Skip to main content
You have permission to edit this article.
Letters to the editor for August 31, 2020

Letters to the editor for August 31, 2020


Trump’s policies are very dangerous for elderly

Trumpism wants to kill me.

I had cancer over a year ago, so I have low immunity. I should not be voting in person.

However, the Trumpian obstacles presented with absentee voting (his universal mail voting) makes voting very difficult.

I have groceries delivered to my home, and things I need are delivered by the mail or FEDEX or UPS.

I am a veteran from the Vietnam War era.

Unlike Mr. Trump, I served in the military with my disability (an amblyopia blind eye — unlike his disappearing bone spur). I receive Medicare and Social Security and Trumpism wants to eliminate its source of revenue (payroll deductions).

I receive medicine by mail, but the new obstacles to mail delivery may be harmful to me.

I can’t afford to be exposed to COVID-19. Trumpism has created a failure there too.

I was an animal virologist for 15 years in my long service to our state.

Surveillance testing is not a new concept — creating a plentiful and fast testing response is not new either.

With Trumpism, rampant ignorance, lying, the lack of ability to compromise, self-interest greed and cheating through corruption is new to the Republican Party ethics.

Why does Trumpism want to harm me or kill me?

You see, I am an old white man, and once I sometimes voted Republican for conservative reasons.

I mean no harm, and I wish no harm.

Why does Trumpism wish to destroy my dreams of living and create conditions for racial unrest, inequality and desperation?

Why is wearing masks (to protect people like me) political now?

Why kill me? This is personal to me.



Letter writer wrong about ‘Lynchburg’ name

Occasionally, the letters to the editor are as laughable as the comic strip.

I found such to be the case recently with that of a gentleman who left his heart in San Francisco approximately 20 years ago to move to Lynchburg, and he perpetually is embarrassed by this city’s name.

San Francisco for the most part is a lovely city. However, it shares with the rest of California the largest population of homeless who daily leave more than their hearts there.

My California friends lament the downtown area is where most of the homeless are settled, in tents, cardboard boxes, and other makeshift shelters reminiscent of third world poverty.

The sanitation and open drug use are described as deplorable both on the streets and in deserted former commercial, now abandoned, buildings such as Schwab, Starbucks and banks.

One of San Francisco’s better known residents was Ross Ulbricht, the now incarcerated “American King Pin,” who operated “The Silk Road” in San Francisco, a multi-billion dollar online illegal drug, counterfeit money/passports and software hacking enterprise.

Ulbricht eventually was arrested in October 2013 while operating online at the Glen Park branch of the San Francisco Library, and he currently is serving a life sentence.

Seriously, the editorial opinion writer is embarrassed by the name of a small city in the Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia?

Please, leave the sanctimonious hypocrisy to the real professionals — the kakistocracy/kleptocracy currently running this country into ruin.



Limit methane emissions key for livable planet

Aug. 14 on page A8 of the News & Advance, there was an important article on rollback of methane emissions restrictions.

With the media full of news about the COVID-19 virus spread and deaths, postal service cutbacks, business closings, major unemployment concerns and congressional inaction, it is probable most people did not notice these harmful rule changes.

Methane has as much as 72 times more global warming potential than CO2.

For over 100 years, conservative economists have warned about distortions in the free market from the lack of a cost being placed on pollution.

Allowing methane emissions is the latest attack on the energy free market.

The cost of this is borne by the public and gives the polluting industries a significant edge in the market place when competing with industries without these harmful emissions.

This has three major effects:

1. It distorts the market to the disadvantage of nuclear energy and sources of clean renewable energy.

2. It makes it significantly more difficult to keep the climate crisis under control.

3. It has direct and immediate deleterious effects on already strained public health.

The EPA action effectively frees oil and gas companies from the need to detect and repair methane leaks.

So, as scientific data show methane levels are soaring and need to be reduced, the EPA is doing just the opposite and again moving us closer to the dangerous 2 degree Celsius limit of global warming.

We need restrictions on methane emissions that occur while drilling for oil or gas and a user fee to be placed on all greenhouse gas emissions at the point where they first enter the market.

Then increase the fee annually, as conservative economists recommend, and return the revenues to households.

This reduces emissions, increases jobs and GDP and is a key first step to maintaining a livable planet.


Group Leader, Citizens Climate Lobby, Lynchburg

Catch the latest in Opinion

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.


Breaking News

News Alert