Home › Opinion › Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor - July 23
Water recreation
More Letters to the Editor 
Share and Enjoy Water vehicles make
reservoir less inviting
The incident of the young woman injuring her ankles at Gross Reservoir underlines the need for better oversight of our recreational water resources.
The Boulder City Council knows that the jet skis and power boats of Boulder Reservoir make that facility less inviting, and chase users to other venues, like Gross, where swimming is illegal and potentially dangerous.
Google it six ways to China, you'll find out that hundreds of public lakes and reservoirs ban jet skis -- but somehow that is just too radical for our present council. Although it may not be the causative factor in this one incident, it should be, at this point, readily apparent that a link exists. If the Boulder Reservoir were a better facility, no one within its proximity would have an excuse to head up to Gross. The jet skis and power boats at Boulder Reservoir are examples of toys that belong in large bodies of water, not on a puddle less than one-percent the size of Lake Powell or other facility known for jet ski users.
I urge water recreationalists in Boulder County to e-mail their thoughts to the Boulder City Council and ask that they take up this issue.
ROB SMOKE
Boulder
Olympics
Paranoia drives
security increase
The thing that bothers me the most is the paranoid attitude of the Chinese government and anything associated with the Olympics. Rightfully, they are very nervous about foreign demonstrators disrupting the Olympics.
The Olympic Torch Relay has been scheduled for months to travel through the city where I'm living, passing right in front of my hotel. The hotel had planned to take all foreign long-term guests Saturday morning (July 26) to the square across from the hotel to watch the relay from a special reserved area. This past Thursday when I arrived back at the hotel after work, I was approached my the hotel sales person who handles long-term guests and was told that the government had informed the hotel that ALL foreign guests would not be allowed to observe the Torch Relay or be anywhere near the square which is being designated a secured security area.
The hotel general manager who is from Australia was told that foreign guests should remain in the hotel during the relay. To me this demonstrated the real paranoia which prevails here in China with respect to the Beijing Olympics. This also may explain why the number of foreigners who are reportedly booking hotels in Beijing for the Olympics is very low in comparison to past Olympics. I do hope that the Beijing Olympics are very successful as this is a significant national event for the Chinese people.
LEN DeMOSS
Longmont
Crosswalks
Safety problems
with cars and peds
There are two significant problems with the crosswalks. The first is when there are two lanes of traffic in each direction. Frequently, the curbside lane traffic will stop suddenly and obscure the view of the pedestrian from the inside lane. The second problem is the fact that some pedestrians do not activate the lights at all or step off the curb simultaneously with pressing the activation button.
I agree with the correspondents who have suggested that the flashing lights should be red rather than yellow.
ROBERT E. MacRAE
Boulder
Curbside garden
Garden doesn't
harm anyone
I am writing in regards to Monday's article about the curbside garden and its fate.
Wow. A man is growing vegetables. Now that is a crime. It amazes me that the phrase "in violation" is being used to describe something as delightful as having planted a garden. Perhaps the folks whose daily lives are being shattered by having to walk around this "obstacle" should move to New York City where gardens are on rooftops, never to inconvenience a passer-by.
I give credit to Mr. Hoffenberg for having made the effort to work with the city in response to this ridiculous charge. Doesn't the city of Boulder have more important issues to address? Oh, by the way, for those who find this curbside group of plants so terribly threatening, the garden will no longer be a problem come late fall.
And to the neighbor who called to report this travesty, I have a phrase for you, one that my grandmother used well. "Shame on you."
CARRIE HOST
Boulder
Iraq War
What does winning
in Iraq look like?
Recently the New York Times rejected an editorial submitted by John McCain. New York Times Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained that McCain's editorial did not articulate his own Iraq strategy but rather attacked Obama's. After having read McCain's editorial it is clear to me just how much he is out of touch with the American people.
John McCain says, "In 2007 [Obama] wanted to withdraw because he thought the war was lost. If we had taken his advice, it would have been. Now he wants to withdraw because he thinks Iraqis no longer need our assistance." These statements are a complete misrepresentation of Obama's position, which is more in line with the American people's.
Apparently McCain missed the memo explaining the cost of this war -- both in dollars and loss of limb and life. As the cost of the war in Iraq quickly approaches $800 billion McCain continues to spew patriotic rhetoric such as "if we don't win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us." Eight-hundred billion dollars is hard to imagine, but in context it's enough money to provide everyone in the U.S. with free health care, or enough to send every high school graduate to college.
