A sampling of recent editorials from Colorado newspapers:
NATIONAL:
Canon City Daily Record, March 13, on civility needed from all political sides in Washington, D.C.:
For anyone who has forgotten, Sandra Fluke testified before House Democrats and submitted written testimony to a congressional committee regarding whether a Catholic organization should be required to include contraceptives as part of its health plan.
What no one has missed was Rush Limbaugh’s response to Fluke’s testimony—or at least the media furor that erupted afterward.
Taking off on the idea that Fluke was asking to be “paid for having sex,” the radio talk show used the words “slut” and “prostitute” to describe the 30-year-old law student. “If we’re going to have to pay for this,” he said the following day, “then we want something in return … the videos of all this sex posted online so that we can see what we are getting for our money.”
Naturally, and appropriately, Limbaugh is getting lambasted for his remarks.
Naturally, in his apology, Limbaugh acknowledged that in using such language he had become like his opponents. That’s true, to an extent, but not the stuff of a sincere apology. And it’s further evidence that the loudest voices at both ends of the political spectrum—talk show hosts, specifically—behave in a manner that their legions of followers would never want to see in their own children.
Limbaugh should simply acknowledge that what he said was inappropriate, period, regardless of what loudmouths of the left say and regardless of who Sandra Fluke is. Clearly, her time in front of House Democrats was planned and staged, even if her words were sincere.
To those on the left who now see an opportunity to claim moral high ground: Forget that. The misogynistic spews from the left, as well, with words that cannot be reprinted here.
If civil discourse is what you want, don’t demand it by attacking the bloviating agitator on the other side of the fence. Begin by refusing to defend the foul attacks coming from those with whom you agree politically.
Editorial:
———
Longmont Times Call, March 8, on why New York Police Department’s surveillance of Muslims should be investigated:
The New York Police Department has redefined racial profiling and police powers in its beyond-the-pale tracking of Muslims.
Associated Press reporting in recent months uncovered an unfathomable program in which the city police department monitored and built databases on where Muslims live, buy groceries, worship and recreate. It infiltrated dozens of mosques and student groups at universities from Pennsylvania to New Jersey to Connecticut. It crafted profiles of Moroccans, Egyptians, Albanians and other ethnic groups, according to The Associated Press.
It took actions that within the FBI would require the highest approvals.
Even as national politicians, New Jersey leaders, American Civil Liberties chapters and many other faith-based and student-led organizations have called for investigation, any real action has been slow to come. Last week, under pressure from some in Congress, Attorney General Eric Holder finally suggested a review was beginning. Some thought such action had taken place last year, and thus should be further along.
Prompt review certainly was warranted.
This case goes beyond one of racial profiling, which generally means the practice in which law enforcement officials target individuals for suspicion of crime based on their race, ethnicity, religion or national origin.
In this case, going about life as a Muslim became a suspicious activity worth surveillance and documentation. For instance, New York City police monitored Friday prayer service, recording license plates, and photographing and videotaping those who attended.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other officials have defended the program, reminding the nation of the city’s vow—our vow—to never forget. The phrase, of course, refers to the national tragedy of Sept. 11.
But the effort to not forget the death of thousands in a terrorist act should not lead to thousands having their civil rights violated.
Editorial:
———
STATE:
The Pueblo Chieftain, March 13, on ban on Colorado-grown potatoes in Mexico:
Colorado Agricultural Commissioner John Salazar thought—as did we—that the ban on Colorado potatoes into the heart of Mexico was solved last summer when the U.S. and its southern neighbor worked out an agreement to allow Mexican trucks full access to U.S. markets.
But while those trucks are free to distribute products around this nation, our potato producers—mainly those in the San Luis Valley—are still being kept out of Mexico’s interior. They’re still only able to ship product to the northern strip of Mexico, a violation of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Now the holdup is Mexico’s powerful potato lobby, which doesn’t want competition from this country. Mr. Salazar notes that the Mexican potato industry is a powerful political force.
In an effort to open the Mexican market, Mr. Salazar and Gov. John Hickenlooper plan to visit Mexico with the hope they can gain an audience with President Felipe Calderon and remind him of his promise that the interior market would open once the trucking issue was solved.
Mr. Salazar says the appetite for Colorado potatoes is strong in Mexico, a fact which has Mexican food distributors clamoring for access to them. This state is the third-largest potato-producing state in the nation, and most of those spuds are grown in his native San Luis Valley.
Gov. Hickenlooper and Commissioner Salazar are persuasive salesmen. We hope they will gain President Calderon’s ear so that he can cut this Gordian knot.
Editorial:
———
The Daily Camera, March 11, on state-proposed Early Literacy Act:
Call it an early warning siren. A study of high school dropouts nationwide showed that 90 percent of them did not read at their own grade level in the third grade.
In Colorado, the high school graduation rate in 2010 was only 72 percent. (The study Diploma Count 2009 shows a wide range in the United States: from 82.1 percent in New Jersey to 47.3 percent in Nevada.)
There’s a clear achievement gap amongst readers in Colorado. In 2010, 79 percent of white students were proficient in reading, compared with 50 percent of all black, Latino and Native American students. Children of color will make up the majority of Colorado schoolchildren in 9 years.
The impact on schools and on the future workforce of the state will be remarkable if nothing changes.
A bill that has garnered both Democratic and Republican sponsors in the House and Senate—as well as early support from everyone from children’s advocacy groups to the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce—will try to shake up the status quo by focusing on early readers.
The Early Literacy Act will provide more assessment and intervention plans for students from kindergarten through the third grade, and require notifying and engaging parents of readers who are struggling. Parents, teachers and principals will work together to decide if kids are ready for the next grade.
Why stop at the third grade? In part because statistically, 90 percent of them are likely to drop out of high school, and because literacy experts say that starting in the fourth grade, readers are reading to learn—history, math, civics, science, etc. —rather than learning to read.
The reality is that Colorado is becoming more polarized between the “haves” and the “have-nots.” The state attracts a highly educated workforce, and many of them move here, but statistics are showing that we’re not growing our own highly educated workforce. We’ve seen the same pattern with health and wellness—the “skinniest” state attracts a lot of people who love our healthy, active lifestyle opportunities, but 10 percent of our kids had no health insurance at all in 2009, and childhood obesity here is expanding along with the childhood poverty rate, which is the fastest growing rate in the country.
Coloradans who care about the future need to pay attention to this growing gap between the state’s children. Supporting a common-sense literacy bill would be a good place to start.
Editorial:
