Opinion
I sat down to write a (hopefully) humorous column about how I have come to loathe the manufactured pomp and grueling parental labor of the holiday season.
I understand why people bristle at the idea of entitlement. As a white male, I have been advantaged.
People sometimes look at the tattoo on my left shoulder that says, “Love hurts,” and say, “No it doesn’t.” I always reply, “Good for you.” Love is the very best stuff, to be sure. It can heal, soothe, and make us feel safe. But it can come at a steep cost. Neil Young was right: only love can break your heart.
The powers that Google and Facebook have over economic and political power in society — especially over the news industry — has caught the attention of lawmakers in Washington, DC. After a close election and many worries over the quality of public debate, many ask if social media have played a role in the misinformation that erodes our free press and plagues our democracy.
Sometimes it’s important to stop and take a breath when assessing how a company is meeting its goals and challenges. That’s especially true for a nonprofit trying to make a difference in Claremont. On the surface for the Claremont COURIER, the good news is many things are also staying the same. The print edition continues to be delivered on Friday, the website is updated almost every day to stay on top of breaking news, our popular email newsletter is sent Thursday nights, each month we have a special edition inserted in the newspaper, and we continue our presence on social media, focusing on Instagram, Facebook and Twitter (although we will evaluate if Twitter is still worthwhile as Elon Musk sinks the platform).
From a number standpoint, it’s easy to see the massive improvement for the COURIER when comparing revenue and expenses for 2021 to 2022. It’s important to keep in mind that in 2021, we were still dealing with issues from the pandemic. Although we developed a donation push back then, all the change going to nonprofit was still relatively new for our supporters.
A Claremont friend of ours recently confessed, she is depressed if she sees a brown lawn, and she is depressed if she sees a green lawn. We think of our friend as reasonably well-adjusted, so lawns do seem to be the culprits here.
When I was a kid there were a few simple rules for social engagement. First, don’t ask people how much money they make. Second, don’t talk about sex or politics, especially during family dinners. Third, save your relationship with religion or a supreme being for Sunday morning. Finally, leave the conversion of others to the missionaries of whatever philosophy was offering salvation: spiritual, economic, political, or psychological.
For a town known as “the City of Trees and Ph.Ds.,” Claremont’s greenspace lives up to its namesake and is a source of pride for longtime community members. Trees line our roads, sagebrush rims the San Gabriels, and the Claremont Colleges flaunt lush green quads. However, our easy access to thriving natural spaces is a double-edged sword. In a City of Trees, we’re susceptible to slipping into a false sense of water security — and Claremont’s emphasis on greenery doesn’t reflect the reality of California’s water crisis.
I’ll start by saying the COURIER no longer makes political endorsements. As a nonprofit, we cannot publish staff endorsements according to requirements set by the IRS. I’m sure some readers are clapping their hands, but we continue to believe endorsements are an important part of a news organization’s responsibility to inform the public. Plus, we get to know the candidates really well. The sad part now is many news companies are dropping endorsements simply because it’s bad for business. And when revenues continue to drop every year, that can be a powerful influence.
Recently, a made-for-TV movie moment happened to us: a friend asked us to be fathers of her baby.
My experience as a dad, a job I’ve held since 1986, has been marked by both joyful exhilaration and deep heartbreak. And though it’s helpful to journal about trauma, it’s difficult — maybe even irresponsible — to write publicly about family strife while you’re still slogging away at parenthood. I’ve pulled a couple columns of mine over the years after feedback from my kids they were too personal. Most of my four kids have their lives yet to build, identities to solidify, so of course this makes good sense. I’m thankful for these reality checks. Even though I’m their dad, their lives are their own. I just supply the shelter, food, free laundry and Wi-Fi.
In 2009 I published an op-ed in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune acknowledging some landmark rulings of the United States Supreme Court, namely Brown v. Board of Education (1954), Loving v. Virginia (1967) and Roe v. Wade (1973). In the Brown case, the Court ruled separating public schoolchildren based on race was unconstitutional. The Loving ruling struck down state laws that banned marriage between individuals of different races. In the Roe case the Court ruled unduly restrictive state regulation of abortion was unconstitutional.
Go ahead, explain non-cisgender … Do you support those who identify as noncis (people whose gender does not match the one usually associated with the sex they were assigned at birth), even if you don’t understand them? Do you hate them and think they are an abomination? Do you even know what I’m talking about?
The story of Cadiz begins in the 1980s, when British investor Keith Brackpool arrived in California after pleading guilty to criminal charges relating to securities trading in Britain. In 1983, Brackpool teamed up with others to locate water sources for development and sale to municipalities. Studying satellite images, he located an aquifer in the Mojave, and proceeded to buy up a patchwork of creosote scrub for the private corporation he founded: Cadiz, Inc. He remains connected to Cadiz today. He was appointed to the board in 1986, served as CEO from 1991 to 2013, and as board chair from 2001 to 2022.
Readers’ Comments: October 21, 2022
October 20th, 2022
Dear editor: The implications of the Oct. 14 COURIER renter protection ordinance article are troubling. Using the figures in the article, if a landlord improves a property by investing money equal to or exceeding eight months of current rent, then raises the rent, an eviction would be legal if the current renters don’t want to pay the new rental rate.