An attempt to regulate food trucks; Rush Limbaugh controversy; and drawing lessons for the climate change debate from the fight against cigarettes

Fat kids, dumb bill

Re “A food truck stop?” March 4

The bill to limit food trucks from parking “within 1,500 feet of elementary, middle and high schools from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on school days” is simple lunacy and demonstrates what is wrong with society’s focus on human problems.

If food trucks are pushed away, will someone else propose to close down the doughnut shop directly across the street from the high school in our neighborhood? How about the fast food taco place on the other corner? And what would be the fate of the liquor store a few steps away, which sells junk food and soda? How exactly will this bill help decrease childhood obesity?

Maybe the money being put into this bill should instead focus on educating parents about helping kids make healthier choices. This effort reinforces the notion of some parents that childhood obesity is out of their hands.

We need to stop trying to fix these problems from outside. Instead, we should support parents in resuming their roles as primary educators of their children.

Diane Nunn

Valley Village

Trust me: I can tell you, as a junior high school teacher, neither the food truck nor the school cafeteria is the culprit behind the childhood obesity problem.

No Child Left Behind is far more culpable, I believe. Why? It has forced teachers and schools to choose between teaching physical education on a daily basis and teaching standards-based test-taking skills.

Blame the food trucks? Think again!

Elizabeth Osborne

Pismo Beach

The rush to judge Limbaugh

Re “Limbaugh says sorry for insults to student,” March 4

Let us spare a moment of pity for Rush Limbaugh.

When a man sets out to be outrageous, he must keep topping himself. Before long he becomes a pathetic caricature of himself, sitting in his poisoned corner spouting absurdities.

Limbaugh became that several years ago.

Harrison Stephens

Claremont

I’m not in agreement in any way with Limbaugh, nor am I in agreement with the Roman Catholic Church regarding this debacle of contraception being a covered benefit in our health insurance contracts.

The question I have, as I haven’t heard it mentioned: Is birth control medically necessary?

My understanding of health insurance is that it covers medically necessary issues.

Gale Gousha

Upland

Dear Republicans:

You object, religiously, to birth control? Fewer kids may be just what this world needs most.

Every one of us has the ability to act morally; it is up to the parishioner to do what’s right.

Deciding that certain medical procedures are so sinful that they cannot be paid for is total bunk. I’m beyond morally outraged, having paid taxes in support of “an elective war” in Iraq.

Please consider that the availability of birth control diminishes the power that men have over women.

I hope that’s not too outrageous for anyone’s religion.

Michael Frishberg

West Hollywood

Limbaugh’s apology surprises — not because he actually made it but because of what it says about his show.

He starts his apology by saying: “For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week.” And near the end, he says that “my choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir.”

So his show is really a “theater of the absurd” attempting to be humorous? My friends and relatives are apparently taking him too literally.

No wonder the

right wing so often sounds “absurd” — they’re quoting Rush!

Lynn Haye

Huntington Beach

So Limbaugh has “apologized” for his scathing condemnation of Sandra Fluke’s testimony regarding birth control.

He is so transparently phony. The only reason he apologized, of course, is to keep his sponsors from leaving him, as they are anyway.

Mary Ross

Cambria

Limbaugh was right.

It was the Georgetown law student who did the insulting. She insulted, first, her parents (before a congressional committee, no less); second, she insulted all taxpayers by demanding money to “safely” have sex; third and most important, she insulted God.

Rafael Villa

Fullerton

Andrew Breitbart, like Limbaugh, was in the professional outrage business (a right-wing specialty) and didn’t care who got hurt, innocent or not, as long as the focus was always on him.

Our attention to their faux outrage does not contribute to public discourse but is only another one of the Republicans’ “weapons of mass distraction” — which we would all be better off without.

Jaycie Ingersoll

Beverly Hills

How government spends money

Re “An uneasy coexistence,” March 4, and “Budget-cut backers now feeling the pain,” March 4

The Times had two front-page articles that illustrated one of the major problems with our present government.

The first described the efforts by a major solar contractor working on a billion-dollar program (which I am sure included some grant from the government), to meet environmental requirements aimed at protecting the desert tortoise.

So far the company has spent millions and apparently still has a ways to go.

The second article describes the budget problems of a small town — Uniopolis, Ohio — that without the help of the county or state will have to disincorporate and, I presume, cease to exist with a town government.

I submit that we have plenty of money available to run the country (probably too much), if we just had someone with some common sense responsible for managing how it is being used.

Jack Bendar

Pacific Palisades

It’s all about tipping points

Re “Cigarettes’ lessons for climate change,” Opinion, March 4

Auden Schendler’s arguments are hopeful but overlook some unfortunate differences between

cigarettes and the burning of fossil fuels.

For example, smoking largely harms only smokers and those in their immediate surroundings; climate change, ironically, first harms those who have done the least to cause the problem — for example, inhabitants of low-lying Pacific islands and Alaskan coastal villages.

More critically, while smoking cessation is a “linear” process — as smoking declines, its damage does also — climate change unfortunately is a nonlinear process with a future marked with “tipping points,” beyond which correction becomes increasingly difficult.

Climate scientists have warned about atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide exceeding a certain threshold. How many tipping points await us?

Robert Siebert

Orange

Still a believer in Davy Jones

Re “Davy Jones, 1945-2012, Obituary,” March 2

How refreshing to see the Monkees and Davy Jones finally getting such respect.

At the age of 7, I wanted to be Davy Jones. He had all the fun and got all the girls. He was not just a teen heartthrob for the ladies; he was an inspiration to all the guys.

And as a kid who constantly got beat up for taking his Monkees lunch box to school, it’s nice to have the critics on our side.

Thank you Davy, for making our childhood a little brighter.

Jeff Gehringer

Los Alamitos