McCain supports spending money on a war that most Americans no longer agree with instead of investing it in his own people. Is this really what Americans want? Furthermore, how do you define winning in Iraq? Is winning ensuring the security of the U.S.? Iraq wasn't a threat before we were there so I don't think it will be after. Is winning staying in Iraq long enough to set up a stable democratic government? The Iraqis seem to dislike that idea so much they're killing us over it. However you define winning in Iraq, ultimately the longer we stay there the longer we lose at home.
NICK CANDLER
Boulder
Posted by cawrigh on July 22, 2008 at 9:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NICK CANDLER "Eight-hundred billion dollars is hard to imagine, but in context it's enough money to provide everyone in the U.S. with free health care,"
Another liberal that can't perform basic math. Let's see. $800 billion divided by the 5 1/2 years we've been in Iraq is about $145 billion per year. Next take $145 billion and divide by about 304 million people in the US equals about $478 per person per year. How many people can get by on a health care budget of only $478 per year?
That reminds me of an unsolvable problem with government funded health-care. What is the right amount that government should spend on health-care? Should it be $2,000 per person? Should it be $2,500/person? Should it be $5,000/person? No mater what figure is selected it's arbitrary.
Chuck Wright
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/
Posted by MsSwin on July 23, 2008 at 4:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Gaffes Happen has become the official teeshirt of the McCain campaign and they may come to regret 'whining' for more news coverage.
Politicians put their foot in their mouth on a regular basis. Sometimes it may be the result of long hours on the campaign trail, sometimes because they simply can't keep their facts straight and sometimes because they can't keep their lies straight. Sometimes it's simply because they do not understand the facts.
Couric/McCain Interview:
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_vid...
Per President Bush and Col. MacFarland, the Anbar awakening was already well under way through organized efforts by the tribal leaders well before the surge began. These events took place months before the surge was even announced. Per McCain, the surge 'began' the Anbar awakening.
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcript...
The Couric interview gets even more interesting as McCain tries to distance himself from the numerous failed Iraq policies under the Bush administration:
“McCain: The fact is we had four years of failed policy. We were losing. We were losing the war in Iraq. The consequences of failure and defeat of the United States of America in the first major conflict since 9/11 would have had devastating impacts throughout the region and the world.”
Why would McCain support a president responsible for four years of failure?
“no one has supported President Bush on Iraq more than I have.” [John McCain, 03/28/08)
“I am proud of this president’s strategy in Iraq.” [John McCain, upon receiving endorsement from President Bush, 02/13/08]
Gaffes and old quotes are a living history of our thought processes, how well we think, what we think and when we think it. Even Carly can't change that fact:
“To say that John McCain was aligned with President Bush on the prosecution of the war in Iraq is to change history.” [Carly Fiorina, McCain Campaign Advisor, 07/13/08]
The McCain campaign should be thankful the media has let them slide on many major issues, such as his voting record on veteran health issues and successful effort to shut down all investigation into remaining POW/MIA over the protests of their families and veteran groups in order to open up trade with Vietnam (his father-in-law immediately opened up a multi-billion dollar beer industry there).
http://www.aiipowmia.com/sea/schanber...
Perhaps McCain should quit whining about media coverage and not look a gift horse in the mouth.
Posted by trappist99 on July 23, 2008 at 5:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"What is the right amount that government should spend on health-care.....?
Everyone should have the same level of health care that Goverment workers give themselves, paid for by the taxes of the rest of us.
(Government of the people, by the people, for the people)
Posted by cawrigh on July 23, 2008 at 6:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Everyone should have the same level of health care that Goverment workers give themselves.."
Which is an arbitrary number. Too, except for Congress and state legislators in some states, I don't think government workers give it to themselves.
Chuck Wright
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/
Posted by Candidate_Brigham on July 23, 2008 at 6:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Boulder Res is just too small for motor vehicles of any kind, unhealthy and possibly dangerous to the beach goers. And, there are environmental consequences. Time to put a stop to this practice.
The City Council should act on this matter before next summer rolls in, but, unfortunately, they can't decide on any action if it alienates any constituent.
Posted by blacksho89 on July 23, 2008 at 6:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
CHUCK WRIGHT:
"How many people can get by on a health care budget of only $478 per year?"
The problem is that health care is profit driven. In a just society where greedy insurance companies and Big Pharma were replaced by a government provided not-for-profit system, $478.00 would be plenty. Physicians would take vegetables from our curbside gardens for payment, and could be educated in the fine medical schools in Cuba, where Michael Moore goes for his medical care.
