Saturday, May 18, 2013
Comment Archives: stories: Columns: Letters
Re: “Letters: Is fracking really clean?”
I created a petition titled "Stop Fracking in Colorado" on SignOn.org. If this concerns you and you have friends/family in the area, please sign it. It is to be delivered to city council when there are enough signatures. Here is the link:
http://signon.org/sign/stop-fracking-in-co…
Drinking water is scarce enough here to take any chances...
Thanks for your consideration...
Posted by
jflo'
on 11/29/2012 at 1:29 AM
Re: “Letters: Teaching Kindness”
"...prohibition is a failure. The United States has double the rate of use as the Netherlands, where marijuana is legally available."...
Every time you make something illegal, or a sin, you raise interest as everyone wants to know what's the big deal; so they go find out for themselves. It also raises the price sky high too, and all the wrong people profit from it. Same with the sex trade; it's here, it isn't going away, but it costs a fortune since it's illegal, and it spreads a lot of horrible diseases.
Posted by
OldCrank
on 11/28/2012 at 8:38 PM
Re: “Letters: Is fracking really clean?”
Thank you Dave and Lotus for bringing light to the hypocrisy surrounding the issue of fracking. Please join us all at the City Council meeting on the 27th. No matter how you stand on this issue Council needs to hear from you. This is OUR future we are talking about and the future of our children. Please visit the website that was shared in Lotus' editorial and see what you can do to help stop the dangerous practice of 'fracking'. Visit https://www.facebook.com/ColoradoSpringsCitizensForCommunityRights
Posted by
Lorena Townsend
on 11/21/2012 at 9:03 PM
Re: “Letters: Is fracking really clean?”
Mr. Suhre. Have some fun, it appears you need it. Google " Dear Red States." Enjoy, it's on me.
Posted by
longtooth
on 11/21/2012 at 11:10 AM
Re: “Letters: Is fracking really clean?”
Darn you, Dave Gardner...that's what I wanted to say.
Posted by
longtooth
on 11/21/2012 at 8:54 AM
Re: “Letters: Is fracking really clean?”
The Gazans have the right to protect themselves...from Hamas; the right-wing religious zealots who have waged war on women, gays and those who don't worship and live as the ruling religious zealots see fit. I'm sure you can imagine Colorado Spring's own right-wing religious bigots with their anti-gay, anti-immigrant, holier-than-thou crusade against non-conformity and un-christian values. Then imagine them armed, roaming the streets free to carry out vigilante justice against non-believers. And free to use the citizens of Colorado Springs as human shields as they fire hundreds of rockets monthly into Mexico. And when Mexico retaliates to put an end to the threat against its citizens, Colorado Springs's Christian Right cries bloody murder and "unfair".
Why would the peace-loving, non-conformist, humanist, justice-seeking left rally behind murderous, religious zealots like Hamas?
People and cultures who can't live together elsewhere in the world, can live and prosper together in the United States, a secular, open society. I call on you, the socially conscious, socially enlightened of Colorado Springs to stand for the social values you hold dear, stand for Israel, a much more secular, open, tolerant society where Jews, Muslims, Christians and atheists live together in everyday peace.
You don't deserve to be repressed by insane, violent, religious fanatics who don't share your values, neither do the Gazans. Help them overthrow Hamas.
Posted by
Slightly Bmused
on 11/21/2012 at 7:15 AM
Re: “Letters: Fight for ‘clean fracking’”
If one has ever used petroleum products or natural gas then they are as much to blame for any damage caused by the industry. Those that keep demanding "fixes" and standards only contribute to the rising price of these products. When I received my first drivers license at 16 environmentalists were unheard of and gasoline was 19 cents a gallon, Earth Day had just had its first observation. You can't have your Earth and use it too. We are not leaving our "foot print" on Earth, WE are stomping it like a gang of drunken thugs with boots on. Now I must leave my warm house, get in my truck and try to make a dollar.
Posted by
Robert Wyman
on 11/17/2012 at 11:11 AM
Re: “Letters: Fight for ‘clean fracking’”
Sorry- I thought it would let me post as our group- we are called Colorado Springs Citizens for Community Rights- find us on facebook or at www.frackfreesprings.org.
Posted by
Lorena Townsend
on 11/15/2012 at 5:32 PM
Re: “Letters: Fight for ‘clean fracking’”
Mr. Carew- there is no such thing as 'clean' fracking or 'clean' natural gas. As for energy independence? This is a myth being propagated by the oil and gas industry. Look up the numbers- we are exporting more gas then we are importing. This keeps gas prices higher so they make more money. There are plenty of resources for you to educate yourself about this. In fact just yesterday a peer reviewed study on air quality was released and the findings are astounding and scary. http://www.tedx.org/chemicals.air.php FYI- this study was done IN Colorado on the western slope. And citizens ARE engaging with their local officials. In fact this group was formed by a hand full of folks who decided that we weren't going to keep letting City Council get away with selling our future to the highest bidder. Because we do not trust them to protect us we are going to take matters into our own hands and are working to place a Charter Amendment BAN on fracking in Colorado Springs next year. The future of climate change is happening NOW. We need to force our government to invest in renewable energy like other countries are doing. Even if you want drilling Mr. Carew but think the regulations need to be stricter PLEASE get engaged like you have called for others to do and show up at the City Council meeting on 11/27. In the mean time I would ask you to do a little more research and find out the truth behind the talking points that these multinational corporations are trying to force on the public.
