Void of a solution
I’m writing in response to the Oct. 27 Pilot quarter page color ad paid and authorized by the South Curry Health Care Alliance. The first sentence wrongfully claims that South Curry County was “pressured” three years ago to approve annexation into the CHD. It would have been helpful if the Alliance writer would have elaborated on this, but as usual, nothing but more unsubstantiated finger-pointing.
Nothing in the large ad suggest any positive solutions whatsoever for Curry’s health care, as the name of the group ironically indicates. The Alliance wants what we all we want, good local health care, that is well understood.
Sadly, the tactics we continually witness by the Alliance indicate nothing but criticism, half-truths and, most notably, are totally void of solution.
The many good community leaders being criticized by the Alliance have dedicated themselves, their lives, to the betterment of Curry County health care. They are not bent on complaining, isolating themselves, nor are they expecting others to bear the costs they refuse to accept as their own.
If the South Curry Health Care Alliance has something positive to share a lot of people would like to hear it. It’s truly a shame that in such a small county that unity doesn’t prevail. Pettiness and negativity are not the solution. Every name criticized in this big yellow ad should be warmly thanked and supported, rather than lambasted by a very narrow-minded, so called “Alliance.”
I really enjoyed the Faith Forum by Kayla Garcia. Her take on going blind was beautiful and I found inspiration in her writing.
My mother went blind in her final years and yet managed to find joy in simple things within her grasp. She enjoyed playing the piano and she loved the sound of the birds while she listened to books on tape. She smiled quite often.
I really don’t care much for the Everyday Believer, however, and I really don’t understand why it’s on the front page while the beautiful writing of Garcia is buried inside. I have read the Believer a few times, it’s just awfully old-fashioned and I don’t get the warm feeling with it that I got from Thoughts on Going Blind. Thank you for the Faith Forum.
Re: “Church asked for advice on homeless issue”— pardon me, but how ironic is that — a headline literally applies whether church is the subject or the object of the headline? In the article, on page 3, Father Bernie Lindley specifically asked the city for help with the homeless issue.
And on page one, Jake Pieper and the city council seemingly demanded that Lindley form a charity to deal with the homeless problem.
As per Brookings’ mayor, the city is only responsible for health and safety issues? If providing public restrooms, showers, and garbage receptacles aren’t covered in that description, I would like to have a word with Pieper, too.
Shelter is the issue. If our local economy and government cannot support establishing more subsidized (low income) housing, then will we witness and be forced to support the growth of shanty towns? Shanty towns are the accepted norm in South America, Africa and Asia, and they are an economic indicator of dysfunction, illness and poverty.
What about here?
I would like to see the Pilot run some stories on what works in other towns, other cities, and in countries that support housing for all needy people.
NBC evening news on Nov. 29th at 6 p.m. will offer “HOPE for Homeless,” stories of solutions, opportunities, and perseverance. I know some U.S. cities are working on the issue.
Councilor (Ron) Hedenskog said, “The homeless issue has to be addressed by a faith-based group.”
I cannot think of any local government that has successfully put the whole burden of hygiene and shelter on a purely faith-based charity.
This is what the city council should have been discussing.
As you’ve heard: Denial ain’t a river in Egypt. Denial flows from Washington D.C. to the western states.
Data indicate that the area burned by fire has been increasing over the last few decades. But data also tell us that going back a century and beyond, the area of western forests burned was much greater than today.
So, what’s been happening? Since the wildfire trend started in the 1970s or 1980s before logging was substantially reduced, that cannot be the problem.
However, what happened in the mid-early years of last century was an extensive campaign of fire suppression. Meanwhile, during the 1970s-1980s and onwards, climatic conditions started becoming notably different as temperatures rose, snowpack declined, and soils started drying out producing worsening drought trends.
Throughout the world, areas with our winter wet/summer dry climate support vegetation that is fire prone, fire-adapted and fire dependent. Since fire is critical to the health of our forests and is inevitable with global warming continuing, we’ll never prevent fires however hard we try. Urging yet more fire suppression rather than sane fire management is displaying ignorance.
It’s alarming to see uninformed citizens and politicians blaming the wrong causes for fires.
I have a question. Why does Donna Hughey, the Everyday Believer, get up to a third of a page column in the Pilot every Saturday — this time on the front page of the Coastal Living section? When I moved to Brookings 20 years ago the Pilot featured a column called “Compass Points.” The Christian ministers in town took turns writing that column — all except for Father Bill Smith of St. Timothy’s Episcopal Church, who was not included.
When Scott Graves became the editor he changed the name of that column to the Faith Forum and, quite appropriately, invited representatives of all faith communities in town to participate — including Father Bill.
Faith Forum still exists, but the Everyday Believer, a fundamental evangelical Christian, gets her own lengthy column each Saturday. I just don’t understand.