In response to Jack Blankenship’s letter of July 24, I have no conflict with law enforcement, though I do have a problem with the stupidity displayed by Sheriff Lou Vallario.
Instead of begging the Garfield County Commissioners for more taxpayer cash, Lou could trade his quarter-million dollar power wagon to increase deputy wages. That alone would provide a $5/hour increase for 25 deputies for one year.
Furthermore, there are several lawsuits facing the jail. How many taxpayer dollars have been spent defending the sheriff’s ineptitude?
It’s time to put a leash on Lou; he has proven that common sense isn’t all that common.
By the way, Jack, there is no county dog catcher, or Lou would have screwed that, too. And if I ever really need help, Lou Vallario is the last one I’d call.
Stan Rachesky asks us to believe facts and not emotions. The problem is his facts come from widely disseminated e-mails which surface every election cycle, painting Democratic candidates as proponents of a tax-and-spend philosophy who will inevitably implement significant tax increases on taxpayers across all income levels, and present the Republican candidate as a model of fiscal conservatism. If you research, you will find Mr. Rachesky’s facts are predominately false. According to the Tax Policy Center’s analysis of the candidates’ proposed tax changes, the primary difference between them would be distributional, with Senator Obama’s proposals favoring lower-income taxpayers and Senator McCain’s favoring higher-income taxpayers. McCain: the average taxpayer in every income group would see a lower tax bill, but high-income taxpayers would benefit more than everyone else. Obama: high-income taxpayers would pay more in taxes, while everyone else’s tax bill would be reduced. Those who benefit the most, in terms of reducing their taxes as a percentage of after-tax income, are in the lowest income groups.
The statements made about the candidates’ proposals for changes in specific taxes or implementation of new taxes are also erroneous or misleading. The statement that Senator Obama proposes instituting a 28 percent tax “on profit from all home sales” is false. Both candidates’ proposals would leave intact an existing capital gains exemption for the first $500,000 per household of profit from the sale of a primary residence. Homeowners who realize a profit higher than the current exemption amount from the sale of their primary residences might pay more capital gains tax under an Obama presidency than they would now, but those instances currently constitute a very small minority of all home sales.
The Republican spin machine has been very busy sending e-mails to loyal followers concerning radical Muslims, Obama’s black family, stories attributed to Obama that are made up or extractions from his many writings and speeches, assembled to defame him.
The Internet provides numerous resources to debunk the bunk. Stan, try researching the facts instead of just regurgitating forwarded e-mails.
Craig S. Chisesi
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User