I would dearly love to read a letter or opinion piece regarding a conservation issue that didn’t start and end with an attempt to get me to hate the person (or, more commonly, corporation) that disagrees with the opinion writer. A case in point is last week’s piece submitted by Robert N. Whitescarver.
While Mr. Whitescarver provides some interesting facts regarding the nature of the land through which the proposed pipeline would pass, is it really necessary to begin his letter with reference to “the tidal wave of corporate greed?” I don’t think the case he makes would be any less impactful without this negativity. Do you?
He almost ends the letter with more information the reader can use: The address to which I can write should I wish to submit my comments to the relevant federal agency. But he just can’t end on such a positive note. He has to return to give a final kick in the ribs to the corporations who, he feels, are stealing all power from “Us People.” What a shame!