Letters for February 20, 2020

Offensive to offenders?

A local media “source” posted an article about all the sex offenders sleeping in our public parks. In addition to the actual predatory perverts, a sex offender includes pubescent teens busted for whacking-off in a backyard, and possibly even someone arrested for pissing on their compost pile, a black mark that follows one forever. No more composting for me, just sayin'.

This article is similar to one suggesting that all homeless are drug addicts who purposely leave their needles around so everybody can get infected.

And the one where people fishing in the river need to open-carry their big guns to protect themselves from the riff-raff.

Next maybe a piece where all the homeless are Democrats? Oops, did I let the cat out of the bag?

Oh well, this is Reno …

Craig Bergland


Stargazing screed

Rob Brezny is full of shit! His Love forcasts are the worst prognostication, I was forced to Read! Nothing but 12 paragraphs of bullshit. I could get nothing out of it. The least Rob Brezny could do is tell me what practical steps I should take, for the week, and how to stay out of trouble. I'm telling you, we need some better Astrology here!

Henry Slovinski


Early caucus concerns

Early voting left us very worried. I completed the check-in and voting process and all went smoothly. However, my boyfriend was behind me and reports being treated like a criminal because he was not registered. It took four confused volunteers to get him registered—and he has no faith that it was processed correctly. He also reported that after I left, the volunteers realized that they had not been asking us to fill out a paper copy of the Google form—and that the two people in front of him, therefore, had their votes voided. Another was voided because they did not complete three choices. They left before the volunteer checking the forms was alerted to this requirement. I am concerned that my vote was voided—and, if so, how will I know. And will I be able to participate in the caucus?

Sarah Skidmore


Not trashing Trump

An important topic of the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, was the evolution of the Trillion Trees initiative as a tool for fighting climate change. Perhaps even more important and newsworthy was President Trump's recent endorsement of the initiative and his recently evolved position on climate change. This support of the trees effort and his offer to the Danish government to buy Greenland signal his acceptance of the reality of climate change. Admittedly, one might be incredulous at his recent claim to be an environmentalist, but it only takes two things to be an environmentalist; now, he needs to walk the walk.

It is easy to be skeptical of the President's conversion to environmentalism, but, after considering the arguments, there remains a core value: it is always a good thing to plant trees. So, he should have a chance to put some effort and achievement behind his promise. Those of us in the environmental movement should hope for success, no matter the source or political motivations. It is very doubtful, however, that planting a trillion trees will actually solve the problem of climate change, but it can certainly be helpful.

The attempt sounds staggering—1,000,000,000,000 trees in 20 years. The world was thrilled last summer when Ethiopians planted 350 million trees in 12 hours. Now the world's citizens need to do that about 3,000 more times. The number is almost beyond comprehension and rightfully so: the prospect of climate change is so daunting. Too often climate skeptics have presented poorly framed, inaccurate or irrelevant arguments to try to justify doing nothing as the world becomes warmer, seas rise, and extinction of species accelerates.

President Trump's conversion to the environmental movement should be welcomed in spite of his past record. In fact, it may be the biggest news story of recent months. Historically, he has greatly hampered the environmental progress by being the denier-in-chief as his fellow skeptics have obfuscated the clear need for progress. Now, perhaps, the debate in the United States will move from the denial arguments to trying to arrive at something closer to a consensus of what needs to be done. And, maybe action.

John Wankum