Letters to the Editor
ann1960
Published Letters: 47 Editor's Choice: 3
-
it's not sustainable
[Read the article: Memo to Bill O'Reilly: More immigrants equals less crime]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's not sustainable for the US to keep absorbing millions of immigrants every year--whether legal or illegal. Our society is ultra-high in cosumption (it would take 6 earths and its resources with today's technology to give everybody on the planet the lifestyle we have here.) It's not about race or color, it's about the pressure put on our natural resources that scares me. While I do my best to limit my carbon footprint, I'm in the extreme minority. Ever since I was in high school in the 1970's, I was alarmed at the ever growing population of the planet, and that was when we had 4 billion people. We add 10,000 humans an hour (after births and deaths), and this poor planet can't continue to absorb that type of exponential growth rate. So, to me, the US can't be the country that continues to absorb the population explosions of other countries-- they'll have to comes to terms with it without sending their overflow here. I would say the same thing if it were millions of Swedes or Norwegians that come here-- I could care less what color or race you are. Paving over ever more farmland and forests is not my idea of progress to accomodate ever more humans. There are enough of us, for God's sake! Let's leave some green, OK??
When the Population Bomb was written decades ago, it warned of dire consequences that have yet to be seen; after all, when it was written, the oceans weren't being strip mined, and the concept of global warming had yet to understood. We weren't pumping millions of tons of herbicides and pesticides to extract ever more food from our decreasing acres of farmland. We WILL hit a wall, the question is WHEN. Did you know that the late 70's was when there was more food produced per capita than today? While the earth is producing more food, there is actually less of it to go around because production is not keeping pace with the human growth rate. So, more people are going to bed hungry today than twenty years ago. Some progress.
This all ties in to illegal and legal immigration. At what number to we slow down? We've got 300 million now in the US, how about 400 million? 500 million? 1 Billion?? 2 billion?When? These are things we need to think about. So please, leave the race card out of this one.
-
so glad she has the authority to speak on climate issues
[Read the article: Real inconvenient truths]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"In the beginning was nature." And nature will survive us all. Man is too weak to permanently affect nature, which includes infinitely more than this tiny globe."
I heard Rush Limbaugh say the same thing! No kidding-- I guess they had the same science teacher.
If Paglia is suggesting that the rock we call Earth will continue to revolve around the sun, then I guess she has a point. But if she's talking about all the diversity of life, then she's 'way off her rocker.
How can anyone say that mankind cannot have a permanent effect on nature? Hellooooooo-- extinction is forever, sweetie i.e. permanent. Seen any Dodos walking around lately? Seen any passenger pigeons? No, I didn't think so. Both extinctions are the direct result of mass slaughter by humans. And these two examples are but a tiny fraction of human impacts on nature.
Ok, let's look at global warming (climate change) this way: How can the atmosphere (and consequently the climate) NOT be affected by the 70 MILLION TONS of C02 being spewed into the atmosphere daily by us? It has been adding up over the last 100 years, and now with China and India coming on line with respect to CO2 emmission, well, we ain't seen nuthin' yet.
So, dear Camille, you and Rush can continue to have lunch with other nay-sayers, and hope that the rest of us will come up with solutions that will save your sorry arses.
-
of course
[Read the article: The front-runners get along, almost]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Of course they got along. In all likelihood, the next president's running mate is part of the group.
-
carol lam
[Read the article: A bigger purge?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Carol Lam (US prosecuting attorney out of San Diego, CA) was fired for doing her job too well. She, a Republican, prosecuted Cunningham, then turned her sights on the number three man at the CIA: Dusty Foggo. She did the unthinkable, that is, she went after fellow Republicans who were criminals. Yes, she was fired for doing her job....
-
I support
[Read the article: An Islamic head scarf goes to Parliament?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I support the candidate who allows political cartoonists to express their opinion in their work. Period.