Jump to content
The only person claiming this is "art" is Rob Douglas. He's the one that pulled "art" from "graffiti artist".
It would be great to see a correction of some sort from Rob, at least an apology to Steve Inskeep. Not holding my breath.
Wow, way to tackle the tough issues Rob. Calling Inskeep a "nitwit" is a big, bold position, and a great way to strike at the liberal media's bias towards the criminal element. It was sure clear in that 25 second blurb that Inskeep was using graffiti "artist" the same way we use artist to describe the paintings of Picasso, Raphael, and van Gogh. Except the part where he leads with framing the graffiti artist as a criminal.
I know it's tough to come up with a column every week. However, taking one word out of context ,"artist", reframing the story and then calling someone a nitwit over your version is stooping pretty low.
You guys should run for Supreme Court! Amazing anecdotal constitutional knowledge.
I think Rob's objection with night skiing might have to do with his Tree Haus home and excellent view of the night skiing area, rather than overall concerns with the environment and the Bortle scale. Might have been a nice disclaimer in this column, "Hey, I'm directly impacted by those lights. However, I'm really concerned with lip service to the environment, not the impact in my backyard.".
Nice thing about those lights, when the switch is off the impact on the Bortle scale will be off as well. We aren't talking about a permanent and lasting impact, just 12 or so hours a week during the ski season.
So, I'm driving into downtown yesterday towards the post office, verifying I'm going 25mph in a 25 mph zone by using the radar sign and my speedometer, and two cars pass me on the left going 40 mph in a 25 mph zone. So I ask myself, why did the city of Steamboat put up those 25 mph speed limit signs?
ski town USA, bike town USA, we need to add Constitutional Scholar Town USA given the number of experts in constitutional law around here.
Amazing number of constitutional scholars found here in the Yampa Valley. Instead of Wikipedia or You Tube for scholarly reference, why don't we use Justice Scalia's 2008 decision in the landmark gun control case, District of Columbia v. Heller, “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.” The ruling also allows limitations on ownership of “dangerous and unusual” weapons that are not in “common use” — like, for example, assault weapons.
Just for reference, this is a quote from one of the most conservative Supreme Court Justices ever, in a landmark (landmark means new, definitive direction in court cases) decision on gun control laws. Just another reference, the "Supreme Court" often decides the "constitutionality" of "laws" and things. The supreme court made up of the Pilot's registered users who comment on this board see things differently than the highest court of the land and one of the most conservative justices ever, but hey, everyone's entitled to their opinion on what's constitutional. I'm sure Joe Meglen would say his interpretation of the 2nd amendment is more correct than Justice Scalia's.
Picture caption suggestion; "Routt County's well regulated militia at their quadrennial meeting discussing the plans to stop the North Koreans from quartering in their private residences."
False equivalencies are the norm for letters to the editors and the comments on the website.
Last login: Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2013 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.