Furthermore, the visible sky would be lit up like a Christmas tree from the multitude of laser beacons and a vast array of blinding, blinking, glowing, moving, and stationery shapes, structures, etc. as communication artifacts from every quadrant of the cosmos. Yet what do Hubble and other powerful telescopes show us? Zero.
The moon was proven sterile. Then Mars, as well. Mercury and Venus are furnaces and the remaining solar system is frigid gas held together by gravitation. The inescapable conclusion is: We are alone.
Drugs? Alcohol? Nope.
I write to both thank and correct Tara Shioya for the piece about the San Francisco Neighbors' Association ("Block Party," March 25). While I am a firm believer in the First Amendment rights of the press and enjoy a robust debate about public policy issues, I also believe in Albert Camus, who wrote, "To write is to choose."
What Tanya [sic] Shioya wrote embodies a bias and a perspective that I acknowledge is a product of her own cultural and intellectual predisposition and experiences, and I will accept that bias. But allow me to correct her as to the proposition that I was misinformed about the issue regarding whether or not alcoholics and drug abusers fall within the ambit of Mabel Teng's OMI moratorium. She has accused me essentially of misinforming my audience.
In Mabel Teng's OMI law, the term "disabled" is not only defined under "federal and state aid guidelines," but "under such requirements or through any other method of determination as approved by the Rent Board." This definition is broad and ambiguous enough to drive a Mack truck through, including "drug abusers" and "alcoholics" if so determined by the Rent Board!
Finally, allow me to thank Ms. Shioya for an overall enterprising piece of writing.
San Francisco Neighbors' Association
Editor's note: Social Security law specifically states that those suffering from drug and alcohol addiction "shall not be considered to be disabled ... if alcoholism or drug addiction would ... be a contributing factor to the determination that the individual is disabled."
Bring on the Puppet Government
I thought it would be a snowy day in San Francisco before I would rush to the defense of your paper, let alone Rose Tsai and Julie Lee ("Block Party"), but Warren Hinckle's front-page column (March 31, Independent) deserves a thoughtful response.
It would seem to me that, Proposition H being a done deal and with no further subsidies in sight, the Builders Association simply needed a convenient out from what must be an embarrassing alliance. And what better way than to dramatize this non-issue, thus currying favor with Mr. Pro-Development Himself, Mr. Brown!
One might wonder why a picture of Tsai and Lee serving Mayor Brown's head on a platter is "racist." After all, is that not really their game plan, metaphorically speaking? A more balanced representation would have portrayed them serving Willie's head on a platter as they dangled an indentured and hapless Mayor-elect Leland Yee by marionette strings!
Harry S. Pariser
Here's a letter that won't get printed. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but I always perceived SF Weekly as a publication that has the interest of its readers at heart. You pursue questionable politicians, reveal the practices of unscrupulous businessmen, and rake up the muck at devious corporations. Why, then, do you support one of the most devious and muck-covered businesses in the world?
I am talking about the tobacco industry and the fact that you gobble up their death-money like a North Carolina senator running for re-election.
The March 11 issue has one full page and one centerfold advertising that to be cool you need to smoke Kools and that to be a big macho man you need to smoke Marlboros. I find your acceptance of these advertising dollars to be indicative of a crass hypocrisy behind SF Weekly's crusading facade.
I strongly urge you to stop advertising for these merchants of death who prey on our children. Put your money where your mouth is and, instead of pointing fingers, make a difference yourselves!