Opinion

3/6 Letters: The pros and cons of a quarry at RDU.

RDU’s assets

The Raleigh Durham International Airport is critical to our economic future and should be applauded for leveraging assets (like stone for a quarry) to be successful. Wake Stone provides important materials for our region’s growth and has been a good neighbor, plus they are offering substantial financial support for community recreational purposes. The RDU Authority has made a rational decision on behalf of our collective interest in having a great airport. Our local governments likewise are doing an excellent job of protecting many green spaces for the enjoyment of our citizens. Opponents of the RDU/Wake Stone Lease offer a false choice. We are not sacrificing our outstanding quality of place to accommodate RDU, rather we are making a wise long term decision for our region’s continued economic prosperity.

Harvey Schmitt

Raleigh

No quarry

The land that is the RDU Airport Authority wants to lease to a quarry is public land that was expropriated through eminent domain. It belongs to the citizens. I believe the local governments have a duty and obligation to take a vote on the quarry, as they are the owners of the airport and of this parcel of land. RDU has a viable alternative: instead of a quarry lease, they could choose to sell that parcel for inclusion into Umstead State Park. On the current path, Wake Stone gets a great deal, RDU tarnishes its image, and the region compromises our crown jewel, Umstead State Park. This is not how smart cities treat their prized assets. Yes, there is a process involved in selling the land, but many would argue it’s the right thing to do. Not only for the image of RDU, but for the health and prosperity of the Triangle.

Michele Trovero

Cary

Not for politics

It’s past time to let the issue of printing or not printing Mallard Fillmore die. The comics pages are not a place for political comment. They are a place to cease playing partisan politics, and allow the reader some humorous entertainment. I assume this was the motive of the editors in removing that strip. If it belonged anywhere in the paper, it was on the editorial page. Thank you for lowering the acid content of my stomach.

Ken Caudell

Durham

Too much bias

Your recent article in Under the Dome was a perfect example of why the mainstream media is not trusted. The headline said 79 percent of people surveyed support the Green New Deal. If you read the article, it turns out only forty-some percent support it and another 30 some percent somewhat support it. Then you find out that the survey was commissioned by a left-leaning environmental group. But they assure us that the questions were not biased. Many people just scan headlines, and this is what you were counting on. Yes, the article does make clear the bias of the survey, but you have to read the entire article to discern this. Should be labeled opinion.

Vincent M.DiSandro Sr

Hillsborough

Dishonest as Trump

In “Not the Worst” (March 4), the letter writer claims the journal “Basic and Applied Social Psychology” says we lie between 60-100 times a day. I found the article, titled “Self-Presentation and Verbal Deception: Do Self-Presenters Lie More?” The study looks at how self-promotion and gender affect the way people lie. The study was base on University of Massachusetts student participants who were told they would have a 10-minute conversation with a stranger. Some participants were told to make themselves appear likable, others competent, and a third group was not told how to present themselves. In these sessions with strangers, the “likeability” group averaged 2.02 lies, the “competency” group averaged 2.37 lies and the “control” group averaged 0.88 lies. The writer somehow takes this data to imply that we all lie 60-100 times a day, though the journal article says no such thing. He goes on to declare that by this standard, Trump is practically “Honest Abe.” To me, this is another Trump defender coming off just as dishonestly as Trump himself.

Robert L Wood

Cary

Sanity returning

Recent findings in the congressional Dist. 9 absentee ballot scheme and rulings blocking voter ID and a lower cap on the state income tax are signs hat sanity could be returning to North Carolina. As Democrats gain more influence, I hope and pray they will not subject us to the same treatment as we have had in the past.

James Bunn

Raleigh

  Comments