Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) (center) and Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) (right) watch as former President Donald Trump speaks to reporters at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York on May 16. (Pool Photo by Gina Moon/via Associated Press)
The Sunday paper is dedicated to hating conservative ideals.
About the Viewpoint section on Sunday, June 2nd
Who is contributing to the division, the hatred, the corruption of truth, the evasion of democratic facts? It’s everyone who contributed to last Sunday’s Perspectives. Leading the way is Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, followed by Megan Schrader, Doug Friednash, and Krista Kafer of the Denver Post. Let’s also add LZ Granderson of the LA Times.
It was a sustained, massive depression of corruptible hatred against 75 million conservative voters who wanted a return to the common-sense democracy that was offered by President Donald Trump and his entire administration. The primary victims, of course, were President Trump and Rep. Lauren Boebert.
Nowhere is there any mention of the socialist left, Biden and his failed policies, the destruction of our economy, the millions of South and Central Americans illegally crossing our southern border, and no mention of crime, taxes, war or debt.
As we all know, the Biden family has received millions of dollars, but thanks to the Department of Justice, the corruption will never reach “the father” as he was deemed incompetent (mental acuity) to be convicted by a jury.
Paying $130,000 in hush money is not a crime. Ask anyone in Hollywood. But turning that into a 34-felony conviction is a miracle in New York City courts. How did 12 jurors come up with 34 charges when even CNN and MSNBC can’t explain it? Biden now claims this is a state and city case, not a federal one, but the lead prosecutor, Matthew Colangelo, is a former senior Justice Department official. Typical Biden lack of facts.
Trump’s biggest obsession is to clean up the destruction caused by the Biden administration, the economy, the border, the war. The second most important thing is to retaliate against the corruption of the Biden administration that has hurt every single one of our people. The swamp must be cleaned up and cleaned up.
Hank Urbanowicz, Englewood
The Biden/Trump dilemma? “Stop worrying”
“Biden is unfit to be president, but neither is Trump. What should voters do?” Commentary from June 2nd
Doug Friednash says he probably won’t vote for President Joe Biden or former President Donald Trump because they are both ineligible for the presidency. Forget about worries about age and false equivalences about eligibility for the presidency. The choice is clear and it’s a crucial one.
There are two candidates. One is old and the other is old and dangerous. One is old and has been in the job effectively for almost four years. The other is old and a con man who has been accused of sexual assault and libel and convicted. One is old and behaves with dignity. One is old and bullies and calls people names like a cranky child. One is old and believes in democracy. The other is old and worships Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Hungary’s Viktor Orban and threatens to become a dictator if elected.
Whining that your dream candidate didn’t win and threatening to not vote for him is a childish and shameful insult to all those who have given their lives and freedom to protect your rights.
Vote, Freed Nash. It’s your civic duty. And if you really don’t know which old man to vote for, call me.
Marla Williams, Denver
There is a big difference between physical unfitness (speculated) and ethical/moral unfitness (proven). They are not equivalent. The worst case scenario of a morally unfit president clearly aspiring to be a vengeful dictator is far worse than a decent president dying or being unable to perform his duties. The latter has happened before, and democracies have survived without catastrophe. The likely outcomes of an extremely amoral/immoral/unethical/authoritarian president are far more dire. This is reason enough, more than ever, for a disgruntled public to vote for the outcome they can survive.
Please don’t leave anything to chance. Take emotion out of your decision and use logic.
Valerie Neal, Boulder
In his op-ed, Doug Friednash laments the impending presidential rematch. I’m encouraged that he brings up Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as a potential “X-factor.” But he also quotes Democratic strategist Eric Koch’s comments about Robert F. Kennedy Jr., promoting the same deceptive soundbites found across the liberal media.
Rehashing rhetoric to disparage Kennedy, really? Freed-Nash made no attempt to research this candidate himself, but I encourage you, my readers, to do so. There are plenty of in-depth interviews and podcasts online where you can hear where he stands on the issues you care about. You might discover a candidate who is thoughtful, intelligent, challenging, competent, and inspiring.