Posted by albanal on July 23, 2008 at 7:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"What we have done is build the system into a bearucratic nightmare of red tape."
Curbside composting could turn into a bearucratic nightmare, too.
Posted by jim_anchower on July 23, 2008 at 8:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Turbo: quit hassling the people at the outdoor cinema. LOL!
Posted by Dunkterfunk on July 23, 2008 at 8:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am getting tired of hearing McCain say the surge worked and we have "won" the war. Even though I disagreed with the invasion to begin with, we should have had those numbers of soldiers or more form the beginning like Shinseki suggested. Violence is also down because we started paying off the militias to go after Al Queda. Not too mention many Sunni insurgents finally saw the greater evil in Al Queda and started fighting them.
Then you have to take into account that the decrease in violence in Iraq has been accompanioed by an increase in violence in Afghanistan. This says to me that Al-Queda just moved there operations where they could fight us more easily and therefore obtain some psychological victories like recently taking that U.S. base.
This is an ideological battles as much, if not more so than a military battle.
Posted by bobcat77 on July 23, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nick,
"These statements are a complete misrepresentation of Obama's position, which is more in line with the American people's."
---
I hate to be the one to break the news to ya Nick, but Obama has different plans then the ones you outlined for the billions of dollars spent on the military.
---
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/17...
The stunning comments from Democrat Sen. Barack Obama that the United States needs a "civilian national security force" that would be as powerful, strong and well-funded as the half-trillion dollar United States Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force have mysteriously disappeared from published transcripts of the speech.
In the comments, Obama confirmed the U.S. "cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set."
Posted by albanal on July 23, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Don't be so coy. What, in plain English are you suggesting?
Posted by JG on July 23, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In a just society, everything would be free, nobody would ever want to make a profit (that is greedy), and fools would get to vote.
Well, at least our society is partly just.
Posted by jim_anchower on July 23, 2008 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Cool! Obama is going to raise a citizen army to guard against TYRANNY !!!
This will show he's real 2nd amendment supporter.
Hes shifted to libertarian.
LOL!
Posted by brian on July 23, 2008 at 10:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
NICK,
Referring to what is going on in Iraq as a war is idiotic. First of all, doing so elevates the insurgents to the status of warriors. That is assuming that it is the insurgents that our military is at war with. This is obviously incorrect because there was no insurgency when war was declared on Iraq. The war was against the Iraqi military forces and those forces were defeated quickly so GWB was correct in stating "Mission Accomplished". What we are left with now is an occupation and an illegal one at that.
Posted by qmmckenna on July 23, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
LEN DeMOSS- I think current events, as well as your letter, amply demonstrate that the Olympics is more of political event than a sports event.
For that reason I think it is farcical.
I like to see international sports events where the best athletes can compete and avoid all the nationalistic accouterments and nonsense we see in the Olympics.
I find more inspiration watching golf and tennis because there individuals can strive for personal excellence on the world stage without politics getting their greasy hands into it.
Why can't we do the same for all the other sports as well?
Posted by MikeEllis on July 23, 2008 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Blacksho is confusing me again! It's not fair! I'm gonna tell the City Council to pass a law!
Posted by JakPott on July 23, 2008 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
" If the Boulder Reservoir were a better facility, no one within its proximity would have an excuse to head up to Gross "
Last time I checked, there werent any trees, jumping rocks or water that was clear, let alone blue at the rez.
Posted by jim_anchower on July 23, 2008 at 10:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why can't we do the same for all the other sports as well?
Well some are team sports and you have to support your team.
you make me wonder what would be like if they made football and socker every man for himself sports. I think i'd fall out of my seat laughing!
Posted by MikeEllis on July 23, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"There are two significant problems with the crosswalks. The first is when there are two lanes of traffic in each direction. Frequently, the curbside lane traffic will stop suddenly and obscure the view of the pedestrian from the inside lane. ..."
Uh, how about it you just stop when you see the car in the other lane stop. There's a well-marked crosswalk, and the lights are flashing, so it's not like you don't have a clue why that car stopped.
"... The second problem is the fact that some pedestrians do not activate the lights at all or step off the curb simultaneously with pressing the activation button."
Then don't do that.
"I agree with the correspondents who have suggested that the flashing lights should be red rather than yellow."
Then you'd complain about having to stop even when there weren't any peds in the crosswalk.
The problem is not with the crosswalks, it is with the idiotic and inattentive drivers and pedestrians.
