Patty Haenny’s letter of Dec. 1 was so very shortsighted. And I have great respect for Pat Dalrymple’s financial savvy and his sharing of that with us, but regarding his Dec. 1 letter, I couldn’t disagree with him more.
Putting shame and blame on those in office who have valid oversight is shameful in itself. Is it not widely accepted that to teach a man to fish is the real gift over just giving the fish.
It would be counterproductive for our elected officials to set up and support the organizations “whose sole purpose is to assist those in need” and then support any and all behavior that discourages them from using those services.
Instead, the giving of money enables the homeless to drink and do drugs and live on the streets, asking others to support that lifestyle. When you give them money, you discount all those volunteers and organizations that are working so hard to change that.
Those panhandlers make up to $200 a day. I live right there and watch what goes on as they go to and from the liquor store. I see them sleeping in the road and having campfires in their drunken stupor. It is dangerous for those of us whose homes are nearby, to say the least.
I would love to see them sleeping cozy warm and safe in a home that is readily available to them, but they do not want that. They love this location for the liquor store, convenience store and all the traffic that allows them to live their lifestyle.
If we don’t give money, they will leave. It’s that simple. And if they leave, some might just find their way to a shelter.
Kudos to all those who volunteer and support those shelters and food banks. Please don’t give money, as it is not a gift you should feel good about and no good karma will come from it. The homeless have several good choices in this valley that they are well aware of, yet they choose the streets because they can, because others enable them.
Traditionally, men work and women stay home to raise the children. In today’s society that is less frequently the case, and so men are being awarded child custody more often today than ever before.
However, there is still a bias toward mothers in child custody cases. Yet from the moment a child is conceived, two parents, a father and a mother, are involved in creating one of life’s most precious gifts, life.
Fathers want more of our rights and liberties to be equal – personally and judicially – when it comes to our kids. After all, they are our children, too.
In awarding custody, a judge will decide what is in the best interest of the child or children by determining several factors, most having a natural bias that favors mothers over fathers. I believe our judicial system is letting us down as fathers, and that in most cases we have been labeled as just a paycheck.
Also, if the courts truly determine custody with an unbiased opinion they would see that the father would win most custody cases based on the factors a judge must oversee to determine who is a better fit parent to provide for and raise that child.
It was disgusting to watch a television news broadcast on Dec. 5 of members of Congress fleeing the U.S. Capitol building for a several days of recess or vacation.
Apparently most of them were Republican House members. Were they told to escape to avoid the debates on the “fiscal cliff” issue? It seems to be a strategy employed by Rep. Eric Cantor and Republican leaders. So, these members of Congress were fleeing their responsibilities.
According to the news anchor, they have only three actual days remaining in December to conduct legislative business. I checked the congressional calendar and this looks to be accurate.
According to a reliable website on our national government, it costs taxpayers $30 million per day to have Congress in session. So, we have a part-time Congress shirking its responsibilities and costing taxpayers tons of money each day. It is almost cowardly that these elected representatives cannot face up to their responsibilities and do their jobs.
Be they Democrats or Republicans, they choose to work for their political parties and not for their constituents and go home for a vacation. When Congress is in session, they are scheduled to do very few days of actual legislative business. The rest of the days are wasted, non-essential, non-working days for them. They all should just stay home and save us millions of dollars.
It is obvious that many of these members of Congress do not care about the 98 percent of the Americans who pay most of the taxes in this country. We need to continue the tax cuts for middle and lower income Americans. Aren’t you tired of supporting the wealthy 2 percent and corporate America?
Recently on my way to the grocery store, I got bored with the music, so switched the car radio over to 980 KGLN talk radio on the AM dial. Wow, what an earful of right-wing vitriol.
KGLN is the only AM station in our valley, cranking out 2,000 watts during daylight hours. The station was locally owned until 2007, when it was sold to MBC Grand Broadcasting in Grand Junction, owner of six other broadcast outlets.
Here is the current lineup of weekday programs:
4-7 a.m., Bill Bennett
7-10 a.m., Glenn Beck
10 a.m. to 1 p.m., Neal Boortz
1-4 p.m., Sean Hannity
4-7 p.m., Mark Levin
7-10 p.m., Savage Nation
10 p.m. to midnight, Roger Hedgecock
Midnight to 4 a.m., Red Eye Radio
Several of those names will ring a bell as Fox News talking heads. As far as I can tell, the entire lineup, including weekends, is supplied by Fox News.
My question is this: Where is the fairness and balance of that? FCC guidelines read in part: As public trustees, broadcasters may not intentionally distort the news. Broadcasters are responsible for deciding what their stations present to the public.
The FCC has stated publicly that “rigging or slanting the news is a most heinous act against the public interest.” Here is a link to the FCC guidelines: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/journalism.html.
Assuming that the airwaves are still the property of thee and me, I feel we should not allow this to go on. The KGLN license comes up for renewal on April 1, 2013, so I intend to write to the FCC and protest the renewal. I hope others will join me, and welcome their input: contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org or 928-8721.
I want to thank Dan Bokenko for demonstrating the liberal mindset in his Dec. 6 response to Ross Talbott’s column. He ignored that which was said and injected his own biased misunderstanding as if it’s truth.
Nowhere in Mr. Talbott’s Nov. 27 column was there a call for elimination of taxes, nor was there any statement that suggested that we should “blame it all on taxes.” As a matter of fact, Mr. Talbott stated that “some taxation is essential.”
The heart of his column suggests that the majority of taxes are hidden in such a manner that the consumer doesn’t see them, and as a result he pays them blindly. Then, as a course of political manipulation, there is a call to tax more heavily the producers, who will ultimately pass that expense on to you as a consumer.
The primary reason that you as a consumer see the prices of products rising without your pay going up is because the operating expense of the producing business has gone up. Those expenses are substantially in the form of taxes and regulation compliance.
If you want a higher wage in exchange for your labor with a fixed cost of products, then you must consider working toward a reduction of the other costs of production of those products. If you mandate a higher wage in the form of increased minimum wage with no other change in the cost of production, then all you have done is increase the cost of production, which will always end up in a resulting increase in the cost of the end product – which you then turn around and buy. Guess who just paid for the increase in your wages? The end consumer. You.
As the pain and cost of doing business continue to rise, so does the cost to the consumer. Ultimately, you will sooner or later drive off the desire to operate a business, and then the small businesses that are the backbone of our country’s economic engine will fade away. Then where are we? So much for your freedom, liberty and free market. Stay paid up and prayed up.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
The final four: Glenwood Springs police chief candidates talk policing philosophies at community meet and greet
Thirty-six candidates applied for the Glenwood Springs chief of police position. None of the candidates were from within the Glenwood Springs Police Department.