E-mail letters, July 1, 2010
State Supreme Court pushes
redistribution of wealth
Redistribution of wealth, the mantra of the Left, is occurring daily in the lives of Coloradans through increasing “fees” of vehicle registrations, property taxes (mill levy freeze) and the “Dirty Dozen” taxes on candy, etc. This is due to our state Supreme Court’s agenda to overcome the TABOR Amendment, which gives us the right to vote on our taxes.
Responsible for this betrayal of trust are four of the justices: Mullarkey, Bender, Martinez and Rice. Mullarkey has already announced her retirement. You will be given a chance to vote out the other three liberals by voting “No” to their retention on the November ballot.
Our state Supreme Court must be accountable to the people of Colorado, not the liberal Denver government!
What makes Maes qualified
to run statewide office?
I find it odd that Mr. Lewis, in his recent letter to the editor, said that just because Maes is a businessman that he is qualified to run a statewide office. His only previous involvement in the political world, was in 1994-1995 when he attended Jefferson County Republican meetings and
in 2009 with the Colorado Republican Party when he decided to run for governor. Why did he not stay involved between 1995 and 2009?
It seems to me that Maes is nothing but an opportunist who saw that independents and moderates were going to run back to conservatism and decided that he wanted to be the one to get the glory.
I do not doubt that Maes is angry and upset at what is going on in Washington and Colorado. I am, too. When my car is broken, I may be able to pop open the lid and notice a leak, but I don’t know exactly how to fix it. Just because you recognize there is a problem does not mean that you are qualified to fix the problem.
A wonderful photo
of Mennonite kids
The photo of the Mennonite kids in the June 28 edition of The Daily Sentinel was wonderful! It made my day.
Moon rock should have
stayed on Western Slope
I learned that on June 28, former Colorado Gov. John Vanderhoof turned over the moon rock he had for more than 20 years to the Colorado School of Mines.
My question to the former governor would simply be: “Why give it to the Colorado School of Mines?” Mr. Vanderhoof chose to live in Grand Junction, and not on the Front Range. The piece of “lunar” history should stay put in Grand Junction Why couldn’t it be donated to, or at least loaned to, the Museum of Western Colorado?
In working with several hundred children in the Grand Valley, spanning more than seven years, I find this is indeed a terrible loss for them. Not being able to see “up close and personal” a piece of what I would have to say is a national treasure, is a loss for the Western Slope. Many of the children there have not seen an actual moon rock, nor will they have the ability to travel
and actually see one.
Seeing a moon rock could inspire a future scientist, perhaps a geologist, or even an astronaut. Sadly, the rock goes over to where everything else seems to go, while the Western Slope gets ignored once again. It seems to be an all-too-common occurrence.
Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
Congressional candidate has
passion, emotion, conservatism
As the conservative Republican candidate for the 3rd Congressional District, kindly let me respond to Richard Schoenradt’s letter to the editor imploring voters not to “vote with emotion” and to “investigate the character” of a candidate.
I agree with Mr. Schoenradt completely that we must talk facts and the fact is Scott Tipton lost to Rep. John Salazar in 2006 by a whopping 62 percent. As the writer notes, “We cannot afford another election year like 2008” or 2006.
As for character, I have plenty. Emotion? Plenty. Passion? I’m angry about the direction this country has taken. I’m a retired colonel, Airborne Ranger, combat veteran, mountaineer, former small business owner and recovering lawyer. Unlike Tipton, who has been involved with the Republican Party since 1976, I have never been involved in politics and owe nothing to the party. Nobody owns me, and they never will.
More facts: Tipton is a one-term state legislator with a middling record on issues critical to the conservative base. The Colorado Union of Taxpayers rates him at 73 percent, based on his voting record in the House. Of the 27 Republicans in the Colorado House, 11, or 41 percent, had more conservative voting records than Tipton.
What Mr. Schoenradt says is so true. Just the facts. Take a look at my website regarding my substance on the issues. I am advocating term limits for Congress, congressional pay cut, ending the Federal Reserve, repealing the 16th Amendment. I state that we should declare war or bring our troops home, repeal Obamacare and replace it with common-sense solutions. I will stand against wrong, whether it’s Republican or Democrat. Take a look at my videos on the Second Amendment, veteran’s rights, health care, and cap and trade, for instance. Then tell me who lacks substance.
We are not voting for senior class president. This is not a popularity contest or a payback for service to the party. The congressional seat I am seeking in order to represent you is critical to the economic recovery and health of the district. Would you send a leader or a proven middle-of-the road politician?
High court gun ruling
didn’t resolve everything
I should be happy about the recent Supreme Court decision on gun rights. However, there are some facts which are very disturbing:
1. Four of the so-called justices voted against the U.S. Constitution. The Second Amendment is in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was not written as a whim by the founders. Every amendment in the Bill of Rights was intended for use by the entire nation, not to be interfered with by crooked politicians (Chicago Mayor Daley comes to mind). These four justices swore to uphold the Constitution, but they have not done so.
2. Why is the Second Amendment continuously attacked? I can almost hear the hysterical screams from the news media if the First Amendment was subjected to the abuse the Second Amendment suffers. The Second Amendment is just as much a part of the Bill of Rights as the other nine Amendments.
3. Despite the extremely restrictive and unconstitutional anti-gun laws in Chicago and Washington D.C., some of the highest violent crime rates in the nation exist in these two cities. In fact, it was in the news a couple of weeks ago that the National Guard was being sent to Chicago to restore order as violent crime was so bad in Chicago. The criminals still have guns and law-abiding citizens have no way to defend themselves.
4. Where there are minimally restrictive gun laws and “shall issue” concealed-carry laws, violent crime is at a minimum. Why is this? Is an armed society a polite society?
We must insist on adherence to the God-given rights our founders recognized and wrote into the Constitution, not a bunch of blathering nonsense from wimpy left-wing politicians. I believe the Supreme Court could and should have given much stronger support to the Second Amendment. By doing so they would have strengthened the Constitution. They have left the door open to
even more tampering and meddling in our fundamental Rights by Mayor Daley and his ilk.
City should rehire
three fired policemen
Bob King’s letter of June 30 is right on point. I don’t know Bob, but after giving this matter a great deal of thought, his opinion and recommendation are a perfect solution.
As a retired Sheriff’s Patrol watch commander, my knee-jerk reaction was to fire the officers. However, I am also keenly aware of the investment an agency has made in each and every officer. These men, whom I also do not know, were hired because they passed all the scrutiny. They had undergone a lengthy and tedious hiring process. They either had previous law enforcement training and experience or received it after they were hired by our city government. That, too, is costly and time consuming.
Termination would have a lasting, if not permanent, effect on these men. Other candidates would have to be hired and trained, at additional cost. The loss of three patrol officers is not easily absorbed either.
Suspend them without pay, reprimand them, put them on probation, give them a short leash —but give them back their jobs. This is the career they have chosen. After all, they aren’t leeches on society. Make it right!
Opponents of tax measures
display their hypocrisy
Monday’s article about the Colorado Municipal League campaigning against the three
tax relief measures left out vital facts.
The CML gets its money from city taxes paid to it as dues. It has donated thousands
of those tax dollars to the campaign committee opposing issues 60, 61, and 101. That is
documented at COtaxreforms.com under Opposition Funding.
They may be “nonpartisan,” but they are definitely not neutral or objective. Their goal is
more and more taxes for big government. They always oppose any limits on government.
Their leader said there have been “cuts” in city governments. The state property tax report,
posted on our website, shows that municipal property taxes in 1993, after TABOR passed, were
$116 million; in 2008, the last year recorded, they were $246 million, more than double.
During that period, they never went down.
The issues do not “add more stress.” They provide tax relief for taxpayers. Of course, the
tax spenders don’t care about relief for taxpayers. They want more power and more programs.
Making government-owned businesses like golf courses and parking lots pay property taxes will
reduce unfair competition with private businesses. The new revenue will broaden the tax base
and must be used to lower property tax rates equally for everyone. How can our liberal opponents tell us higher taxes are good and then object to paying them? The word “hypocrisy” comes to mind. Why continue these tax subsidies to socialism?
Slowing the rate of increase in government revenue about 2 percent is not the end of the world. Colorado families have adjusted far more than that. A slower rate of increase is not a “cut.” The modest tax relief in these three issues is phased in over 4-to-12 years. How is that radical or devastating?
Vote “Yes” on Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101.