Brenda Snook is Completely Wrong, Except For Part About Alameda Daily Noose's Value to the Community
I wanted you to know that I agree with what you said about some of those people out there who seem to have an unhealthy obsession with Squirrels. However, as a frequent reader, I couldn't help noticing that the Alameda Daily Noose seems to be in danger of falling into that same trap. Do you realize that you've been running Squirrel stories for the past four days in a row now (not counting the weekend, of course).
Aren't you worried that if Right-Thinking Alamedans read too much about Squirrels they might start to understand and even sympathize with them? As important as it is to make everyone aware of the Squirrel threat, I'm afraid you may have crossed the line into too much Squirrel coverage. Please, step back from the edge of that abyss before it's too late. The Alameda Daily Noose is far too valuable a resource in our community. I don't want to see it fall to friendly fire in the Global War on Squirrels.
Concerned Citizen Brenda Snook
Brenda Snook clearly doesn't know what she is talking about. The Alameda Daily Noose and I run plenty of stories about things other than Squirrels. Miss Snook must not read carefully enough to realize that. As Tom Paine—or was it Tom Petty?—once said, it is "the height of the folly of ridiculousness" to suggest that we could be susceptible to wasting as much time on Squirrels as those nutty researchers and unrealistic "rehabilitators" who seem to think that being a Squirrel is not necessarily cause for punishment. The Alameda Daily Noose and I can't help it that there has been an alarming amount of Squirrel activity lately, on which it was our duty to report.