E-mail letters, July 29, 2010
Tipton will be congressman
western Colorado needs
For those of you who haven’t voted yet, I’m encouraging a vote for Scott Tipton in the 3rd Congressional District. Scott has spent the last 30 years operating a small business. He’s created jobs, met a payroll and made tough choices along the way. These are all things that Congress had failed to do. Scott is a true conservative and he’s the kind of leader we need.
I also want to share with you some concerning facts about the other candidate in this primary, Bob McConnell. I don’t usually do this, but Bob McConnell’s public comments are quite strange and very concerning. In fact, these comments are why The Durango Herald concluded that Bob is “off the deep end.” Read it for yourself.
In an interview with the Herald, McConnell said he wrote up his own Declaration of Independence to create his own country, a country he claimed existed in his head, called “Bobistan.” (He seriously did this!) Read it for yourself. We are facing serious issues and we deserve a serious candidate.
Bob McConnell’s health care plan is a more extreme form of socialism than Obamacare. In a recorded candidate forum that aired on Channel 12 in Grand Junction, Bob McConnell suggested a public health care policy where local governments buy foreclosed homes, turn them into public health care clinics that are run by EMTs and provide health care to the people who live in those neighborhoods. Watch it for yourself. (It’s video #3)
In a recent letter to the editor, in The Durango Herald, McConnell was chastised for falsely claiming an endorsement (the guy actually endorsed John Salazar) Read it for yourself.
Compare all of this nonsense to Scott Tipton, a husband, father and small business owner who knows how to live within a budget and expects the same of Congress! Scott is a true conservative and he’s the kind of leader we need. Please join me in voting for Scott Tipton for Congress.
Sentinel on wrong side
on Arizona immigration law
I am confounded after reading The Daily Sentinel’s third editorial on the Arizona law. Once again, it has supported outlawing rigorous enforcement of immigration law. At this rate, it won’t take a crystal ball or Nostradamus to predict its position on amnesty when it comes up for serious debate.
I can’t quite grasp the Sentinel’s logic. We know that non-enforcement by the federal government results in illegal immigration. We have granted seven amnesties to six million individuals to alleviate the problem, which in turn was rewarded by 20 million more illegal immigrants, again the result of lax enforcement. Current non-enforcement is going to result in what?
Arizona is literally a battle zone of crime and activity directly related to illegal immigration. Arizona passed a law to facilitate the job the federal government won’t do. The Daily Sentinel responds by siding with fears that profiling may occur if someone without adequate identification is questioned about immigration status at a crime scene.
The Daily Sentinel needs to rethink its laissez faire priorities on law enforcement because it is on the wrong side of this issue. On illegal immigration, the majority of Americans are willing to accept the inconvenience of profiling over murder and mayhem any day.
Perhaps it’s time to be more responsive to the needs of our citizens and less sensitive to the feelings and welfare of illegal aliens.
Public must demand that
politicians take up energy
In light of China’s upcoming prominence in energy consumption, the urgency to move forward as a leader with clean energy and an honest climate policy is clear.
Now more than ever, it is time for the Senate to seize this opportunity and end the status quo of our current unsustainable energy policy. However, it is apparent that the relentless and well-funded lobbying efforts from the coal and oil industries are not only obstructing valuable discourse but much needed legislative steps toward clean and renewable energy.
In the debate over energy policy, a minority of politicians, such as Texas Republican Joe Barton, constantly obstruct the opportunity to tackle climate change and move toward a clean-energy economy. Until partisan obstructionist tactics are condemned by the current political leadership, America and its citizens will suffer the consequences.
Our senators still have the power to do the right thing and expand America’s leadership role as a clean energy leader into the 21st century. However, without more public participation in this discussion, I fear our country will be left behind.
Rules for gravel-pit hearing
must be consistent
Two months ago, the Grand Junction Planning Commission denied an application for a permit to operate a gravel extraction operation on 29 ¾ Road, wisely recognizing the serious safety issues of the adjoining neighborhood concerned about the possibility of hundreds of trucks rumbling up and down the narrow road of their subdivision.
The applicant, Schooley-Weaver Partnership, has appealed that decision to the Grand Junction City Council, and the hearing is scheduled for Aug. 2. They are certainly within their legal rights to appeal this decision.
According to city code and Planning Staff, “…the consideration of the appeal by the City Council is limited to the Facts on Records. No new evidence or testimony may be considered.” This lays out the ground rules for Monday’s meeting. However, I find the “no new evidence or testimony” part quite intriguing, since the applicant’s appeal cites at least one point of new evidence dealing specifically with the safety of children waiting for the school bus on 29 ¾ Road – the only road those gravel trucks can travel to access Highway 50.
During the June 8 planning commission hearing, the applicant’s engineer stated: “…we specifically contacted Dave Montoya (of School District 51) to suggest a relocation of the bus stop potentially to something to the east…”
Later, Commissioner Richard Schoenradt asked the engineer: “When you asked Mr. Montoya, what was his response to moving the school bus stop?” And the answer? “Unfortunately,” the engineer replied, “we tried contacting him last week and we simply played phone tag for three or four days.”
No actual conversation took place between Schooley-Weaver’s engineer and the School District prior to the Planning Commissioner’s meeting.
Imagine our surprise when reading this statement in the appeal letter, the document that WILL be read by Council: “(The engineer) testified at the Hearing to the ongoing efforts with Dave Montoya, School District 51 Transportation Coordinator…to relocate the bus stop off 29 ¾ Road and internal to the subdivision. The School District is agreeable to this solution.”
So, is this new information? Please, city of Grand Junction, what will be the rules for Monday’s meeting? We’d really like to know.
Testing trends is
critical to science
A letter in Tuesday’s Daily Sentinel, headlined “Global warmists want us to bet all on limited data,” demands the following response.
Trends, as the writer of the letter so easily dismisses, are absolutely important in making just about every decision in our technological environment. An engineer, for example, bases his predictions of the strength of concrete, a product composed of non-homogeneous earth materials — sand, gravel, cement, and water — on trends established through testing and charting of the trends resulting from these tests. Foundations for skyscrapers are designed on the basis of these tests (strength trends).
Airplanes fly based on the results of wind tests on wing models. Lift is caculated based on formulae established through testing and charting of these results. Most scientific advances must be confirmed by results of testing either in laboratories or out in the environment. In all these tests, trends are established, and include anomalies not unlike the trends associated with weather predictions and yes, global warming.
So how can we ignore the fact that 90 percent of scientists today state unequivocally that the rapid increase in global temperatures are mostly the result of man’s activities. Especially when these pronouncements are based on several hundred years of observations and plotting of data to establish a trend.
To ignore the observable trends of “melting ice and a rising temperature trend”, which incidentally are a small part of the factual data, is to condemn life on Earth as we know it (including us) to extinction. What do we breath for example when the atmosphere so essential to life is increasingly displaced by CO2 and the other byproducts of our reckless life style?
Robert A. Tallarico
McInnis far from only one
who has plagiarized
What’s the big deal about plagiarizing? I’ll bet a large majority of lawyers, research people, professors, judges and lots others have done the same thing. The worst ones are ministers in their sermons, according to the dictionary definition of the word.
Also, no one has said a thing about what the foundation that got the research paper from Scott McInnis did with it. If they used it, then they must to have been satisfied with it. Now they cry foul. I say they got what they paid for, so shut up.
Now to the judge who said the law can’t stop the person who claims to be a veteran with the Purple Heart and the Bronze Star. I would like to go to the courthouse next time that judge is there and tell him to get out of his chair. I think I am a judge and will take his place.
By the way, I am an 85-year-old real World War II veteran who got the Bronze Star. Tell that judge to come see me, I will show him my commendation.