On the Reflections Page on my site there is a poem which I wrote a few years ago, “Ode to a Clear-Cut.” I invite you to read it and contemplate after you finish today’s blog.

      The Wall Street Journal and New York Times in late February (25^th) both ran articles about the demise of major newspapers; the New York Times and the Tribune Company’s Los Angeles Times among them. However, the demise of the Hearst newspaper company’s cornerstone the San Francisco Chronicle caught my eye.

      You remember the Hearst family; daughter Patty was a domestic terrorist and a member of an obscure “Liberation Army,” a group of radicals who waged war on innocent Americans. Ultimately, Ms. Hearst was found not guilty even though she was an active participant in at least one bank hold-up. Her daddy’s efforts returned her to society, clean as the San Francisco air she breathed. Goes to show us what money can buy….freedom.

      Although the Hearst Corp said “it may close” the paper unless it can slash costs, it would be a blessing to all of us if the three aforementioned papers went under and the sooner the better.

      For one reason we would save hundreds of thousands of trees. After all, isn’t that what conservation is all about? If we allowed those hundreds of thousands of trees to live we would have reduced the carbon dioxide, generated by humans, exponentially. After all if we had not cut all those trees over the past hundred plus years wouldn’t our air be much cleaner, healthier and fit for human consumption?

      Second, we would have significantly reduced the source of decay for moral degenerates. It’s no surprise that San Francisco, L.A. and New York have acted as fertilizer for the deviants who have destroyed the fabric of our once wholesome communities and families.

      Third, the closing of these papers years ago would have had a major impact on the spread of HIV/Aids. Without the lies and defense of aberrant behaviors by perverted sectors of our society, we would have had access to the truth about the perversion and perverts who indiscriminately spread the fatal disease. The truth would not have been obscured by the writers and editors responsible for the portrayal of these poor infected souls as victims…instead they would have been quarantined and the disease would have had a better chance to be contained.

      In the late eighties I had the pleasure of spending hours with the former head of an emergency room at San Francisco’s primary trauma hospital, Dr. Lorraine Day, and we discussed the coming pandemic called Aids and how it was spread.

      As an orthopedic surgeon Dr. Day explained that she had resigned from her position because she feared the disease and the lack of concern the medical profession was providing towards the infectious and deadly disease.

      I asked her for her professional opinion about the possibilities of finding a cure. Her response was chilling; there will be no cure. The virus mutates so quickly and is so insidious that we, as professional researchers and practitioners, cannot keep up with it.

      Was she right?

      To clean up our environment we should push for a quarantine of clear cutting, protection of our forests and reconsider our attitude about who, how and when activism trumps the protection of deviants.

      We can clean up two society’s problems; lies and more lies.

      Lest we forget, quarantines and moratoriums, even at this late date, may save lives.  Isn’t that what we are about, a clean disease free environment?