The Valley Vantage, a very small local newspaper in the valley, recently printed a rather seething op-ed piece by guest columnist Burt Prelutsky against Al Gore, Arianna Huffington, and any other democrat that crossed his mind. Burt Prelutsky used to write a lot for TV, and his writing style is more hyperbole than fact. He isn’t a journalist, so I take his comments with a grain of salt. Nevertheless, there is often a backbone of conviction deeply rooted in most rants of the humorous variety (just think of Dennis Miller). He likens Al Gore to a raving Chicken Little with global warming as the falling sky. Global warming is not a political issue. But in his article, Prelutsky turned it into one. Global warming is a political issue with a soft, defenseless underbelly. The environment can’t defend itself. So, Prelutsky attacks the people who do. As a result, the cause of environmental conservation is muddied in all sorts of political clutter.
Here’s the letter I sent to the newspaper’s publisher.
Dear Kathleen,
Hello. I enjoyed reading your March 22nd issue of the Valley Vantage. I particularly took to Burt Prelutksy’s op-ed piece. It excited me, pissed me off a little, but most importantly, it ignited this letter. I hope that his political harangue, albeit humor-tinged, also ignited your other readers into thoughtful discussions, political ruminations, and most importantly, a call to action. Burt may not think that global warming merits immediate attention but his article may spark other Valley Vantage readers to a very different conclusion.
Global warming is not exclusive to democracies, California, or the United States. It’s not a political issue. It’s a human issue. It affects little girls on the bus in the Appalachians, Chinese motorcyclists in the chaos of a Shanghai intersection, and polar bears in the northern Arctic tundra. It affects us all. And we all have a responsibility to curb its disastrous effects on our planet.
He obviously had an axe to grind against certain people. And by people, I mean democrats. Popular, liberal-leaning democrats who are often attacked when their own convictions are mistaken for political ploys. He pushed a little too far, way too far in some instances, and made for a scathing attack.
Burt Prelutsky may have written his article solely as a piece of political sarcasm, but I find there is often a solid backbone of conviction deeply rooted behind such humor-tinged rants. His opening sentence, however unintentional, was a riot. “My friend Pat Sajak recently made an excellent point.” How could that not catapult into an even better punchline? “He said that inasmuch as he doesn’t take global warming to heart, he sees no good reason to alter his own lifestyle.” Burt started off with comedic potential but swayed into the widespread territory of the morally murky. A great opening for a celebrity-sponsored rant.
If everyone in the world adopted the Pat Sajak mentality, the world would be on a downward spiral. The poor would be poorer, and the rich more wasteful. Championed causes would lose champions. Public officials would be more choosy on who they represented. Good Samaritanism would be a silly obsolete notion. And that’s just the beginning. If everyone did no more than what they took to heart, the world would be a colder place. A wasteful place. A love-less place. It’s easy to close our eyes to issues that aren’t important to us. It’s comfortable. But it’s not responsible.
The Iroquois nation, the first peoples to adopt a participative democracy in North America, and ironically, the first to be put on reservations by the US government, have a saying - “Think not of yourself, but of the seventh generation coming”.
Prelutsky challenges scientists that deem global warming an eminent threat. He scoffs at politicians who cite scientific claims he finds dubious. As mindful residents of this planet, we shouldn’t require much convincing to know the environment is hurting. We know that exhaust fumes pollute the ozone, that excess consumption yields excess waste, and that the polar ice caps are melting. These are things that we learn in elementary school. We didn’t question them then. So what happened?
We grow up. Some people become so politically charged (or, perhaps, religiously blind-sighted) that their common sense becomes muddled with misguided passion. That’s OK. It happens. There is nothing wrong with passion. And Mr. Prelutsky’s op-ed piece was extremely passionate. But it had no direction. It had no practical purpose other than to release a tirade, make liberal democrats irate and make conservative republicans giddy. Above all, it had no reason. And passion without reason is a recipe for disaster.
But sometimes, if presented in a civil (even humorous) way like an op-ed piece in a community newspaper, it may ignite passionate and mindful people to speak up and put common sense in its place. For the environment’s sake, I hope it did just that.
Thank you for your time. Looking forward to more igniting articles.
Posts
