Why do Kentucky’s leaders deny climate change when we keep having climate disasters? | Opinion

Climate disasters

Kentucky has seen more disaster declarations than any state between 2000-2022. The last declarations happened in February of this year and December of 2021.

One hundred and thirty-nine elected officials in the 117th U.S. Congress, including 109 representatives and 30 senators, refuse to acknowledge the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change. All 139 of these climate-denying officials have made statements casting doubt on the clear, established scientific consensus that the world is warming, and human activity is to blame.

According to 97 percent of climate scientist, 2023 is becoming the hottest year in history, yet climate deniers comprise 52 percent of House Republicans and 60 percent of Senate Republicans.

In Kentucky, U.S. Sens. Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul and U.S. Reps. James Comer, Thomas Massie, Hal Rogers and Andy Barr have all denied climate change. These 139 members in congress have received $61 million in lifetime contributions from coal, oil and gas industries, or essentially $442,293 per official.

Kentucky’s elected officials have a duty of responsibility to do what is factual and ethical. In the last decade we have all seen the weather changes, yet evidence appears officials care more about voting for monetary gain instead of that common link: we all inhabit this small planet, breathe the same air, and cherish our children’s future - we are all mortal.

Mike Newton, Frankfort

Climate action

So, you are concerned about the climate crisis and are not sure what to do about it. Know that you are not alone. Also know that the Climate Movement needs you. It needs everyone to do everything we can to address this crisis. Here are some ideas to help:

- Learn more about how our world is warming; the causes, consequences and actions that need to be taken to stop it. Start by visiting NASA’s website on climate.

- Talk about it, a lot, with friends, family, neighbors, everybody and anybody.

- Get involved; join a climate group or two. Ask how you can help. You undoubtedly have skills the groups need. If you have money to donate, they could benefit from that too.

- Get political; take to the streets, contact elected officials, repeatedly, at all levels of government, and demand that they take action to address this crisis. They were elected to serve the people, and there is no higher service than protecting the world we live in.

- Walk the talk; take steps to reduce your emissions. It is very gratifying.

- Pace yourself; we’re in this for the long haul. Have Hope.

Ron Sadler, Louisville

Barnum mentality

Former President Donald Trump has expressed his admiration for world leaders who are authoritarians, the leaders of Russia, China and North Korea being excellent examples. Domestically, he prefers leaders of organizations such as the Proud Boys, the Ku Klux Klan and other such groups which have, as he said, “good people” as members. Roy Cohn, who was Joseph McCarthy’s legal adviser, appears to be his model for the legal system. Politicians who at heart are opportunistic, lack any moral compass, and have a large capacity for hypocrisy are also highly regarded by Trump - too many to mention and you don’t have to look far or hard.

One other person who has had a profound influence on Trump has been overlooked- P.T. Barnum. Trump’s propensity for showmanship and his guiding principle, “there’s one born every minute” (referring to dupes and suckers), are straight out of Barnum. His ability to separate people from their money who then thank him for the most outlandish things is indeed noteworthy.

The circus is in town.

Charles Myers, Lexington

Hood opinion

Concerning the opinion column by J. Larry Hood about Trump’s indictments: This opinion piece should never have been given the light of day even considering the right to free speech guaranteed in the First Amendment. It contains unproven allegations and outright lies. A newspaper’s desire to be balanced is not a license to publish things that are inherently false, and which will contribute to a false narrative.

One of the great difficulties we have had over truthful accounts as opposed to fictional accounts is the failure of media to call into question items that are unproven or untrue. Where truth is concerned equality should not be a dictum.

That this writer is a teacher at Midway College is both telling and dismaying. Such innuendo and outright falsehoods should not be purveyed to our students.

Bob Moore, Science Hill

Blind Justice

I had to read Larry Hood’s op-ed piece (“Trump’s indictments threaten civil liberty”) a second time after seeing in his byline that he teaches history. In addition to his factual errors and “whataboutisms” lifted verbatim from right-wing news, I was taken aback that any historian would make the logical errors he does.

