Your Letters |

Your Letters

I find Marianne Maynard’s letter of May 11 a little offensive.

There are many of us who agree with Stan Rachesky’s opinions. To criticize Stan for doubting Obama after eight years of Bush being vilified, branded as ignorant and uncaring, is disingenuous at best.

We who agree with Stan do doubt current policies and are less than optimistic because we are students of the political and economic history of the United States.

We believe that increasing control of our private lives by the federal government is unconstitutional and not in keeping with the intent of our founding philosophy.

We believe that massive debt to fuel social programs will destroy the capitalist economy of our country, an economic system that led to worldwide prosperity and the betterment of mankind.

We believe that history shows the folly of appeasing those who threaten us.

We believe in the power of small and large business, not unions, to innovate, create new wealth and provide jobs.

We believe we should be competitive on the world stage, not sacrifice our future for the junk science of feel good environmentalism.

These beliefs lead us to doubt the socialistic populist policies of the current administration. We not only have a right, we have a responsibility to doubt, be pessimistic and offer alternatives.

Bob Rankin


Why does liberal talk radio fail? Recent studies have shown that 90 percent of talk radio is conservative. Conservative talk radio prevails even in liberal bastions like New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston and LA. Liberal talk radio either fails or has to have massive infusions of cash to remain on the air. There is not a single nationally viable liberal host. Why is that?

Here is one answer. Talk radio is a forum for opinion, which takes rational, logical arguments to succeed. In order to argue well, one must subscribe to reason. Liberal ideas are based on emotion, not logic. When reason is applied, liberal ideas falter.

Television and newspaper are a single-sided medium. Assertions can be made, arguments can be presented, and there is no one to discredit the argument.

In TV shows with discussions, the loudest voice always wins. (This applies to both liberal and conservative TV.)

With talk radio, there are limitless callers who are more than willing to press the issue and demand an explanation backed up with facts.

Liberal talk show hosts are not able to explain and defend their views in rational fashion. This is why liberalism cannot withstand the analytical aspect of talk radio and why it has failed. Most people will not listen for very long to an analysis-driven program if the analysis itself does not make rational sense.

The bottom line is that liberal talk radio fails to attract listeners, and that fails to attract advertisers. If a program does not attract enough advertisers to make money, it fails.

This is where the so called ‘fairness doctrine’ comes into play. Now, if the ‘fairness doctrine’ forced the MSM to provide equal time for conservative issues, as well as forced talk radio to provide equal time for liberal issues, it would indeed be ‘fair’, but the doctrine would only apply to radio.

Since liberals cannot compete in this free market, they wish to use the power of government to force the issue.

Now that FOX news is dominating the nightly news scene, is TV next on the hit list?

Joe Blanc


I’d like to respond to the recent concerns about the many letters to the editor from frequent letter writers ” we all know who they are, and I’m not going to name them because it may spark another letter submitted under the guise of freedom of speech.

I follow a couple of other papers’ letters to the editor, and never have I seen the back and forth arguing and preaching like I’ve seen in this paper. It’s gone on too long, and I beg the editor to exercise his freedom to print or not to print the same old stuff day after day. You don’t have to print every letter that is submitted. I’ve written letters to other newspapers that never got printed. That’s why they call you an editor ” so start to edit, will you?

While I’m at it, we need to retire both Hal Sundin and Ross Talbott. Get some new writers who can stimulate the mind. Your readership would increase.

Mary Blichmann


Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Glenwood Springs and Garfield County make the Post Independent’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.

For tax deductible donations, click here.

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User