Email Letters: September 23, 2016

Gail Schwartz understands the importance of our public lands

Jason Blevin’s article on public lands and Donald Trump Jr.’s fireside chat in Grand Junction certainly brought the issue of the future of public lands to the public. But much more lies in the Western Slope where Scott Tipton and Gail Schwartz are running for the 3rd Congressional District seat. As a hunter of some 60 years in Colorado, I am very concerned that Scott Tipton has co-sponsored four pieces of legislation to transfer or sell off Colorado’s 25 million acres of National Forest, National Parks and BLM lands. As the article mentioned, Colorado receives some $34 billion from outdoor recreation each year and nearly $20 billion on the Western Slope. Gail Schwartz was chair of the Colorado Senate Natural Resources Committee and understands the importance of our public lands. She is the natural choice of the 3rd Congressional District.


In-depth review of DHS may force much needed changes

I would like to extend my “thank you” to The Sentinel for the extensive articles you wrote on the “Failure to Protect” child abuse deaths and the failures of our local Department of Human Services to respond more quickly to the warning signs presented to them. The state policy of “kinship” does tie the hands of DHS to some extent, but there are still avenues they can pursue, such as vetting kinship as thoroughly as they do foster and adoptive parents. This, of course, is going to require more time and effort on the part of DHS, but isn’t just one child’s life worth it?

I found the cavalier attitude of Tracy Garcher, as quoted in the article on Angel Place, truly appalling. I know it is easy to Monday morning quarterback, but I am sure that his attitude they are doing all they can to handle child placement and didn’t make any mistakes has filtered down to his staff. I hope that because of your extensive coverage there will be an in-depth review of DHS that will force much needed changes.

Grand Junction

Future makeup of Supreme Court more important than presidential election

Consider this a summation of discussions related to the forthcoming general election. Both candidates for president lack qualities of statesmanship exhibited by predecessors such as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, or General Eisenhower, but we must choose one.

Mrs. Clinton has been documented as a devious liar over the past decades. How could anyone vote to turn over the operations of our government to a person with such low standards? Mr. Trump is only slightly better, and, if elected, must be held in check by a diligent Congress.

The question of who should be elected president is of less importance than what political party should be in power afterwards. The makeup of the Supreme Court should not be of the political importance that it is, if the justices would follow the requirements of our Constitution, which is unfortunately not the case. Should Clinton be elected, and have the power to nominate new liberal justices to support her legislation, the affect would be felt for many years by all of us. The Constitution would be essentially trashed, and many of the freedoms we presently enjoy, including ownership of guns, would be severely restricted or abolished.

Neither candidate says much about our staggering national debt, or the size of and many offensive actions by the federal bureaucracy. Our only salvation is to encourage economic growth and reduce the size of the federal government. Think about this when you submit your vote.


Clearly this war on terror is simply creating more terrorists

With the recent attacks in New York, New Jersey and Minnesota, the issue of terrorism is foremost in the minds of many Americans. These attacks should also raise the question, “what is the best way to stop more of these incidents from happening?” Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have proposed military means as the best solution. However, if we look carefully at the recent history of the U.S. War on Terror, we see very clearly that bombs do not destroy terrorism. In fact, one could argue that military intervention in Iraq lead directly to the birth of ISIS. Furthermore, the perpetrators of the attacks in New York, New Jersey, Minnesota, as well as San Bernardino, were seemingly motivated more by sympathy for the terrorists being bombed, rather than any formal allegiance to the terrorist organization itself. If that is true, clearly this war on terror is simply creating more terrorists.

Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party Candidate for President, offers another way forward. She advocates reining in military responses and resorting to more economic and diplomatic means. Dr. Stein has proposed going after countries such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, the alleged sources of funding for terrorist organizations. By freezing the funding as well as arms sales to these countries we can ensure that terrorists are less able to continue their operations. Not only is this an effective means of stopping terrorist activities, it costs taxpayers less too. Instead of spending our already stretched national budget on more funding for the military we can divert those funds to helping secure the future of many people here at home.