Posted by jim_anchower on July 23, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Boulder Reservor is Gross LOL!
Posted by MikeEllis on July 23, 2008 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
QM, lots of sports have international competitions regularly, independent of the Olympics. They just don't get quite the media attention. There's a pretty exciting international race happening in France right now, for example.
Posted by MikeEllis on July 23, 2008 at 10:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
jim, LOL
Posted by albanal on July 23, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
jim: I don't think Obama is really going to create a citizen army and exercise our Second Amendment right to overthrow the government (yes, there is, true; I learned it right in these forums).
He just said that.
After Bob Barr, drug warrior and Patriot Act supporter, made his dazzling switch to Libertarianism, Obama thought he ought to toss in a little crazy Libertarian stuff himself.
Don't give it a second (amendment) thought.
Posted by ncandler on July 23, 2008 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Cawrigh, simple mistake. I meant to say "Enough to pay for everyone in the U.S. who does not have healthcare to have it for free", which is true.
The whole point of my editorial was to try to understand exactly what John McCain means by winning in Iraq. He continues to preach about it but yet is so vague about what winning is that The New York Times won't even print his editorial.
I'm not advocating free health care or free college, I'm simply saying you could spend 200 billion dollars/year (the current cost of Iraq) much more wisely, or better yet not at all.
Attacking me as a "liberal" is really getting you no where. There is nothing more "liberal" in the actual sense of the word then useless military spending.
Posted by ncandler on July 23, 2008 at 11:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
cawright, as a Libertarian you should be able to level with me a little bit on this whole isolationism deal.
Posted by talven on July 23, 2008 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
'...The New York Times won't even print his editorial.'
That says more about the New York Times than it does about John McCain. They don't even pretend to be unbiased any more. Their refusal to print his editorial is journalistic malpractice. Free speech advocates should be outraged.
Posted by billy_goat_gruff on July 23, 2008 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"In the comments, Obama confirmed the U.S. 'cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set.' "
Makes perfect sense. We cannot rely on our local police in order to achieve the local security objectives we've set, so why should we rely on the government army?
The right to keep and bear armies shall not be infringed.
Posted by qmmckenna on July 23, 2008 at 12:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
jim_anchower on July 23, 2008 at 10:32 a.m.'Why can't we do the same for all the other sports as well?'
"Well some are team sports and you have to support your team."
You can have team sports without nationalism.
For example, the Denver Avalanche hockey team moved here from Canada. One major league basketball player I know of comes from China. Also, many of our major league baseball players come from South America, Cuba, and at least one from Japan. Some Americans also play on baseball teams in Japan.
What does this prove?
It proves that people can work together, maybe even better, when nationalism doesn't get in the way.
Posted by ncandler on July 23, 2008 at 12:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"That says more about the New York Times than it does about John McCain. They don't even pretend to be unbiased any more."
They didn't print his article because he didn't explain his position or what "winning" is, but rather attacked Obama's position on Iraq. I've said this several times. OP-ED editor David Shipley said that if McCain revised his editorial with articulation of what his position on Iraq is he would print it.
What the New York Times did wasn't malpractice, Shipley was just running his newspaper. What John McCain did was similar to turning in a term paper on an unassigned topic.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 12:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
talven: "That says more about the New York Times than it does about John McCain. "
Oh, for the love of [your god here]! Read the damn thing; your willful ignorance is astounding.
I think the Times should have printed it, put it out there as incontrovertible proof that McCain and his writers can't keep on topic. Instead, the Times did the right (unbiased) thing, editorially: they bounced it back for revision and to bring it more in line with the expectation that it would not be a marketing fluff piece. So, it ends up on Drudge, where the editorial bar is on the sidewalk, easy even for McCain to step over.
Posted by Doc_Brinkley on July 23, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Rainbow gathering at Boulder Reservoir!
Posted by albanal on July 23, 2008 at 12:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The right to keep and bear armies shall not be infringed."
I Suppose this means McCain will soon be organizing his own band of maxbooted thugs.
[NOTE: Help with this joke available on request.]
Posted by phoenix_rises on July 23, 2008 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The problem isn't with the crosswalks. The problem is that motorists no longer view "yelow" as prepare to stop. They now interprete it as accelerate as in the light is about to turn red, go go go.
Of course, failure to yield the right-of-way is a conservative thing.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
Posted by talven on July 23, 2008 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
'They didn't print his article because he didn't explain his position or what "winning" is, but rather attacked Obama's position on Iraq'
So What? It's an opinion piece. Why should McCain have to write what the NY Times wants him to write?
