Arrest in the JonBenét Ramsey murder case
In light of the confession by John Mark Karr to the murder of JonBenét Ramsey, will there be proportionate apologies by the rush-to-judgment press for tarring and feathering the Ramseys out of town? What justice will the media give in redress? Where is the media’s outrage at itself?
Jim Schwartz, Centennial
…
The new suspect in the JonBenét Ramsey murder must still be afforded his presumption of innocence, since even a “confession” must be suspect when our attorney general apparently thinks that waterboarding is an enlightened juristic tool.
Nevertheless, the next time authorities or reporters say that innocent people don’t need a lawyer, just remember that if the police and nearly every local and national media pontificator had had their way, Patsy Ramsey would have died in prison and John Mark Karr would still be teaching children in this country.
Steven Chostler, Denver
…
So, 10 years have gone by and, lo and behold, JonBenét Ramsey was not killed by her mother. Already the discussion has begun. Is the media going too far? Well, yes it is. Peter Boyles’ tireless crusade to publicly prosecuted a completely innocent woman was a great example.
Granted, this is not entirely the media’s fault. The American public, so enamored with scandal, sports and celebrity worship, created this opportunity for the media. But when it comes to someone like Boyles, who had Patsy Ramsey publicly lynched in front of the entire city of Denver, words seem to fail me when thinking of ways to describe the outrage I feel.
Boyles needs to invite John Ramsey onto his show and make a public apology to him for the whole city of Denver to hear.
Jard Davis, Glendale
Colo. secretary of state’s new campaign rules
Re: “GOP benefits from new campaign rules,” Aug. 15 editorial.
I was astonished to see your newspaper come out against something I had thought both major political parties could agree on: the need to shine a light on political funding.
Your editorial swipe at Republican Secretary of State Gigi Dennis on Tuesday essentially accuses her of manipulating public policy in the interest of rank partisanship, a pretty serious charge. She supposedly did this by requiring those murky “issue committees” that fund so much of the negative advertising every campaign season to disclose their donors. You contend she also did this by barring campaign contributions from non-U.S. citizens and by requiring unions that use their members’ dues for political purposes to obtain each member’s permission.
What is the problem with any of that? You try to impugn Dennis’ motives without addressing whether her actions might actually be good public policy. You acknowledge that disclosure “seems sensible enough, as long as the enforcement is evenhanded.” What is your evidence it won’t be evenly enforced? And what could possibly be wrong with requiring unions to obtain a member’s approval before using his or her hard-earned dues to back, or attack, candidates and causes of the union leaders’ choosing? Right now, rank-and-file members have little say in such matters.
Is The Post’s concern really that Dennis’ policy decisions are intended to help Republicans, or that the evenhanded application of such sensible and overdue policies will disadvantage major Democratic contributors?
State Sen. Andy McElhany, Colorado Springs
Relocating non-native fish from Yampa River
Re: “Recovery plan real ‘boondoggle’; Western Slope anglers angry over continued funding of native fish program,” Aug. 13 outdoors column.
Charlie Meyers’ lamented the vast amounts of money spent on relocating non-native pike and smallmouth bass from the Yampa River. The purported purpose for removing these species is to assist in the recovery of four endangered native fish species – specifically, the humpback chub, the bony tail, the Colorado pikeminnow and the razorback sucker. According to Meyers, these removal efforts, in addition to being expensive, have not been particularly successful in enhancing the recovery of these native fish. Rather, the more noticeable impact has been the ruination of a once-great pike and smallmouth bass fishery.
What may be even more galling, if the suspicions of local Yampa River anglers and guides are founded, is that the real intent of this removal program is to rid the Yampa of natural predators so that the native endangered species can proliferate – to such an extent that they can then be taken off the endangered species list, thus easing current water restrictions placed on developers, ranchers/farmers and utility companies.
It is important to note that this removal effort falls under the auspices of the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program, a group involving not only state and federal agencies, but water and utility power organizations in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. This recovery effort may have the veneer of an environmental program, but one has to wonder if it’s nothing more than another power grab for that precious commodity – water.
Jon Phillip Weimer, Denver
New security rules for passenger carry-ons
Re: “Real air security or window dressing?” Aug. 16 editorial.
What in the name of stirring up passenger annoyance and fear of terrorist plots is going on here? We’re supposed to be scared by a tube of lipstick or some toothpaste? Get real! There are far more serious threats posed by carry-ons.
One example is laptop computers, which are carried by passengers on every flight. The recent recall by Dell of more than 4 million batteries used in laptops was caused by incidents of computers actually blowing up and bursting into flames. How many of the millions of people affected by this recall will either not have heard about it or choose to ignore it? This is a carry-on that has real potential of danger.
Security officials should take immediate steps to ban laptops unless they are inspected and the checkers are satisfied the batteries have been removed.
Bill Holroyd, Castle Rock
…
In regards to the new airline rules requiring disposal of all liquid items: I find it ironic that in a nation that has so much, in our usual overreactive manner we now throw away thousands of items that could have been distributed to the needy throughout our own country, let alone over the world. It’s disgusting to watch our government force individuals to remove all liquid items and instead of recycling for good causes, they end up in the trash heap. What ever happened to the recycling movement in our country? I’m sure the needy of the world would love to have a few of these items.
John L. Browder, Denver
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
Letters guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 200 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address and day and evening phone numbers. Letters may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.
Archives: Missed your favorite columnist or the latest Mike Keefe cartoon? Archives available at The Denver Post Online (www.denverpost.com)
