It’s hurricane season. And that means it’s time for articles about past damage from hurricanes.
Since one of the major issues for the liberal decision-makers is climate change, and the President and seemingly his entire leadership team stretch to tie every issue back to the international climate change movement, the New York Times wrote an article focused on Fair Bluff, a small town in southeastern North Carolina that sits on the banks of the Lumber River, and how devastating hurricanes brought on by climate change have hurt the town.
In the article is the quote: “The increasing frequency of extreme weather has left countless towns, in the U.S. and around the world, vulnerable to both physical devastation and economic insolvency.”
The article doesn’t just focus on Fair Bluff. It also mentions the devastation of Seven Springs, which for decades has been subject to flooding from its position on the banks of the Neuse River. Then there’s Princeville, sitting on the banks of the Tar River, and also ravaged by flooding from storms over the years.
We feel for these people who have lost their homes and property from weather disasters. We hope that more opportunities for relief for people in these areas are coming their way in the form of more choices for flood insurance and disaster mitigation.
What is interesting in the New York Times article is the feeling you get that the editors have an issue that is THE one thing they want to hammer – and that they have commissioned their writers to look for evidence and examples of places in the country that help them make their case and arrive at their conclusions.
Yes, all these towns are vulnerable to storms that cause heavy flooding. But – think about it – they are on riverbanks, so that possibility has been around for a while.
As to their economic demise, we also know that most towns in eastern North Carolina the size of Fair Bluff, Princeville and Seven Springs haven’t been doing so well since tobacco and the whole economy tied to it went out of business in the 1990s and early 2000s – leaving farm communities, banks, tractor equipment companies and other tobacco-related industries sucking air. The tobacco buyout was the last straw – and since then small towns like Fair Bluff have unfortunately become shells of their former selves with abandoned buildings and empty storefronts.
For many of these same towns, you might add to it the evaporation of the textile and timber industry in eastern North Carolina that suffered from changes in the international economy and pulled up stakes for greener pastures. Other factors hurt eastern North Carolina cities and towns – including the high cost of electricity in some municipalities that hurt manufacturing plants and deterred the recruitment of new industry.
If you know the history of North Carolina, you might remember that most towns in the eastern part of the state were built on waterways because there were few roads. So yes – besides the economic downturn from other factors in the past couple of decades, these towns are subject to damage from river flooding from hurricanes when they occur – especially since many people like to build near water.
Yes – the storms have been bad. Hurricane Florence sat over southeastern NC in 2018 and dropped 30 plus inches of rain in some areas. Two years before, Matthew pounded the region on the South Carolina border up and down the Lumber River.
20 years earlier, Hurricanes Fran and Floyd did a similar one-two punch to eastern North Carolina and decimated some riverbank towns.
Families and businesses were crushed then just like now. Horrifying stories emerged. Damage costs were astoundingly high. And articles were written.
If it gets hot for a series of days, there’s an article about how the pattern is part of climate change. If it’s an unusual series of days of cold weather, there’s an article about the cold snap.
Radio and TV talk shows need fodder. Reporters need stories. News services want to make money. Weather reporters like to lean into the wind on camera. And politicians crave votes.
We’re not saying the weather is not having an impact on lives. We are absolutely sympathetic to people’s plight when these dire circumstances occur.
What we are saying is this New York Times article is just another example of liberals working overtime to rewrite history. According to their agenda.
Their drive to make what seems like every weather occurrence fit the narrative of a political agenda that blames everything on climate change, without telling the whole story, gets a little old.