"The Beautiful Game," Adam Cayton-Holland, July 5
What happened? Did Adam Cayton-Holland run out of hipsters to make fun of?
Whatever — I'm glad he turned his attention to the African Community Center soccer team. Theirs is a really remarkable story, and very inspirational. Denver's hipsters could learn something from these brave refugees who wound up in Denver through no choice of their own. It appears that Adam did.
"The Beautiful Game" was very appropriate reading on the Fourth of July. It showed America at its best, welcoming refugees from other lands — and then finding a way to make them all feel at home. Beautiful, indeed.
Great story. Only one thing: I am skeptical that the girls playing soccer were wearing burkas. Perhaps Adam Cayton-Holland is thinking hijab, which is the traditional head scarf?
"A Tear in My Beer," Patricia Calhoun, June 28
Regarding all the letters published in last week's issue about ladies' night:
Geoff Jordan: Calhoun's mocking tone is indeed justified; your letter proves the point. If in fact bars hosted a "men's night, white people's night, blond people's night," etc., no ladies would show up. You ignorant fucking moron. The whole point of ladies' night is for guys to get laid. How is that discriminatory?
To Steve Cruz: I'm anti-feminist. Not because of divorce court, but because of child-support court. The State of Oklahoma says I owe this much, and the Sate of Colorado says I owe that much. And each agency comes up with a different set of figures every ninety days. And this all happens while I'm current on my child-support payments. But that's a different rant. Who the hell cares what women think about his rant and lawsuits? The key here is that women control 75 percent of all the money and 100 percent of all the pussy. End of argument, dipshit.
To Martin Riddle: Stay in San Diego. We don't fucking want you here. You and your kind are what is so wrong with Colorado. Keep your opinions to yourself. Having worked "downtown," I like having a Curves on every corner. I could care less if any gym has a "Men Only" session. The So Cal-led double standard is a figment of your imagination.
And finally, to Name Withheld Upon Request: Yes, ladies' night is a way for you to make up for the 23 to 54 percent difference. You don't pay for drinks, we men do. And we pay for all your cover charges. And your drinks. And your breakfast. And your drinks. And the condoms. And your drinks. And the room. And your drinks. Get it?
Steve Horner is a moron. He typifies many of the ills that afflict this great nation: "Something is wrong, and someone must pay." You dumbasses who get your opinions from Fox News deserve what you get. But I will be damned if I'll let you inflict your lack of intelligence on me.
James G. Ayling
I've restrained myself for too long. Steve Horner's fifteen court filings of fame must be just about up. Your readers should know something else about him other than his litigious nature. In late March he phoned me to comment on a letter regarding gay rights that I wrote which was published in the Denver Post. After cheerfully inquiring as to "are you the ...who wrote, etc." and getting an affirmative response, he said: "I just had to call to tell you that it's a shame you live such a deviant and depraved lifestyle." In a subsequent phone message, he referred to me as a "girly man" who should get back to the kitchen where girls belong. It's time to do the worst that can be done to him: Ignore him.
Editor's note: Would that we could. Westword will be seeing Steve Horner in court next month because of one of those filings. In the meantime, letter-writers be warned: Stephen Crout is not the only one to report a dialed-in diatribe. The letter writer who requested that her name be withheld last week did so because she, too, was the recipient of a call from Horner after her letter on a subject unrelated to ladies' night (not that there is such a thing, as far as Horner is concerned) was published in Westword.
Letters to the Editor, July 5
I was shocked to see that anyone would suggest dropping This Modern World. I laugh out loud nearly every time. It's the first thing I read. And it's always dead on. Keep This Modern World!
"SWEET 16th," Adam Cayton-Holland, June 14
As much as I hate to admit it, I am completely on the side of the loathsome, fancy-boy city officials who are trying to make the 16th Street Mall respectable. While I can somewhat sympathize with Adam Cayton-Holland's longing for non-trendy accoutrements, my utter disgust and frustration with walking down the mall every lunch hour outweighs my underdog leanings.
