With Norm Clarke’s final Review-Journal column last week, accolades, as well as notes lamenting his resignation, are surely pouring in. Mr. Clarke was the wizard of Vegas nightlife. Though his medium was prose, it also flowed like poetry, with grace and generosity.
Norm’s reportage waltzed us lyrically, and most of all, curiously, into the lives of the rich and famous. In contrast to the utility of most journalistic writing, columnists — the most independent — give us passports into realms only imagined. That’s why readers had to love Norm’s color, boldness, and certitude. No hedging, few “allegedlys” or “rumored” — such that if he wrote it, it was insightful magic you could bet on. His work was also as spontaneous and exciting as those he covered. With effortless style, he always ethically super-sized those already larger than life.
Whether writing about Celine Dion, her children or her loss of beloved Rene; or Britney, familialy stunted, though a survivor still; or when he caught the action of a sports figure, or casino mogul, Clarke always did it right. But what I’ll never forget was when he swung low, to mention even me, an obscure poet, when I first came to town. All in all, in his images and classy style, he was a poet himself.
Finally, soon after I arrived here, I heard the following unlikely comment from a casino pit boss. This regular guy was talking about Norm, saying, “Everybody in Vegas, worries about the day when one thing or another will take Norm away; for he is a ‘Vegas star,’ as big as those he covers.”
At the time, it was just disconcerting small talk about when Clarke, our favorite stargazer and poetic insider, would be lost. So here we are. We love you Norm, and wish you well.
If I remember correctly, the reason the Donald Trump-Humayun Kahn controversy started was that Mr. Kahn stated that he and his wife had sacrificed for America through the death of their son. They then asked Mr. Trump what he had sacrificed for America.
As far as I can determine, no one has asked Hillary Clinton what she sacrificed for America. If asked, she could probably say she and her husband received $100,000 less than they had asked for speeches to various influence seekers.
Seeks a vote
The rooftop solar issue that was before the Nevada Supreme Court is important to me and should be important to all Nevadans who value their right to have a voice in their government on the issues that impact them, especially those issues that touch their pocketbooks.
The court ruled that the citizens of this state will not have the opportunity to vote on the referendum that would either approve or disapprove the Public Utilities Commission’s December decision that eliminated the rate structure for Nevada Energy customers who also generate some of their energy through rooftop solar panels.
This decision destroyed the solar panel industry in Nevada. The PUC did not even provide a grandfather clause to protect existing homeowners with solar panels. This decision left homeowners like me with a huge financial loss on their roofs as the new rates did not provide an opportunity to recoup a homeowner’s investments.
The real issue at the heart of this debate is whether the public should be able to voice their will on this question in November. Citizens for Solar and Energy Fairness — the group NV Energy funded — sought to derail the people’s opportunity to vote with a petty and misleading argument that defied common sense. The group claimed that the referendum’s 200-word description is not straightforward and is argumentative and misleading.
But the only thing that is argumentative and misleading without being straightforward is NV Energy’s creation, the Citizens for Solar and Energy Fairness.
The court should have given me and my fellow citizens the opportunity to decide our own energy fate. Denise R. Duarte