The implications of climate change are facts
This letter is in response to the May 16 letter to the editor by Bennie G. Williams (“Save global warming stories for next April Fool’s Day”).
I have enjoyed reading many articles by your reporter Mary Landers, specifically “Study: Rising seas may cause population to shift inland,” however, you can imagine my disappointment when I see that not everyone understands the importance of environmental issues in our community.
Climate change and its implications are not “preposterous ideas” — they are facts. If anyone needs to hear about these facts, it is the people of the Coastal Empire. The residents of Tybee Island are already being directly impacted by the effects of climate change; according to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the beach community has experienced 10 inches of sea-level rise since 1935. The seas aren’t “suddenly going to rise” — they already have been at an alarming rate. Tybee Island is frequently cut off from the mainland due to tidal flooding. In 2015, these floods occurred on average every two weeks (23 times in one year). Residents might not be fleeing for their lives, but they are being stranded on their island homes.
I believe that purpose of Landers’ article was to provide the residents and business owners of the Coastal Empire with pertinent, factual information regarding their community. It is unfortunate that many still believe that anything published with the words “climate change” or “rising sea levels” is still perceived as “pushing a liberal agenda” rather than simply informing the general public about the certain dangers they will face in the future.
More than a year ago, Tybee Island became the first Georgia community to officially acknowledge the climate change threat. I believe this is a huge step in the right direction; by accepting peer-reviewed reports and implementing sustainable beach management practices, we can prevent (or at least limit) the destruction of our coastal community. Some will choose to perpetuate a product of doubt around climate change, but others can choose to provide information to citizens, protect residential, business, and ecological communities, and limit further damage of our coastal environments.
Ringer’s columns loaded with laugh lines
I have ignored this newspaper for many reasons, not the least of which was your Trump for President endorsement last November. The Opinion section, in particular, has always been irksome because it’s never been a forum for opposing viewpoints.
You’ve undoubtedly done a demographic study to determine that your readership is older, conservative, and suburban/rural; therefore, it’s a risk to print a viewpoint shared by more urban, educated, liberal readers. Robert Ringer’s May 11 column “Time for radical left to be put under oath,” would have elicited a more angry response from me just a few months ago, but now it’s just high comedy.
I guess you’ve exhausted the usual slate of conservatives to feature in this section because even they’re bewildered by the daily onslaught of Trump headlines. Ringer thinks “…it’s time for the radical left to be put under oath …” Hilarious! The “Dirty Dems” and “Horrible Hillary.” I’m still laughing! We get it. Yes, it’s a rallying cry for the Trump supporters suckered by this boorish, incompetent huckster who ran on a promise to drain “the swamp.” Instead, he’s created a toxic cesspool to flounder around in with the rest of his administration. Many appointees are smart, but they’re not wise, and others are unqualified for the positions to which they have been appointed. The scandal, conflicts of interest, and lawsuits courted by this administration will stymie its ability to get anything done, and that’s the good news. The irony of the latest security breach resonates so nicely with anyone who remembers Trump assailing Hillary Clinton for a private e-mail server. Ringer’s piece can be seen as an entertaining look at the alternate reality promoted by Trump defenders. The ridiculous notions in Ringer’s tirade are laugh lines. Who needs Colbert or SNL when we have the Opinion section of this newspaper?
Pitts wrong about white support for Trump
Your columnist Leonard Pitts, “Deep animus of the white working class,” May 15, refuses to accept the real reasons Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump. Pitts implies that Americans who voted for President Trump are racists, suggesting Trump channeled their racial and cultural animus.
President Obama proclaimed that he would fundamentally transform the United States and he certainly did that. Clinton, if elected, would have rubber-stamped all of President Obama’s far left agenda and continue to push our government in that direction. For that reason, in spite of Trump winning the GOP Primary, “Anybody but Clinton,” was a huge motivator for people to vote for Trump.
I can’t speak for everyone as to why they voted for Trump, but I do know some of my relatives that have never voted before, registered and voted for Trump.
Too many Americans are fed up with politicians and Trump was their best way to tell Washington, Hollywood, and especially the media to kiss their behinds.
Democrats blundering toward irrelevancy
Since the election, I’ve failed to identify any positive proposal that the Democrats have brought to the table, since in fact they have no interest in sitting at the table. Doubling down on their shift to the left, and still licking their post-election wounds, they endorse their supporters who are taking to the streets and wreaking havoc. Republicans were as devastated by Romney’s loss, but they moved on. The left’s primary goal, aided and abetted by “fake news” is a 24/7 assault on President Trump, be it FBI Director Comey’s termination, for which the Democrats were screaming before the election, or the unconstitutionality of the president’s $1 salary.
Using odious terms like Fascist, Nazi, KKK and Hitler demonstrates the depths of depravity to which they’ve degenerated. The latest catch word “resistors,” born of Hollywood and street rioters, denotes all anti-Trump, all the time. If anyone doubts in which direction the party is careening, Tom Perez as new chairman of the Democratic National Committee lays that question to rest. Someone who says, “white people are not entitled to protection under the voting rights act because it would create dramatic complications” is their choice for party leader. Blinded by ideology, they are still in denial and lash out like children. While voters grow weary of their sophomoric contrivances, the party blunders toward irrelevancy.