Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Just when you thought former President Donald Trump couldn't get more crass, he comes through again. This time he's hawking "God Bless the USA Bibles" for the low, low price of $59.99! This is following the other items he's peddled, including trading cards featuring Trump as a superhero, cologne, gold sneakers, T-shirts, steaks, vodka, neckties, furniture and more. With this current pitch, on Truth Social, Trump wished his prospective buyers "Happy Holy Week!" Uh, Donald, Holy Week is the commemoration of Jesus Christ's betrayal, trial and crucifixion. For Christians it's not usually considered a time for happy wishes. Until we get to Easter. You might want to read a bit of that book you're selling.

Sharon Decker, St. Louis Park


NBC NEWS

McDaniel debacle speaks volumes

So, NBC News cannot tolerate a Republican on its staff (since it reversed its decision to hire former Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel). Clearly there is no room for diversity or tolerance at NBC and no chance of getting both sides of the story at this mainstream news outlet. This one-sided, narrow viewpoint is described as "cohesive and aligned." The 75 million people who voted for Trump and all independent voters should take note and avoid this station given its open declaration of partisan bias.

Martin Wellens, Shorewood


•••


NBCUniversal Group Chairman Cesar Conde accompanied his announcement of the decision that McDaniel will not become an NBC News contributor with his assurance to the media world of his company's "deep commitment to presenting our audiences with a wide diverse set of viewpoints and experiences."

Thanks to Conde, we now know the actual meaning of NBC and its business culture: "Non-Binding Commitments."

Gene Delaune, New Brighton


ENVIRONMENT

On permits, look forward, not back

An opinion in the Star Tribune authored by Jason George and Jim Schultz ("Let's team up on permitting reform," March 25) advocated for speeding the permitting process for more manufacturing projects. They acknowledge that there is state legislation to speed permitting of renewable energy projects and that permitting reform should be happening in many other industries, such as natural gas, agriculture, food production, timber, paper and mining, among others.

Although Minnesota lost a pig iron processing plant to North Dakota, industries such as coke production and iron and steel have higher greenhouse gas emissions related to energy consumption from burning fossil fuels. In the absence of a national penalty on fossil-fuel use, Minnesota is legislating lower fossil-fuel emission targets over the next decade. Why would the state be anxious to permit high-emission industries here, knowing that greenhouse gas emissions would rise? Local residents might well object to these dirty plants being located near their communities and insist on local participation early in the permitting process to protect themselves. We have all read about agricultural waste and fertilizer runoff into soils, streams and local water supplies and wells. Cutting more timber releases the carbon sequestered in the old-growth trees. Paper production, logging and mining create high demands for energy and are also industries fraught with pollution problems. We are experiencing a multiyear struggle in opposition to mines and mine runoff in the northern part of the state, an area of many interconnected lakes and rivers where pollution from mining would not stay safely in a contained area but would potentially pollute widely in those vulnerable lakes and community water sources.

The industries the authors mention are those in which water, air or soil pollution might be more likely or community safety might be more at risk. How are other states with high environmental standards able to approve industry permits at a faster rate than Minnesota? It is surprising to me that the authors are not addressing these issues in their article. For fossil-fuel-intensive projects, permitting would require greater assurances that our mutual environmental future is not at risk.

I am in favor of speeding up the permitting process especially for renewable energy and grid-improvement projects. We are experiencing ever greater demand for clean renewable energy. With more clean energy, we can have more agriculture and manufacturing that do not rely on petrochemicals and fossil fuels. It is wasteful to build more fossil-fuel infrastructure when we are transitioning away from fossil fuels, as we must do for a stable climate and a safer future.

Laura Haule, Minneapolis


•••


The controversy surrounding the proposed Nemadji Trail Energy Center gas plant in Superior, Wis., underscores the challenges facing Minnesota's energy transition ("Proposed power plant near Duluth hits a snag," March 22). As our Iron Range coal plants approach retirement, we'll need a dispatchable, reliable power source to keep the lights on. While any new energy infrastructure will face some resistance, nuclear offers unique advantages that deserve serious consideration.

Advanced nuclear reactors provide a land-efficient, carbon-free energy source that isn't vulnerable to the supply disruptions that have contributed to blackouts in places like Texas and California. These plants could create good jobs and tax revenue for communities facing the loss of coal, while preserving our natural landscapes and air quality.

But Minnesota's outdated ban on new nuclear energy ties our hands. We need to lift this moratorium now to give our utilities the flexibility to explore all available options. Nuclear plants don't appear overnight, and proactive planning is essential to avoid a future of energy shortages, blackouts or prolonged reliance on polluting fossil fuels, as Germany has demonstrated.

Some may clutch their pearls over used fuel storage, but the real boogeyman is climate change. Minnesota has a rare opportunity to join the global nuclear renaissance and chart a sustainable path forward. Let's not allow unfounded fears to eclipse the urgent need for clean, reliable energy.

Eric G. Meyer, Falcon Heights

The writer is executive director at Generation Atomic and a Falcon Heights City Council member.


RAMADAN

Common questions, answered

As your friendly Muslim college student, I'd like to answer some questions my non-Muslim friends and colleagues ask me during Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting.

1) "How does it work?" Every day, before dawn we eat and pray. Once the sun starts rising, we don't eat or drink again until sunset. Yeah, not even water.

2) "What's the point?" Giving up food and water is just one piece of the puzzle. We also increase our charity, prayer and recitation of our holy book, the Holy Qur'an, during this month. Essentially, we give up physical sustenance to focus on nourishing our souls, like a religious refresher course of sorts.

3) "Don't you get hungry, thirsty, tired?" Yes, but that's the point. The challenge allows us to reflect and be grateful for all that we are blessed with. It also increases our empathy toward those who go to bed hungry and thirsty not because they are fasting but because they have no food and water. Finally, it shows us that we are capable of making these difficult sacrifices of food, sleep and money for the sake of faith.

4) "Do all Muslims fast?" Generally yes; however, those with physical limitations like young children, the elderly, pregnant, breastfeeding or menstruating women and those who are ill or traveling are exempt.

5) "What can we do to show support?" Be aware that Ramadan is happening. I always appreciate when non-Muslims friends and colleagues wish me Ramadan Mubarak or accommodate my praying and eating schedule.

Shanze Hayee, Duluth