I have been consistently disappointed by the Wisconsin State Journals editorial board. It would be one thing to disagree with their perspective (which I often do), but I find I am often simply better informed than the editors - and all I have to do is read their own newspaper to attain that very minimal achievement. I am not pretending to be a genius, Im sure I have much to learn and understand of this world, but the WSJs positions on so many issues of the day are just, well, uninformed. Like they dont even read their own newspaper.
I added a comment online to the article, thanks for providing the link, and submitted the comment as a letter to the editor: TO the WSJ Editor: Your editorial on 8/26, Rally to reduce foreign oil was a disservice to the high intelligence level of your readers. You cheer for "alternatives" like tar sands, shale gas, fleet and power plant conversion to natural gas, nuclear, and frack sand related jobs. Your pep rally mascot did a little flip for Great Lakes wind, but your pom-pom squad you employ failed to mention efficiency, conservation, transit, rail, walking, bicycling, bio ethanol fuels, or solar! (Given your slant on the issues, I'm surprised coal didn't make your list of solutions!) You've grabbed onto the myth that tar sands can be part of the answer (no mention of the low energy return on energy invested and higher carbon emissions associated with tar sands). Instead of more climate-change, how about the editorial board endorse legislation to put a price on carbon (the Save our Climate Act, to be precise http://citizensclimatelobby.org/SOCA)? Time is running out on the climate and editorials like yours aren't helping. ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hans Noeldner Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 4:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Bikies] Letter to the editor challenge The Wisconsin State Journal just ran an editorial, Rally to reduce foreign oil. It includes plugs for Tar Sands, shale gas, fleet and power plant conversion to natural gas, frack sand related jobs, even wind. Nothing about rallying to conserve, curtail fossil fuel use, expand transit, or use more active transportation. No mention of the higher carbon emissions associated with Tar Sands: http://tinyurl.com/8nd244j OK lets see a few letters to the editor from bicycling advocates! In addition to praising bipedal self-locomotion please endorse legislation to put a price on carbon (the Save our Climate Act, to be precise) http://citizensclimatelobby.org/SOCA Id write something but it has been less than 60 days since they ran my LTE Teachable Moment: http://tinyurl.com/9q24zom Hans Noeldner Pedestrian/Bicycle/Transit/Sustainability Advocate Chair, Madison Peak Oil Group www.entropicjournal.blogspot.com Oregon, Wisconsin 608-444-6190 _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