Posted by Horace on July 23, 2008 at 12:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"So What? It's an opinion piece. Why should McCain have to write what the NY Times wants him to write?"
Because it's their paper. They get to choose and print the topics of their choice.
Posted by talven on July 23, 2008 at 12:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
'Because it's their paper. They get to choose and print the topics of their choice.'
The bias is showing. So much for the objectivity of the fourth estate.
Posted by qmmckenna on July 23, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
bobcat77 on July 23, 2008 at 8:54 a.m.
"In the comments, Obama confirmed the U.S. 'cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set.' "
In a way I have to agree with Senator Obama, whether he agrees with my reasoning or not. I think the surest source of protection we have to preserving our way of life is that we have over 100 million guns in private hands. One hundred million guns in private hands would be a formidable obstacle to any oppressor, be he foreign or domestic.
Our military has now become of secondary importance to preserving our American way of life. It is now just primarily being used to play at world power games, and has less and less relevance with our daily existence.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 12:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"So What? It's an opinion piece. Why should McCain have to write what the NY Times wants him to write?"
Do you often have a sense that maybe you don't understand things that you feel you really, really should? Your foot in reality just washed up on a Canadian shoreline...
Posted by Horace on July 23, 2008 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)
talven- Every paper has some bias... especially in the opinion section. They cater to their readers. This should come as no surprise.
Posted by ncandler on July 23, 2008 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
talven, The New York Times did not print his editorial because it was not on topic, that's all that it comes down to. It has nothing to do with media bias. Drop it.
Posted by talven on July 23, 2008 at 1:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It has everything to do with media bias and I won't drop it just because you say so.
David Shipley (the editor) served in the Clinton Administration from 1995 until 1997 as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Presidential Speechwriter.
Posted by albanal on July 23, 2008 at 1:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Come november, Ron Paul is getting my vote one way or another."
They don't tally votes for people who aren't on the ballot.
Let me urge you to vote for the RINO in '08.
Not quite Republican, Not quite Democrat.
RINO: it's the other white meat.
Posted by qmmckenna on July 23, 2008 at 1:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
TurboPotato on July 23, 2008 at 1:17 p.m. "Come November, Ron Paul is getting my vote one way or another. As a libertarian, I don't like Bob Barr."
I'm thinking along the same lines. As a write-in will the new fangled electronic voting machines, scanners, or whatever, accommodate it?
Posted by billy_goat_gruff on July 23, 2008 at 1:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"One hundred million guns in private hands would be a formidable obstacle to any oppressor, be he foreign or domestic."
Imagine a Libertarian Army.
First, they would march, each to a different drummer, in all directions.
Then, half of them would threaten to quit and start a new army.
Posted by qmmckenna on July 23, 2008 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm personally in favor of media bias.
America is more about pluralism than it is about fairness anyway.
I would rather read contrasting views on a topic that stimulates critical thinking than to read bland mush all the time.
Posted by qmmckenna on July 23, 2008 at 2:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
billy_goat_gruff on July 23, 2008 at 1:51 p.m."Imagine a Libertarian Army."
With you non-libertarians it's seems to be almost always about group-think. No wonder you guys are so easily led around like sheep.
You don't necessarily need an army to provide a formidable multi-layered resistance against oppression.
As the Versailles Treaty Allies discovered in the Ruhr Valley, "you can't dig coal with a bayonet."
Posted by Louise on July 23, 2008 at 2:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Rob: People do not go to Gross reservior to swim, they go there to jump 30-40 feet into the water. There is no place at the rez to do this, with or without boats or jet skis. Why in the world would you compare these two things? I don't care one way or the other about motorized vehicles at the rez, I am just curious about your logic.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 2:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"I'll be damned if I get blamed for the downfall of this country."
If you voted for shrub, either time, you're on the short list.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 2:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"It has everything to do with media bias and I won't drop it just because you say so."
Your other foot just washed ashore. If you're so thrilled with that poorly-written, wandering, off-topic, and almost incomprehensible screed from McCain, please do send it to everyone in your email address book. Please.
I'm doing that as we speak.
Posted by talven on July 23, 2008 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
flaven - while you are at it email horace and hatmonger. They seem to agree that the NY Times is biased.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 3:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It really hasn't sunk in, has it, talven?
The NY Times did McCain a _huge_ (and unbiased, but editorially critical) favor by returning his submission for revision. I personally wish they had printed it, but that would not have served their submission standards well. It was a flack piece that would have been publicly ripped to shreds.
