Ned Lamont’s response to Cheney, Lieberman
Re: “Dem winner assails Lieberman, Cheney,” Aug. 14 news story.
A headline in Monday’s Post presented Connecticut primary winner as “assailing” and “lashing out” at defeated candidate Joe Lieberman and Vice President Dick Cheney. But a quick reading of the accompanying story was enough to reveal that the big type misrepresented the facts.
Perceiving the Connecticut upset as a judgment on its policy in Iraq, the White House mounted a coordinated campaign to portray administration ally Lieberman’s loss as, in Cheney’s words, a victory for al-Qaeda. Having been rejected by fellow Democrats, Lieberman immediately began parroting the White House line and cynically politicizing the terrorism issue.
Ned Lamont, if anything, responded mildly to Cheney’s and Lieberman’s antics: “My God, we have a terrorist threat against hearth and home, and the very first thing that comes out of their mind is, ‘How can we turn this to partisan advantage?’ I find that offensive.”
Note to Denver Post headline writers: Responsible journalists call Lamont’s words a “response.” Fair and accurate journalism requires a neutral presentation of the facts, but slanted headline writing undermines credibility.
Bill Simpson, Golden
Beauprez’s choice for lieutenant governor
Re: “Beauprez allies with newcomer,” Aug.16 news story.
Janet Rowland is an excellent choice for Bob Beauprez’s lieutenant governor. Your article detailing the announcement is one-sided, and I hope The Denver Post will work to show all sides of the story.
I am a young, moderate Republican from Mesa County who used to work for a U.S. senator from Colorado, so I am very familiar with politics. Janet is one of my role models in Grand Junction, and I could not be happier in a choice for the state’s second-highest position. As a Mesa County commissioner, she has shown her ability to listen to her constituency and make fair and just decisions. The fact that The Post focused so much on a comment Janet made regarding gay marriage (of which she apologized for soon after), instead of her extensive background in many other important social issues, shows The Post’s inability to write a fair and balanced article regarding politics.
The last thing that I would call Janet is “ignorant,” as quoted by the opposite party. She has the ability to listen to all sides of an argument and then come to her own conclusion. I may not always agree with a particular stance a government official may take, but I do put my trust in people like Janet Rowland. I know she will work extremely hard and I am extremely proud that Beauprez chose her to be his running mate.
Amanda Crysler, Grand Junction
…
Re: “Rowland’s view belongs in barnyard,” Aug. 16 Jim Spencer column.
Bob Beauprez’s campaign manger says running mate Janet Rowland made some regrettable comments, that she made a mistake. I’m sure she does regret saying that my partner and I have a relationship that is similar to sex with sheep. When will politicians realize it is not enough to regret having said what they believe? Why don’t she and Beauprez say they realize that what she said was a misstatement of what she really believes? And further, say that they do believe my partner and I should be respected and supported in our 22-year relationship? I think it is because they don’t want to step away from those beliefs that are indeed regrettable, because they do want to have it both ways.
John Ferguson, Denver
…
Apparently lieutenant governor candidate Janet Rowland intends to begin her candidacy with a lie. She is quoted as saying domestic unions for gay couples would give no benefits gay couples do not already have.
When my son, who was gay, died recently, his desire was to be cremated. Yet his long-term partner was not allowed to sign the cremation order because they were not legally married. That is an outrage.
What if, in the very sad event that Ms. Rowland’s husband should die, she were not allowed to make funeral arrangements, and that task would be given, against her will, to someone else? Would she think that fair and just?
Frank Lee Earley, Elizabeth
Stem-cell research and protecting human life
In the controversy over stem-cell research, the debate about when human life begins will rage on, but there is an aspect about stem cells that is irrefutable and that deserves consideration. Embryonic stem cells are a product of a particular woman’s eggs and a particular man’s sperm, and so the cells are imprinted with unique characteristics of its parents, defining a human being that has never existed before nor will ever exist again. I believe this individuality is a sacred and marvelous part of what we describe as humanity. To indiscriminately create and destroy embryos that contain a unique human identity seems to me to undermine the very integrity of our species. It is even more disturbing to know that the individuality of one is being sacrificed for the sake of the individuality of another.
We need to carefully consider not just whether or not embryonic stem cells are a human being worthy of protection of its life. We must also be cognizant of the fact that every embryo slated for research or medical use already contains that distinct individuality that makes it different from every other human who has ever lived or will live.
Kathleen Freeman, Aurora
Mallard Fillmore, James Taylor and Johnny Cash
Like Mallard Fillmore cartoonist Bruce Tinsley, I’m not a huge fan of James Taylor’s music. I’m curious about Tinsley’s broad assertion that Taylor and his “entire generation” of musical peers were “confessional, whiny and self-indulgent,” with Taylor being “the biggest ‘wuss’ ever.” I’d like to ask Tinsley whether he’d lump Johnny Cash in that category. While not of the same generation, Cash gave Taylor his first national television audience by inviting Taylor on “The Johnny Cash Show” in 1970 and performing a duet with him. Cash also had Bob Dylan, Neil Young, Joni Mitchell and Judy Collins appear on his show between 1969 and 1971 and went on to cover some of their songs. Was Johnny Cash a “whiny, self-indulgent wuss”?
Sean McKeown, Cascade
Golden TV tower fight
In the Sunday Denver Post, there was a “Get over to Golden” section advising people to spend their money in Golden. I think Front Range residents should keep in mind that the City of Golden is trying to keep them from receiving free over-the-air broadcasts of HDTV. TV channels 4, 7, 9 and 20 have been trying to put up a new shared HDTV tower on a 75-acre site they own on Lookout Mountain. The City of Golden is trying to seize the 75-acre transmission site by eminent domain even though it is far outside Golden city limits. This presents real problems for Front Range TV stations since they are required by Congress to begin HDTV broadcasting in 2009. The TV stations have been running commercials explaining their problem and also have a website that goes into detail at hdtvcolorado.com. Before people support Golden by shopping there, I hope they consider that the City of Golden is doing everything it can to keep Front Range residents from receiving free over-the-air HDTV broadcasts.
Bill Quinton, Centennial
Dobson and Gibson
Re: “Dobson backs Gibson’s work,” Aug. 11 news story.
I’m disappointed to see The Denver Post still waste ink and space on James Dobson and his thoughts on Mel Gibson’s drunken tirade. Racist comments, especially by people with a national platform, should be met head on (and they were), and I happen to agree with Dobson in letting the matter rest, so why is The Denver Post reporting Dobson’s comments long after this story occurred? There are much more important things to report on, both in the world and here in Colorado.
Craig Keyzer, Aurora
TO REACH OPINION EDITORS
Phone: 303-820-1331
Fax: 303-820-1502
E-mail: openforum@denverpost.com (only straight text, not attachments)
Mail: The Open Forum, The Denver Post, 1560 Broadway, Denver, 80202 or PO Box 1709, Denver, 80201
