In response to "EPA limits toxic plant emissions" (Dec. 22):
Thanks to EPA, it just got easier to dump that 'bad boyfriend' coal
The writer is Campaign Coordinator for Appalachian Voices.
The coal industry reminds me of a controlling, abusive boyfriend when it complains about the EPA's new guidelines to reduce coal plants' mercury emissions. He tries to convince you that you can't live without him. But the toxins he emits give you bronchitis, give your children asthma and poison the fish you eat.
Fortunately, the EPA just performed an intervention. Big Coal has known for two decades that he'd have to make changes to stick around. If he can't treat you better, there are better options out there.
Thanks to the EPA, it will be a little easier to break the cycle of abuse. Now you can breathe a little easier - and maybe one day, eat the fish again.
In Brazil, business looks bright; in U.S., government has stranglehold
If you want to understand the negative impact of the current administration on economic growth consider the Duke-Progress merger as an example.
The government is opposing the merger because it wants to tell Duke where it can sell power. So North Carolina, which paid to build its plants, could be forced to sell its power to other states, such as California, with political clout but who won't build plants.
As an investor why would I want to invest in a government-run Duke when I can buy stock in Brazil where the government is freeing businesses and the future is brighter?
Newt reminds me of Nixon, and
we all know how that worked out
Newt Gingrich has declared that as president he would ignore judicial rulings, impeach judges, subpoena Supreme Court justices and abolish the courts if he didn't agree with their rulings. The last president with this attitude was Richard Nixon. As a professor of history, Newt should be aware Nixon's hostility towards the Constitution and the court system, and his belief that the president was above the law, didn't work out so well - for Nixon or the country.
All this talk about clapping in church raises a good question
If it's OK to clap for a good sermon is it OK to boo for a bad one?
Could use fewer Homer Simpson moments, more contemplation
It's sad that First Presbyterian Church gives in to the culture. Of 168 hours in the week, you'd think people would like an hour's respite from the clamor and silliness of the society surrounding them.
Ovations and Homer Simpson-like "whoo-hoos" from the crowd simply identify them as wedded to TV and its American Idol tone.
A sacred anthem is not meant as a referendum on how listeners feel about it or how entertained they are. Sitting quietly can allow one to think on what is actually required: Something to the effect of "doing justice, loving righteousness and walking humbly."
There would be an hour well spent.