Home»Opinion»Letters»LETTERS: March 30th Issue

LETTERS: March 30th Issue

0
Shares
Pinterest Google+

The Siskiyou Challenge is an amazing race, to borrow a term. A five-stage race—kayak, cycle, run, mountain bike and run—it is as fun as it is challenging and bruising.

We are proudly sponsoring the race, and have a free team registration for you and/or you and four friends.

How to win? Post your PG-rated video of “feats of human awesomeness” to the Messenger’s Facebook page. Whichever posting receives the most “Likes” by April 15, that person/team receives a free entrance to the event!

 

Re.: LNG Pipeline

Much like the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota, Oregon’s Jordan Cove LNG pipeline is pushing as hard as it can since the swearing in of President Trump and his executive order supporting and expediting both the Keystone XL pipeline and DAPL. Many communities in Southern Oregon have been rallying against it for several years now—Environment Oregon, Rogue Action Sierra Club, and others.

OSPIRG and these allies have brought together a collection of information related to this pipeline project and we are planning to have our lead campaign effort, along with a major rally on Wednesday, April 19 at SOU, against the approval and construction of this pipeline. Some facts you might be interested in are:

  •     JCLNG will run through four counties in southern Oregon (Klamath, Jackson, Douglas and Coos)
  •     Pressing eminent domain against 704 landowners, most of which are not happy
  •     Risks 400 waterways
  •     29 endangered species
  •     Risks a boom-and-bust economic conditions
  •     The exporting of this pipeline will raise prices
  •    Export terminal point located in tsunami zone
  •     Increased fracking would accelerate climate change and earthquakes at location
  •     Highly explosive.

We hope this information will be enough to spread awareness and warnings on the danger of this project. We must stop it.

-Devin Winter

 

Hey Messenger: I want to know why this girl on my last date corrected me when I said something was “contemporary art.” She said, “no it is MODERN ART.” I think we were talking about Picasso. Everything in this century or last century is contemporary I thought. A teacher told me this?

-W.

Hello W.: This is something you could have easily Googled. But hey, no big deal. I have to say, you are not alone in confusing the modern and contemporary eras. I have heard these words used interchangeably my entire adult life. This is because it honestly is a little bit confusing. There is an overlap in decades. Modern art covers the period between the 1860’s and the 1970’s, while contemporary art covers the 1950’s through today. Another definition of contemporary art specifies that the artist must still be alive and actively producing works of art. It does not specify genre or style. Modern art on the other hand, tends to imply a sense of abstraction and a turning away from previous, long-held traditions. I’m sorry to say that the girl from the date was more correct, as Picasso produced most of his rule-breaking work in the early part of the 20th century. To put it in context, the famous Blue Period was 1901-1904. Sorry, bub.

Hey Messenger: I wrote you before and you helped me out back then, but this newspaper is too leftist. In my view there are an equal number of poeple (sic) on the right. Why are we not represented?

-Steven

Hey Steven: I remember you! Last time we discussed your friend’s meth deal he tried to pin on you.  I hope that situation worked out. Well, this is just my own column, so I cannot speak for the paper overall or its management. I would agree that the paper has a liberal bias. But here’s the thing, as Steven Colbert once famously said, “Reality has a liberal bias.” This might sound shocking at first, but it is actually quite true. More aspects of the liberal platform cohere to empirical research from a variety of fields, than the conservative platform. This is true about most everything, from psychological research to climate change research. I understand that this may feel emotionally disturbing.

Let me clarify something else: It is true that there is ideology and emotion on both sides and perhaps it is even equal. That is why while thinking about this, you have to separate the issues themselves from the political motivations. It is completely possible liberal positions are more informed by ideology than research, and that they are just more correct by accident. However, by accident is better than not at all. Therefore, if our humble newspaper seems left leaning, that is most likely a sign that we are making every effort to represent reality.  Either that, or we are just crappy liberals representing reality by accident.

 

No Comment

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.