who believes God gave them the land all the way to the Med., will never give an inch back to Palestine. They cut the water off to a trickle so they can’t even survive. Israel jets and torpedo boats sank our USS Liberty during the six-day war (1967). “By mistake they said, “We never found out the real story till the release of documents from the “freedom of Information Act.”
Historians know the truth, others just use the same old talking points. Bottle rockets vs. Cruz Missiles—poor babies. The $3 million a year we give Israel as “aid” benefits us how? It’s still the largest lobby in Washington too.
S. Rudzinski
Soquel
Best Online Comments
On ‘Medical Marijauna’ Woes …
[David] Evans of the Drug Free America Foundation] says, “Why in God’s name would we want to legalize something that is carcinogenic if we don’t have to do it?” Hmm, cigarettes are legal, and quite carcinogenic. So is burning coal, and many other chemicals out there. Prohibition causes more problems than the actual use of weed, etc.
—Mike “Lew” Lamar
I’m shocked at some of these comments by Evans. “We go through the Food and Drug Administration process. It’s served us for 100 years. It’s not perfect but it’s far better than having a Wild West situation where people can just use whatever they want. That’s how people get killed.”
`Perhaps the fact that the big-pharm companies are so profitable is a sign that the FDA has not served us well for the last 100 years. And excuse me…how many people die from prescription drugs? Supposedly I live in a free country where I have the right to choose how to treat myself. I’m fortunate enought to not need medical marijuana, but I’d sure prefer it over opiates and other nasty pharmaceuticals.
—WG
On ‘The Breast Cancer Bill’ ..
I’m not just outraged that Gov. Brown vetoed the Breast Density Bill a few weekends ago, a bill that would inform women patients about the density of their breast tissue and therefore the accuracy of mammograms, as outlined in your article “A Dense Discussion.” It’s his reason why that really infuriates me.
The bill sought to inform women patients about the density of their breast tissue and therefore the accuracy of their mammograms—dense tissue means harder to read mammograms, as outlined in your article, “A Dense Discussion.” If this bill hadn’t been aimed at only women, it would have passed hands down. Think about it—if almost half the men in the country had a normal prostate condition that made regular detection of prostate cancer inaccurate, there is no way that a bill aimed at informing these men about this condition and helping them get further testing would be vetoed due to fears of “panic” and “unnecessary anxiety”. Give me a break! As if we women aren’t capable of understanding the concept of increased risk and can’t handle making decisions about our own care without falling into hysterics. That’s a pathetic excuse for axing a bill that would save those same women’s lives.
To the governor’s credit, this latent sexism is so pervasive and unconscious that he probably had no idea that prejudiced thinking informed his decision.
—Bez Maxwell