Posted by
Lorena Townsend
on 11/15/2012 at 5:29 PM
Re: “Letters: Fight for ‘clean fracking’”
Ms. Faber: Obama won re-election because a majority of Americans see through the GOP obstructionism that prevented enactment of key parts of Obama's program - despite that the economy is slowly improving.
After sending the Army to Iraq for 9 years, the GOP killed a jobs bill for our veterans!
What really killed it for Romney was the outright lunacy of the party base during the primaries where we were treated to such stupidity as: Santorum claiming sex is only for procreation and that birth control should be restricted; Akins and Mourdock's lunacy on "legitimate rape;" Romney's constant flip flopping; his continual insistence that the wealthy get even more tax cuts; that 47% of our fellow citizens are leeches; and many other positions that flat out insult the voters. He insulted everyone but fat old white gun-nutters and racists.
Romney insists he ran a "superb campaign." He blames his loss on Obama's "gifts" to blacks, hispanics and the young. Gifts? In GOP-speak, programs that help PEOPLE are gifts but hundreds of billions of corporate loopholes, oil subsidies, etc, are somehow not gifts. We know better than to fall for that CRAP from the GOP, where up is down and where in is out.
The guy is either nuts or just plain delusional, and so is much of today's GOP.
I voted GOP for most of my life, but it's now so far to the right that it's just UN-ELECTABLE.
Posted by
OldCrank
on 11/15/2012 at 4:03 PM
Re: “Letters: Fight for ‘clean fracking’”
No Fracking Way! It would be great if there was really such a thing as clean fracking. Unfortunately, there is not. The time is here to finally face up to the fact that we need to change the way we live, and the world we leave for our children and grandchildren. Come to the Colorado Springs Council
Tuesday, Nov. 27 – Formal City Council meeting. First reading of the ordinance. Public welcome; public comment permitted.
All meetings will begin at 1 p.m. and will be held in the Council Chambers located on the third floor of City Hall at 107 N. Nevada Avenue.
Posted by
Lenora McAndrews Degen
on 11/15/2012 at 10:29 AM
Re: “Letters: Fight for ‘clean fracking’”
Amen, Eric Verlo. It seems many local pastors find it more compelling to engage in purely political speech than to take a stand against social sins.
Posted by
Indylover
on 11/15/2012 at 10:14 AM
Re: “Letters: Fight for ‘clean fracking’”
Mr Carew, nice try but no sale. Canadian crude will flow through our heartland with a when, not if, spill potential. This stuff is toxic. When it reaches Texas it will be refined and loaded onto ships for foreign ports to support the fungible world market supply. Big oil will win, but we, as average Americans will see little, if any, benefit. In return, we risk polluting our groundwater and surface water forever. Wars? Don't worry, we'll find a reason to fight them. Religion, passageways for commerce, etc.
Posted by
longtooth
on 11/14/2012 at 12:01 PM
Re: “Letters”
COLORADO PERA IS INDEED MOVING TOWARD VENTURE CAPITAL . . .
GOV. HICKENLOOPER RAIDS PERA PENSION FUNDS FOR CORPORATE WELFARE.
PERA BOARD GRANTS ACCESS TO PERA TRUST FUNDS TO PRIVATE BUSINESSES IN COLORADO.
From PERA’s website:
“We heard from businesses around the state during the development of the Colorado Blueprint that increased access to capital is critical to their success and that of our state’s economy,” said Gov. John Hickenlooper. “The creation of the Colorado Mile High Fund will improve that access to capital and we are pleased that Colorado PERA’s partnership will benefit and help grow companies here in Colorado.”
It is not logically possible for the PERA Board to claim that the PERA Trust Funds have faced, or face, an “actuarial emergency” in recent years and simultaneously enter into an arrangement in which the investment performance of those PERA Trust Funds may be compromised (to any degree.)
News flash for our “businessman” Governor: By definition, placing an artificial, political restriction on investment options for a portion of the PERA Trust Funds (regardless of size) denies PERA members and retirees the benefit of the most productive use of those funds. Interference with the work of Colorado PERA’s investment team is ill-advised and the burden of restoring any resulting loss of capital will fall on Colorado taxpayers.
From the Colorado PERA statutes:
“As fiduciaries, such trustees shall carry out their functions solely in the interest of the members and benefit recipients and for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits and defraying reasonable expenses incurred in performing such duties as required by law.”
Is the provision of corporate welfare through the “Colorado Mile High Fund” in conformance with the fiduciary obligation of the Colorado PERA Board of Trustees to act “for the exclusive purpose” of providing PERA pension benefits? How does this scheme guarantee improved investment performance for this tranche of the PERA trust funds for beneficiaries? I believe this action represents yet another clear breach of fiduciary duty by the PERA Board of Trustees.
