A1: "Young's Farm"

Lefty prods me to post on this, and I admit something about it bothered me on first read, but I put it to the side. Developer Monogram is sweet-talking the D-H P&Z Commission about water, vegetation and open space, which rightly ought to be a strong concern there along what's left of the Agua Fria. I'm reading that Monogram can put in wastewater treatment, but they'd rather use septic systems, they're not sure about the trees, etc. It may be that the Commission will make them toe the line, but it's hard to see in Doug Cook's story. Maybe they didn't say. I just get the nagging feeling that something's being soft-pedaled here by somebody.

Editorial: "Public transit issue just getting rolling"

The editor is right to focus on the weak public input to the CYMPO survey. People should get up on their hind legs once in a while and weigh in, that's how our system is supposed to work. It's a little unfair to imply that the Interfaith Council is bombing the system, though. As far as I know this is a pretty sober group committed to smart governance, and reminding your members to get involved doesn't make you a one-issue, me-first pressure group. Calling 11 buses a "blue-chip proposal" is also a little over the top, don't you think? But the real disservice here -- and I don't think the editor is being evil about this, this logic flows from weak premises that an awful lot of people in this country have bought into -- is wagging the finger over cost, implying that public transit can't work because it can't pay for itself.

I've lived in places where public transit works, and it's not a simple matter. To get people to depend on it daily, you have to be where they are and where they want to go in large numbers at all the right times. This requires a commitment to extensive infrastructure probably well beyond what Arizona or Prescott is willing to do, at least until the cost of fuel really starts to ramp up (you ain't seen nothing yet). Prescott's advantage is that it's still relatively compact, so starting now makes a useful system far more feasible than putting it off.

My complaint, though, is the it-must-pay-for-itself meme, limited in scope to money from riders supporting the entire operation. This is bogus economics designed to kill the issue. The benefits to the community as a whole would extend far beyond getting a ride to the mall -- reduced congestion and parking needs, better air and life quality, more sales because businesses are more convenient to more people, safer kids, on and on. Quantifying all that is hard, but at least consider it in the balance. That's why we spend public money -- to benefit the entire community, including people who don't take advantage of the system -- and it'd be worth it.

Reagan: "Socialized medicine hazardous to health"

Does anybody actually read this boob? In this hit-piece, originally titled "National Health Care Can Kill," he scatters clumsy lies and cracked logic to try and scare us all into continuing to bankrupt ourselves and our country with our monumentally stupid health-care system. In parts left out of the substantially longer original, Reagan tells us that everything's better for Americans, who get the jazziest new drugs sooner because national systems take time to do their own testing and negotiate prices. We don't do that negotiating -- sorry, we are prevented by law from doing it -- leaving most of us unable to afford them anyway. I didn't check the stats on personal bankruptcies related to health costs, care to take a guess?

Need facts? Check out Fig 1.2 on this page from UK Cancer Research, one example of many sources I found with a quickie Google search. The highest incidence of breast cancer per capita? US. The lowest in the developed world? Japan, which also has the lowest mortality rate and the most extensive government health-care system.

The press is supposed to help make us smarter voters, that's its constitutional function. Crap like this gives the whole profession a black eye. You can print lies and distortion and call it opinion, but if you don't call them out, as a journalist you're either falling down on the job or actively participating in the fraud.

Talk of the Town: "4-H Expo livens things up with livestock"

The Courier maintains this week's theme of lifting stories from high-school papers. Nothing against Eric Fleck, who I'm sure is having a marvelous time raising his hog, but what the heck is this doing on the op-ed page? I'm just agog.

A3: "Democratic Women of Prescott Ares offer scholarship"

The Courier gets caught with its Briefs down again. Okay, there's not a whole lot of interest in this regular compilation of press releases, but still, it's just good form to at least scan the headlines for typos before you go to print. (Hint: This is a twofer.)

Letters: The peace rally

The Courier is still taking flak about its backhand disparagement of the peace demo last month on the anniversary of Bush's adventure in Iraq. That oughta teach you to talk down personal choices in footwear.

(The first reader who can post me a link to the original story gets a cookie, I'm getting no joy from the Courier archive this morning.)

Update, 10:26am: From leftturnclyde: 'Give peace a chance', March 25.

Letters: Photo radar again

Ms Randall writes the third LTE I've seen on the Glassford Hill Gauntlet. Where's that story, Courier? Your readers are getting way out ahead of you.

A1: "Manhunt in Prescott Valley"

Ken Hedler offers us a highly detailed recitation from the police blotter, but I dunno, maybe I need coffee, this story seems all over the map -- which may be appropriate to what reads like a modern Keystone Kops episode. So DPS chased two guys, arrested one of them, let the other one go, then PV chased the other one, lost him, found him, lost him again, used their helicopter, used the police dog that bit a neighbor last year, carried a rifle, heard he was somewhere he wasn't, on and on, aaaarghh what a mess, I give up! Could someone please wake up the editors?

Sports and other time-wasters

Some readers may wonder whether I have anything to say about the sports pages. In a word, no. I don't read 'em, and I'm not interested in what happens there. If you're a regular fan and would like to report on them, I'll sign you up as an author. To me sports coverage is a complete waste of space.