It may be cool to some that the mall is "kind of shitty" and hosts some of the crappiest stores in downtown Denver, but when you have to make your way every lunch hour down a street that's teeming with panhandlers, junkies, gutter punks and degenerates, the coolness wears off real fast. If Adam is worried about the mall inviting big, ultra-trendy businesses (which it already does and undoubtedly will continue to do), maybe he should consider the fact that non-shlocky small businesses aren't going to set foot onto the mall until it gets cleaned up a little. Actually, a lot.
And Adam, as far as culture on the mall goes, who are you kidding? Obviously yourself, if you think it really exists. Just as you stated, "It's a simple pedestrian mall." It's not Haight-Ashbury, it's not Sunset Boulevard. It's just a freaking street in Denver that people should feel safe walking down without being panhandled, pestered or yelled at every block. Is it too much to ask that just once, I can walk to Mad Greens on my lunch hour and not get hassled? Gentrify away, Denver officials.
Why is panhandling on the 16th Street Mall down 92 percent? Because it's illegal! The Business Improvement District and the Denver Police Department state that panhandling on the mall is illegal. In fact, BID personnel will alert the DPD to charge you with loitering, trespassing, aggressive panhandling or something. On the other side, panhandlers asking for change for food are deceiving people. There are sufficient free meals and food banks that no one in Denver should go hungry.
Does this make me an Impressionist? I'm going to do a quick impression of every Westword article I've read for the past month. Are you ready? Here goes:
"Dingleberry Dan does (or does not) do this thing that is only tangentially related to what we're talking about. We're going to spend a paragraph writing about this because hopefully it will grab your attention and get you interested enough to keep reading the article and not notice that you're now leaking blood from your poo-hole. Dan is better known around Denver for doing this thing that only scenesters will find interesting, because they get bored of everything more than five minutes old. They will be entertained because they're either too young to have heard about this topic ten billion times already or because they're entering the early stages of dementia.
"'I'm basically a self-absorbed tool,' says Dan as he sips a Vitamin Water. 'I'm really influenced by people with more talent, but I'm glad everyone is paying attention to me instead. It's nice that Denver's insulated from the rest of the world. Otherwise, people might actually focus on something worthwhile.' Sadly, Dingleberry Dan's story happens to too many (or not enough) people, and you should feel kinda bad about that. But don't feel too bad, because those jeans look really good on you, and the girls at Buffalo Exchange give dirty looks like that to everyone." Aaaaaaaaand scene.
Okay, Westword, I'm pretty sure that there are interesting things that happen in Denver; I'm almost positive that there are important social, political and cultural issues that need to be addressed; and I know for a fact that those pants are entirely too tight for anybody with a scrotum. So I ask you: Why do I doubt myself when I read your paper?
Ask a Mexican, Gustavo Arellano
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
I wonder if anyone has drawn the parallel between black slaves and the Mexican immigrants here now. I hear so much about how primarily the white people want the Mexicans out of here, yet they perform an essential role in keeping the whites pacified. Think about what would happen if the Mexicans — legal or otherwise — left. Who would serve you your cheeseburger or Egg McMuffin? Who would water your yard or dig your ditches? Now that the Mexicans are in abundance, you want them out of here. Didn't the whites want to do that with the slaves after the slaves practically built this country for them? I find it amusing that the events are similar.
After much soul-searching, the answer to the immigration problem came to me: The United States of America must liberate Mexico. Any other country that had 30 million citizens flee to another country would draw the attention of the United Nations and the U.S. The Mexican government has even encouraged its citizens to leave. We could set up a new Mexican government and military bases to keep things in order so it's safe for Mexican citizens to go home.
If this doesn't fix it, we might have to put our own best people in their government so they can show how it's done. Or possibly make Mexico the 51st state (not a territory) of the U.S. They would abide by our laws. We can call it Mexicana. This would allow those who are sympathetic to help people of their own country. Mexicana has lots of natural resources that industry can use. The weather is nice. The people love and trust the United States, or they wouldn't come here.
Just allowing Mexican citizens into our country by the millions does nothing to help their country, their families or ours.