Does the Governor understand that the PERA Trust Funds belong to the beneficiaries of the trust? Does the Governor understand that the PERA Trust Funds are not public property to be used to meet public policy goals? (Politicians have been trying to gain access to this “pile of money” for decades.)
If the members of the PERA Board of Trustees would grow a backbone and resist political interference, we might have avoided the recent SB 10-001 debacle, the breach of retiree contracts, the “legal morass” it engendered, and this most recent assault on the integrity of the PERA Trust Funds.
If Colorado businesses are desperate for capital why do these businesses not take advantage of available historically low market interest rates? Is it simply the case that these businesses are considered too great a risk by private lenders? This risk must be assumed by the beneficiaries of a public pension fund? Public pensions should be forced to invest in businesses that the private sector won’t touch?
“The Colorado Mile High Fund will be a new pool of growth capital for investments in Colorado businesses. Over time, the amount of money available for such emerging entrepreneurs and management teams has diminished in Colorado, and PERA saw the mutual benefit providing much-needed capital for Colorado’s business community,” said PERA Director of Alternative Investments Tim Moore.
How is it the responsibility of Colorado PERA members and retirees to redress this shortfall of funding for Colorado entrepreneurs by accepting a less favorable risk/reward ratio for a portion of their PERA Trust Fund property?
“This is good for Colorado and for PERA,” added PERA Chief Investment Officer Jennifer Paquette.
The duty of the PERA Chief Investment Officer is not to achieve what is “good for Colorado,” or “good for PERA” administrators. The duty of the Chief Investment Officer is to invest the PERA Trust Funds prudently . . . and in a manner that offers the greatest return potential at the least portfolio risk.
However, I believe that Paquette’s statement here is politically necessary for her, and I find it sad that the PERA Board places her in this situation. Paquette should be left alone to do her job free from political interference. I believe that if she could speak freely, she would state, as an “investment professional,” that the artificial limitation of investment opportunities for a tranche of PERA’s trust funds is NEVER “good” for the beneficiaries of the Trust Fund. I place only a modicum of blame for this blossoming fiasco on Paquette. I understand that as a condition of employment she must do the bidding of an invertebrate PERA Board.
If the geographical restriction of PERA Trust Fund investment options is a prudent investment philosophy will the PERA Board please explain why this policy has not been in place at Colorado PERA for decades? Why the artificial, geographical restriction of investment options is summarily rejected by securities industry professionals?
How did the PERA Board go about determining the geographical investment boundaries that offer the greatest risk/reward potential for the investment our funds? What analysis was conducted? What advantages did Colorado’s borders offer over limiting investment of the funds to venture capital or private equity opportunities in Massachusetts? California? Australia?
Complete PERA propaganda available here:
http://www.copera.org/pera/about/latestnew…
Posted by
Algernon Moncrief
on 11/07/2012 at 8:43 AM
Re: “Letters”
Hey Curcio, shame on you guys for two weeks. Bad boys, Bad girls. Bad uh, whatever.
Posted by
longtooth
on 11/07/2012 at 8:27 AM
Re: “Letters”
What upsets you, TejonTech, and these pastors is a Constitutional principle called separation of church and state.
Obama does favor changing the definition of civil marriage. I have no idea how you end up conflating that with Christian marriage.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 11/05/2012 at 6:22 PM
Re: “Letters”
We must vote lying sack sallie out. She is the lowest form of politician there is. She in a self serving and deceitfull person who changed the election rules, waited until it wouldn't affect her, then ok'd the change back, but only if the wording was set so it did not affect her - what a slim bag. Don't vote for this type of political scum!!!
Posted by
happyfew
on 11/05/2012 at 4:36 PM
Re: “Letters”
Maybe Obama faux religion is what upsets people, not his skin color. The man is pro abortion, wants to change the definition of Christian marriage, has strange sexual ethics, and works to run Christianity out of the public square, not to mention forcing Christians to support secular positions contrary to their faith...that and not his skin color is why pastors say it is time for him to go...and hopefully gone he will be.
Posted by
TejonTech
on 11/05/2012 at 3:29 PM
Re: “Letters”
Pastors Are speaking out because they are concerned with where obama is taking this country. America is the Greatest Country In the world ! If we dont wake up we will loose what we all fight for , is our freedom! That is what the Americans and Pastors are afraid of ! GOD HAVE MERCY ON US ! WAKE UP !!! WAKE UP !!!
Posted by
Rod Lewno
on 11/05/2012 at 12:29 PM
Re: “Letters: Teaching Kindness”
Re: Power to consumers
This is exactly what Pena wrote in the Denver Post: "Providing a smart meter to customers without providing them with the dynamic prices the meters allow them to respond to is like trying to clap with one hand."
I believe Mr. Daly is under the impression that the "dynamic prices" are the result of opening up "access to competitive markets for electricity."
The two are not related. The "dynamic prices" Pena wants to provide consumers is a rate structure that will charge more for electricity consumed during peak generation hours, and less during off-hours. Currently the rate for electricity is flat regardless of the time of day or day of the week when the electricity is consumed.
This rate structure can be implemented even under the current "outdated regulated monopoly model for electricity" as long as current meters are replaced by new smart meters, but IMHO the "benefits" are dubious.