Grand Junction

Change in leadership at county level could be a big step in protecting our children

Erin McIntyre and Gabrielle Porter’s series “Failure to Protect” is without a doubt one of the finest pieces of reporting ever to come from the Sentinel. The series was extremely well researched, pulled no punches, and shed a long overdue and much-needed light on the horrific and seemingly escalating crime of child abuse and murder in Mesa County. These two women deserve the thanks of our entire community for making us more aware of these heart-breaking and complex issues and the failure of the government agencies, bureaucracy and departments whose mission it is to protect these innocent children from their despicable murderers.

While we wait for the kinship placement procedures and other statutes to be changed, a change in leadership at the county level could prove to be a big first step towards preventing future murders of children. Tracey Garchar was put on an “improvement plan” and probation last October. It was never really made clear what the improvement plan involved, but at the end of his probation period, county commissioners McInnis and Justman voted to allow him to retain his job. Garchar continues to be employed at the pleasure of the county commissioners and under their direct supervision. Perhaps it is time for all three men to lose their jobs so that our children have a better chance of keeping their lives.

Again, many thanks and congratulations to McIntyre and Porter for your efforts in bringing this series to us.

Grand Junction

Growing number of people question wisdom of throwing money at green energy

Mr. Kolbenschlag’s Sept. 21 letter to the editor claims that Greg Walcher’s commentary in The Daily Sentinel last Friday misrepresented the Alliance’s trip to Washington D.C. Walcher did not misrepresent the fact that when you shut a mine and start the reclaiming process, every employee will lose his or her job – a job that will never return. Neither did he misrepresent the contribution of millions of dollars paid to local town, state, and county governments (contributions that are lost forever!). Nor did he misrepresent continued increases in electrical rates (devastating the poor!)

Your own credibility may be questioned though when you are projecting to produce 50 percent of the power by 2025. Questioning your means to pay for all of these “green energy” projects without government subsidies, grants, or an individual contribution is legitimate. The green energy company, Solar Energy International, referenced in the letter, and your company, Mountain West Strategies, relies on subsidies for existence. The Washington D.C. trip was necessary to influence the money gurus to give you more tax dollars.

There are a growing number of people that question the wisdom of continuing to throw money at green energy companies. At some point they have to stand on their own two feet. According to Good Job First, $20 billion has been awarded to 17 “green” companies. One, SunEdison, may soon file for bankruptcy after collecting $680 million. There are 36 other companies known as “Obama’s taxpayer-funded green energy failures,” that were awarded substantial sums of money such as Solundra ($535 million), SunPower ($1.2 billion), First Solar ($1.2 billion), and Abound Solar ($400 million) and when they failed thousands of people lost their jobs.

The green solution to global warming is to spend lots of money on wind and solar power while banning less expensive conventional energy sources. Mr. Kolbenschlag, your support of methane capture is surprising being that it leaves a carbon footprint and has surpassed coal in emissions of carbon dioxide. As a rancher, business owner, and activist you must know that fellow environmentalists have expressed their concern about humans and livestock being a major contributor to global warming because they emit methane when they belch or fart. Have you done any experimentation with the fart-capturing backpack?

Grand Junction
Situation in Charlotte worthy of front-page coverage

After two nights of serious social unrest, rioting, looting, and injury in Charlotte, The Daily Sentinel does the expected: publishing an Associated Press article of about nine column inches and a tiny photo, crammed in between advertisements on page 6A.

Isn’t this situation worthy of, say, front-page coverage?


Grand Junction

Trump is the vaccine that America needs right now

I am a 71-year-old white woman who has a Master’s Degree from a good university and raised two successful sons as a single mother. I have also lived part of my life in the suburbs. I am exactly the person who is not supposed to vote for Donald Trump. But I’m going to do so enthusiastically.

This is how I see the current election. It’s as if a dreadful, deadly virus has suddenly spread all over America. There is a vaccine that has been tested for about eight years, but with very little, if any, success. There is a new vaccine that shows great promise in testing but the CDC thinks may be a risk. Most of the people will choose one of these vaccines. However, another group of people won’t use either one. They know the old vaccine doesn’t work, but they think the name of the new vaccine sounds like a dirty word – possibly even a word that God doesn’t want us to use. These people will instead take a couple of aspirin. It is widely known that aspirin has no effect on the virus. I’m taking the Trump vaccine.



Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050; M-F 8:00 - 5:00
Subscribe to print edition
eTear Sheets/ePayments

© 2017 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy