

Readers' letters | Rand Paul, Louisville Gardens, energy and the daily paper

2:28 PM, Jul. 12, 2013  |  Comments

Poor representation

Again, Sen. Rand Paul is questioned for the quality of his company and his poor judgment. Paul's spokesperson tried to "explain" the "Southern Avenger" with a fox-guarding-the-henhouse sidestep. "Avenger" Jack Hunter said it was an "honor" to work for Paul, but was it honorable for Paul to hire Hunter? Why would a responsible U.S. senator select and defend someone who says the "craziest things?"

Wouldn't a capable U.S. senator screen applicants? Why, exactly, was Hunter qualified? Why didn't alarm bells go off at the get-go, and later, if Paul deplores racism? Either Paul looked the other way, or he is inept in staffing his Senate office. Either way, a damning indicator of Paul's competence and integrity. And Paul imagines himself ready for the White House.

Sen. Rand Paul disgraces our state, shames the U.S. Senate and makes a mockery of the U.S. presidency. Paul's honorable option is to resign the U.S. Senate.


Louisville 40207

Local businesses

Wow. Imagine my amazement when I got to the Metro section of the C-J and saw the article about "Reuse of the Gardens." Totally shocking! What? The "developer" couldn't squeeze more money out of the city to pay to enable more profits for this non-Louisville company? What they ask for is ludicrous. I would make a wager, that if anyone actually took the time to do a study, they would see that more businesses have closed/failed in that one-block area than any other block in the city.

As a co-founder of the Louisville Originals (with Michael Reidy of The Irish Rover) and a member of the Louiville Independent Business Alliance, we have given many unpaid hours to promote locally owned businesses that give Louisville its identity. The epitome of greed is headquartered in Baltimore, Md.



Baxter Station Bar and Grill

Louisville 40204

Alternative energy

I read with interest the op-ed piece from July 8 concerning the president's "war on coal," and as is usual on this topic I came away wondering why we as a nation are going to kill something before we have an alternative source of energy that can take its place. I'm not a "flat-Earther" as the president so quaintly puts it. I believe the scientific community when they tell me our planet is warming and that we are at least partially responsible for that happening. I'm not even saying that coal, as a major source of our country's energy needs, doesn't need to be phased out of use.

My questions come from the timing of this war. Why are we so intent on killing coal before we have a power source that will be able to step in and take up the slack of coal's loss? None of the new technologies is ready to do that unless I've missed that little snippet of news. If we kill coal now what's going to replace it, and more importantly when will that new energy source be ready to do so? If we sign coal's death warrant before that alternate source of energy's infrastructure is up and ready, what will we do to keep the lights on?

Then there's the whole question of just how effective any of our changes will be when China and India account for more greenhouse gases than the U.S. If the environmentalists and scientists can answer these questions perhaps I'll be less anxious about our country's energy woes, but unless they can answer those questions with viable alternatives, then in the parlance of my grandfather, aren't we putting the cart before the horse?


Louisville 40223

Front-page news

It's becoming one front page. It has sports, it has local news, it has state news ... and now, as most recently demonstrated, it has national and international news. If you want it all, find it on the front page of the C-J. If the story is too big, or the pictures too large, find the story you want via the Index you'll need. And this all sets independently, next to the weather you have to know.

For me, it's a rough day, without the CJ.


Prospect, Ky. 40059

Things To Do


Real Deals