For example, to Hood, the fact that Former President Donald Trump has been indicted but Presidents Joe Biden and Barrack Obama, and former U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton were not (for a Fox News-sourced list of their supposed crimes) is evidence Trump didn’t want to politicize the U.S. Justice Department against his rivals.

Occam’s Razor suggests a simpler explanation: Prosecutors looked at the facts and found insufficient evidence to charge Biden, Obama, or Clinton. There is ample evidence that Trump only failed to use the Justice Department for his personal political benefit because he was rebuffed by his own Attorney General and many others.

Hood also suggests Trump is being charged for his speech, but the indictments make clear he can say what he wants. He’s being charged for his actions--conspiring to disenfranchise millions of voters, ignoring a federal subpoena, and knowingly and recklessly handling America’s closest-held secrets.

It seems grand juries can think more clearly than some adjunct history professors.

David Miller, Lexington

Privacy concerns

Your Fusus article’s headline misleads, saying “Some civil rights groups OK” with this unproven, invasive surveillance system giving government agents access to private citizens’ cameras.

Since “OK” can mean “agreement” or “acceptance,” readers could easily assume these groups approve of government surveillance. But the actual article describes their severe reservations about Lexington Police using Fusus. They are only “OK” because they don’t have any say in the matter.

There is only one reason to adopt Fusus. It’s not to prevent crime, because no data proves video surveillance does. There’s only shaky evidence it helps close cases. All anecdotes about the Flock system (owned by a private corporation) were given to local news by police and uncritically reported as fact.

Be honest: Fusus exists solely to give tax-payer money to a private corporation.

Lexington awarded our police millions in federal funds, allowed public surveillance cameras in our poorest neighborhoods, and increased their budget by millions annually. Meanwhile, local news organizations bend over backwards to launder any and all criticism as outliers.

Truth is, most people hate the idea of living in a totalitarian police state. That’s why media outlets – like the Lexington Herald-Leader – spend so much effort making it sound agreeable.

Bronson O’Quinn, Lexington

Denial of candidacy

The Commonwealth of Kentucky’s Secretary of State should begin legal correspondence with the U.S. Supreme Court and/or the Kentucky Supreme Court to assure they have the authority to deny former President Donald Trump, who is in my opinion a traitor, the ability to be a candidate for President of the United States on the November 2024 National Election ballot.

Billy Wilson, London

Winning ham

On Friday, August 25, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported on the front page an article announcing the auction of the grand champion country ham that sold for $10 million at this year’s State Fair. It is noteworthy that one of Kentucky’s premium agricultural products served as the focal point for so much attention by politicians and others at the country ham breakfast. However, it was regretful that the name of the person or company that produced the ham was not mentioned in the article. Surely that bit of recognition should have been given to those that made it possible.

William G. Moody, Lexington

(Editor’s note: the ham was produced by Bradenton B&B Foods in Kuttawa, Ky. We regret the omission)

Democrat advice

Strange as it may sound, it seems to me like Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley is offering Kentucky Democrats advice on the abortion rights by default. Consider what Haley is telling her own party to begin with. “Let’s find consensus,” she says. The anti-abortion movement is lambasting Haley for saying this. Meanwhile, the pro-abortion movement is silent. It seems the activists at both ends of the abortion rights opinion spectrum are opposed the public consensus.

What is the public consensus? Here’s something else you might find strange. Public opinion polls have reported for decades that the large majority of us support abortion rights in some or most situation, though not all situations. What about the other situations? Most of us want to leave determinations of health risk or the non-viability to the physicians, according to the polls. And no one wants to put recently pregnant persons in jail.

I’m willing to hazard a guess that Nikki Haley is unwittingly offering Kentucky Democrats better advice than the activists at either end of the abortion rights opinion spectrum.

Tom Louderback, Louisville

Compiled by Liz Carey