together by the staff of the Santa Fe Reporter,
posted "There's Something About Bill::Political
Animals", subtitled "If dogs could vote, they
might pick Bill", by Dave
Mr. Mass must be kidding. Only city dogs would
vote for Bill! New Mexico's rural dogs know that
because Bill doesn't give a hoot about rural
dogs, or rural dogs' owners, their lives are in
constant jeopardy. Bill doesn't care that rural
dogs (and cats, horses and other animals owned by
rural New Mexicans) are being killed by Mexican
wolves - he says "wolves play a critical role in
maintaining balanced ecosystems" but like most
big-dollar, high-litigation environmental groups,
Bill apparently doesn't include human or domestic
animal species in our ecosystems.
Where exactly did humans evolve, then - another
planet? Are we not part of the
ecosystem? Haven't all species of wild animals
on this planet shared the environment with
domestic animals for the last ten thousand years
and with humans for longer than the Mexican wolf "species" has existed?
The instances of Richardson's "animals rights"
stance in Mr. Mass' article illustrate one
important point: Bill is appealing to potential
non-New Mexico voters while ignoring rural New
Mexicans (just like he has as governor).
New Mexico is not a large population state. It
is not possible for a governor here to miss the
pleas for relief from oppressive environmental
decisions which have arisen from litigation and
not-so-subtle pressures by highly-funded
non-local environmental groups and which inflict
a disproportionate burden on rural residents.
Richardson emphasizes diplomacy in many of his
public appearances. His diplomacy with respect
to rural environmentalism seems to be of the sort
that cats use: Bury the shit by scratching a
little fresh smelling soil over it. Maybe a
plant will grow there someday… or more likely,
maybe the shit will poison the soil and kill the
plants nearby. A vote for Richardson is a vote
for green at the expense of an important segment of our culture.