Posted by DavisA on July 23, 2008 at 3:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Rob,
I rarely go to the Boulder resevoir, but I can understand the point of view that motorized watercraft should be outlawed.
That said, sorry I don't buy the link between Gross and Boulder resevoirs. Your stretching and it shows, aren't the basic merits of the argument good enough?
Posted by ogghead on July 23, 2008 at 4:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Robert McCrae,
You forgot to point out the students who seem to enjoy pushing the ped walk light on Baseline near Broadway, then walking away and not crossing the intersection. Sort of a more cowardly "ring and run" gag, I guess. During the busy evening hours, this seems to account for a third of the times it's flashing.
So kids, please accept my apologies that I ignore that one now. And good luck!
Posted by nuggethillrd on July 23, 2008 at 5:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Remember Flashing yellow means proceed with caution! It doesn't mean stop. Boulder you better get out the Colorado driving instruction book. You also might want to see what the international driving regulation are. We do have people from over-sea's that drive here. Lot's of students!
Posted by billy_goat_gruff on July 23, 2008 at 5:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Remember Flashing yellow means proceed with caution!"
This does not relieve you of the obligation to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk, especially when there's that posted and visible sign advising you of state law.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 6:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"...soy can comment on it."
In case you didn't notice (not that unusual, apparently), soy is no longer with us. My authoring program for soy blue-screened and he failed to reboot.
"Flaven? Who cares?"
I certainly don't, but don't let that prevent you from getting your briefs in a twist.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 7:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Do you owe me dinner?"
Not unless you're paying.
Posted by talven on July 23, 2008 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I get you flaven, more than you know. It's a pity your towering intellect has left you bereft of any sense of humility. You evil geniuses are all alike.
Posted by qmmckenna on July 23, 2008 at 7:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
trappist99 on July 23, 2008 at 5:41 a.m."Everyone should have the same level of health care that Government workers give themselves, paid for by the taxes of the rest of us. (Government of the people, by the people, for the people)"
The solution to solve the health care problem is simple. Make everyone work for the government. That way we can all get the same level of health care as government workers get. (Government is the people)
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 7:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"You evil geniuses are all alike."
No, mondo's a bit different.
Posted by talven on July 23, 2008 at 7:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
'mondo's a bit different.'
OK, you got me there. I have to agree.
Posted by flaven on July 23, 2008 at 10:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
vk, I'm terribly sorry: you're confusing me with someone else, a libertarian perhaps. Check with Ralph, OK? Or, qm in a pinch.
Posted by billy_goat_gruff on July 23, 2008 at 10:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The old lunch trick. Don't you remember?
Posted by billy_goat_gruff on July 23, 2008 at 11:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, that's it. I'm declaring foreign_correspondent the winner, and calling the dogs.
I'm calling them "Spot," and "Fido."
Good-bye.
Posted by Buffmaster on July 24, 2008 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What illegal war are we involved in? The last time I checked, our last war ended in 2003, a couple weeks after it started. Yeah, the same war that was started with the same INTEL that your favorite DEMS had been touting to be true that somehow became lies that Bush told.
No good choices in '08
Posted by flaven on July 24, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The last time I checked, our last war ended in 2003..."
Oh, good -- I hadn't heard that. The troops will be coming home tonight, then?
Posted by Buffmaster on July 24, 2008 at 4:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You should spend some time tonight reading about the end of WWII in Germany. The Allies were still fighting bands of Nazi's unitl 1955, did WWII end in 1945 or 1955? I hope you can see my point.
Posted by flaven on July 24, 2008 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh, good: another 100 years.
Posted by flaven on July 24, 2008 at 4:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh...were the allies still fighting bands of Japanese until 1955?
Posted by flaven on July 24, 2008 at 4:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh...were the allies still fighting Vietnamese after we bailed?
Posted by flaven on July 24, 2008 at 5 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh...were the allies still fighting Koreans after we won?
Posted by flaven on July 24, 2008 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"I hope you can see my point."
Oh...no, as a matter of fact, I can't. Probably because there is none.
Posted by Buffmaster on July 25, 2008 at 9:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You need help
Posted by talven on July 25, 2008 at 11:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
'You need help'
Yes, he does, but admitting you have a problem is the first step, and evil geniuses rarely if ever do that.
(Requires free registration.)
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Camera staff does not actively monitor comments. If you believe a comment breaks the user agreement, please flag the comment and someone will take a look at it.