I am willing to act on that belief instead of voting for the lesser of two evils, or not voting at all.
Lori Cicero, Fort Collins
The opinion piece’s headline is misleading, falsely suggesting that Biden is unfit for the presidency, when in fact Fried-Nash merely argues that Biden is too old, too physically inept, and too unpopular in the polls to be the Democratic front-runner.
Felon Trump’s ethical failings, lack of respect for democracy, constant lies, incoherent statements, and criminal record prove that he is unfit for the White House. Simply put, any conscientious voter, as Fried-Nash asserts, will weigh the differences between the two, consider the complete unfitness of Robert Kennedy Jr., and vote for Biden. Let’s hope Fried-Nash and similar voters in battleground states feel the same way.
David Schroeder, Arvada
I have voted in every election my whole life and I plan to vote again this November.
It irritates me that people across the political spectrum are scratching their heads, seemingly only now realizing that it was the two major parties that created the situation Freed-Nash writes about.
The country has a choice, and I supported it with my donations and outreach to No Labels, an established group that also helped found the Congressional Problem Solvers Caucus, which pursues common-sense solutions in Washington.
No Labels has made it to the ballot line in 18 states (147 electoral votes), including Colorado, and is awaiting certification of petitions in several more states. They had promised to move forward with their “insurance” only if the American people were dissatisfied with the two major party candidates and two willing candidates (one Republican and one Democrat) came forward. The first condition has apparently been met, as evidenced by polls by many reliable polling agencies. However, no willing candidates came forward in time for 2024. So, on April 4, No Labels abandoned their 2024 efforts.
So there were options, but now there are options offered by the two major parties.
Kathy Wanstrath, Denver
Punitive measures against homelessness don’t work
“Aurora’s ‘jobs first’ strategy is clearly different from Denver’s approach,” commentary June 2
Aurora Mayor Mike Coffman has once again taken matters into his own hands when it comes to homelessness. As a medical law physician and public health expert, I oppose the Aurora Mayor and City Council’s proposals to address homelessness. The proposed enforcement actions raise civil rights issues, violate constitutional protections, and are unlikely to get homeless people off the streets or into the workforce.
This proposal, like the “Homeless Mike” stunt, in which he pretended to be homeless for a few days, shows a Mayor more interested in politics than truly helping people — performative gestures designed to generate publicity, not implement meaningful, evidence-based solutions.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ case of Martin v. City of Boise sets clear precedent: punishing individuals who camp out without shelter violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. The City of Aurora’s policy of immediately removing encampments without notice is likely unconstitutional. During oral arguments in Grants Pass v. Johnson, a case currently before the Supreme Court, the justices questioned the logic of punishing homeless individuals when shelter options are inadequate.
Public health research supports the “Housing First” model, which prioritizes stable housing without conditions and ensures individuals have access to supportive services. Mayor Coffman, along with Deputy Mayor Dustin Zvonek, City Council Member Steve Sandberg and City Council Member Curtis Gardner, are ignoring the expertise of public health and housing experts and experimenting with punitive measures without evidence-based support to score political points rather than responsibly addressing the root causes of homelessness.
Greg Whitman, Creed
Raising standards benefits police officers
June 2nd editorial: “Don’t lower standards at police academies”
Many law-abiding citizens are outraged by the number of cars with expired temporary plates on Denver roads, and I was recently behind the wheel of a car with 2022 temporary plates.
Clearly, restrictions on police enforcement of these crimes have been in place for some time, and law enforcement is essential in an overly permissive society that assumes the law is for everyone but itself.
“I have full support and respect for police officers, but it’s not clear to me why training and standards are being lowered for candidates. Police officers put their lives at risk every day and the standards for mental and physical readiness should be raised when they are hired, not lowered.”
Denver can’t follow in the footsteps of New York and Chicago’s revolving door law enforcement agencies. The key is to hire more competent officers and pay them minimum wage.
Elaine Little, Denver
Subscribe to Sound Off to receive a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit it online or review the guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