Same goes for commercial press releases (can you spot them in the current issue?), thank-yous for sponsoring our (your nonprofit event here), ribbon-cuttings, advice columns, religion and other advertising disguised as features.

I wouldn't mind the comics if any of them were amusing in the slightest. (sigh)

Robinson: "The Decider has lost his convictions"

The headline should be "The Multipolar Presidency," which better fits the writer's point, but today's contribution from the WaPo comes through on time and almost completely unmangled. Thanks, Tim!

Letters: Yet more on guns

George Seaman offers a measured, reasonable and totally academic argument asserting support in the ninth and tenth amendments for drooling nutbars to carry M16s on my street.

Can we please get past this stuff? With the technology available over the counter at our local gun shops, ten zealots could have ruled the world of the 18th century. The founders could not have imagined what was coming -- if they had, those amendments would have been written rather differently, I'm certain.

What we need is a measured, reasonable discussion of how we deal with this technology in our midst, in terms of both physical possession and the process of socially integrating individuals to minimize the number of wackos out there.

Open thread: Climate crisis

It's looking like a big day for climate news. This is a massive disaster coming like a freight train down our throats, if you can stand a mixed metaphor.

Editorial: "ICE needs to prioritize deportation of criminals"

So, let me get this straight: the Courier editor thinks it icky that when Prescott PD pick up an illegal on suspicion of doing a crime, the Feds don't just sweep in, take the alleged miscreant off our hands, transport him back to wherever he came from and save us all the trouble and expense of a trial. It's funny how our commitment to the rule of law can so easily slip into demand for the rule of law-enforcement officers.

Last night I happened to see a clip of Bill O'Reilly making much the same argument. It's a hoot.

I'll give you that the prosecution of illegals presents us a very complex problem. Might it not be better, for example, if we could rely on our southern neighbors to prosecute and incarcerate their own for crimes done here? In any case let's not go off the deep end -- per capita, illegals do a tenth the crimes that legal residents do. Since we're convicting him in the Courier anyway, wouldn't it be more illuminating to focus on who this guy is rather than his visa status?

A1: "Snow study"

Two stories today forecast permanent drought conditions for the entire Southwest, and the Courier editorial page continues to throw chaff about climate change. Smell the coffee?

When the Verde and the Colorado dry up, we're gonna need a pipeline to the Gulf of California. How about some investigation of longer-range thinking for our area?

A8: "Wanted: a big who likes to be outside"

Does anyone else find it a little embarrassing that we're advertising children for 'adoption' (sub req) in much the same way that the Humane Society advertises homeless dogs? It makes one wonder whether the little sloe-eyed waif is in line for the gas chamber at the end of the week.

It took me a minute to figure out that the headline isn't missing a word. I think I'd have done something more to make it flow, either capitalize 'big' or set it in quotes.

A7: "Climate change threatens to create dust bowl in Southwest"

I've got an idea: let's put this (sub req) opposite one of Tim's op-eds on the subject and poll the readers on which is more persuasive.

We might also reference it in stories about pumping water up to Prescott. Complete context changes everything.

A7: "Grading work causes gas, water line ruptures"

Two grading accidents in one day (sub req) might lead me to ask someone whether PV has a glitch somewhere in its blue-staking process.

Memo to the Courier's crack fact-checking crew: I had a nice chat with CYFD's Charlie Cook just the other day. His title is Assistant Chief now.

A3: "New neighborhood program seeks to increase public participation"

I think I read this story (sub required) four times, trying to find some description of what PV's new Neighborhood Division is actually supposed to be doing. It wouldn't surprise me that it didn't come out in the public meeting -- there's a tendency to skip over things that everyone in the room thinks everyone else in the room already knows, and of course the public doesn't count -- but Ken Hedler could have stopped someone afterward and, you know, asked a question. Maybe the editors cut that bit, for space.

Talk of the Town: "Now is the time to prepare for droughts"

I'm trying to reach Mr Garfin to check how well the Courier version of his piece reflects his views, but no joy so far. Meanwhile, what leaps out at me is yet another attempt to paint the climate crisis as a political position rather than a real problem, matching VP Al Gore up with twisted entertainer Rush Limbaugh. Maybe that's in there just to set the expected Courier reader at ease about listening to a climatologist. From the looks of the Institute for the Study of Planet Earth Website, I don't expect Mr Garfin is anything but a straightforward scientist, but we'll see.

What's more likely to puzzle the casual reader is the headline. Haven't we been in drought for ten years already? I guess it's time to get on the stick! Check what the Verde Independent editors think about that, plus what Cottonwood and Clarkdale are doing while Prescott sits on its thumbs.

Anyhow I'll let you know if he comes back to me with a reply.

B1: "Touting conservation"

Here's what they could have put on A1 in place of that stupid fluff. (sub required) Another kudo for Cindy Barks. This looks a lot like a City press release, but the info here is good and useful.

I've got one brickbat: maybe it's a pet peeve, but editors, look up "tout" sometime -- there's an unsavory nuance to that word that I don't think you really intend.