I’m very disappointed about the firing of Mike Shanahan. It is one of the most boneheaded moves in NFL history, and it was brought about by the constant goading of a bunch ignoramus sportswriters and “johnny-come-lately,” whiner fans.

Those of us fans who have been through years of mediocre teams under coaches like Lou Sabine, John Ralston, Red Miller, Wade Phillips and Dan Reeves know how hard it is to get a decent coach. How many new coaches are we going to have to go through before we get back to the level that Shanahan set here? Look at the Raiders; they have been through coach after coach in the last few years, without any sign of improvement.

I place the blame for this mostly at the feet of sportswriters whose careers are based on controversy. They almost succeeded in getting rid of John Elway by agitating that he “couldn’t win the big one.” Now they have succeeded in hounding Shanahan out of town.

The irony is that many teams would love to have him and his record. But then, I’m sure that as soon as the Broncos get beat by a Shanahan-coached team, the sportswriters will start hounding owner Pat Bowlen for making a bad decision.

Larry Fish, Denver

This letter was published in the Jan. 1 edition.

We have so wondered why Broncos owner Pat Bowlen kept Mike Shanahan on for all these years. He just was not that good. John Elway carried the day while he was playing for the Broncos. Shanahan was not above average.

Daniel Lukensow, Loveland

This letter was published in the Jan. 1 edition.

Mike Shanahan is a good person; and, at one time, he was effective. Nuggets coach George Karl is a good person; and, at one time, he was effective. Unfortunately, Karl’s record of effectiveness has not been with the Nuggets. This is a team loaded with talent, which absolutely has the ability to go well into the playoffs; however, this won’t happen under Karl’s direction. Why wait until another early exit from the playoffs? Of course, we will; but please do remember in April what the Broncos ownership had the guts to do in December.

Barry Siff, Boulder

This letter was published in the Jan. 1 edition.

Although I wasn’t around at the time to read it, I’d imagine that The Post’s headline declaring the bombing of Pearl Harbor was comparable in print size to that of Wednesday’s “Sacked.”

I realize that I’m being a bit sarcastic. But I am aware of the importance to Coloradans of watching beefy men running around, falling down, and ripping anterior cruciate ligaments in the pursuit of a ball of pigskin. I even like watching a game occasionally, especially when the Broncos do something besides sit on the sidelines in great seats, witnessing the offensiveness of their offense and defense.

The droning on of a multi-millennia war between Semites in what is now Israel, the last gasps of what has become the most pathetic, damaging presidency since Hoover’s, and the continued destruction of an economy roped and steered by said presidency and its minions are events probably not warranting the coverage afforded to football. After all, war is ubiquitous, we’ve known for some time that Bush is a pitiless nincompoop, and we’ve gotten used to being used by Republicans for their own nefarious ends, especially when money is concerned.
Perhaps some balance is necessary when considering the print size of a headline. Then again, how would we figure out the magnitude of an event?

Jan Sershen, Cañon City

This letter was published in the Jan. 1 edition.

More from eLetters

• Stimulating the U.S. economy: 4 letters
• Iran president’s speech: 4 letters
• Johns Andrew’s European adventure: 4 letters
• Filling Ken Salazar’s seat: 4 letters
• Obama’s mortgage plan: 4 letters

eLetters Recommends

• Valentine’s Day murder of two teens (Cold Case Crimes Colorado)
• Fluke begins MercyMe’s journey (Higher Note)
• On The Spot: Sen. Mike Johnston, D-Denver (The Spot)

Three decades passed before I joined the green movement, but I did it. Yet I still have bugs to work out. Recently I placed my canvas grocery bag next to the plastic bags at the self-serve checkout, and a computer voice said, “Unexpected item in the bagging area.” And then, more loudly, “Unexpected item in the bagging area!” OK, OK.

You might wonder what finally moved me to turn green. As member of the baby boomers, I nodded in agreement when Tom Brokaw called our parents the Greatest Generation. They survived the Great Depression and won World War II. How in the world could we ever match that? But it suddenly struck me that if we could save the human race before we reach the tipping point — the point of no return that could come as early as the next decade — we could challenge our parents’ generation.

Taking canvas bags to the grocery. Driving hybrids. Recycling. Lowering the heat in the winter. It’s an inconvenience, but it’s not extremely hard. With baby boomer Al Gore as our leader, the Greatest Generation may have met its match.

Susan Finger, Falcon

This letter was published in the Jan. 1 edition.

More from eLetters

• To the Point: 4 letters
• Social security and the boomers: 2 letters
• The bright side of the aging boomer generation
• Keep learning the lessons of Columbine
• Where the candidates stand: 2 letters

eLetters Recommends

• Should the Guard be called out on pot protesters? (The Spot)
• Another Republican eyes the governor’s race (The Spot)
• The silly class warfare of Speaker Carroll (The Spot)

With President-elect Barack Obama renting three multimillion-dollar beach-front residences in Hawaii solely for his family and friends, and considering all of the money being spent by the media who jetted to cover the story, one must give credit to Obama for providing his own mini-stimulus package to Oahu. Certain questions do arise, however: How will Al Gore feel about the contribution to global warming caused by the exhaust from all of the jets traversing the Pacific? And with all the money spent on such lavish quarters, how Lincoln-ish is this for the man who so much wants to emulate honest but frugal Abe? And with the shots of Obama playing golf, how many Americans will remember the bad press that President Bush received for playing golf once with his father at Kennebunkport?

William H. Smith, Highlands Ranch

This letter was published in the Jan. 1 edition.

More from eLetters

• Obama and McCain on the economy: 2 letters
• Scared about Obama
• Obama and his church
• Obama’s foreign policy
• Very clever, Obama

eLetters Recommends

• On the Spot: Rep. Mark Waller (The Spot)

Re: “Rivals, replies in preliminary stage,” Dec. 28 news story.

I am disappointed but not surprised at the arrogance of those who have expressed interest in replacing Sen. Ken Salazar, yet who refuse to answer policy-related questions posed by one of the state’s major newspapers.

We just came through eight years of an administration thumbing its nose at the electorate, and now it appears that the leading candidates for Colorado’s upcoming Senate vacancy are cut from the same cloth.

Like so many others, I am sick of politicians dealing behind closed doors and asking that we, the public, simply trust their judgment.

Hats off to Diana DeGette for being forthcoming and publicly discussing her positions.

J. Levy, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

With the exception of Rep. Diana DeGette, there’s only one word to describe the failure of the other candidates to respond to the questions asked by The Denver Post on basic issues: spineless.

David Aitken, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

Re: “Ritter should consider a woman for the U.S. Senate,” Dec. 25 Gail Schoettler column.

From former Lt. Gov. Gail Schoettler, we have an example of the blatant sexism that liberals don’t even realize they are promoting. She names a number of women as possible replacements for Ken Salazar, all of whom have marginal qualifications for such an important position, and some who would be downright counterproductive. Evidently being female is credential enough. By mentioning the current percentage of males in the U.S. Senate, Schoettler is implying an inability of men to adequately represent women, and maybe that liberal staple, the quota, should dictate the choice.

Can you imagine the demonization of anyone with the temerity to suggest that a man should be named?

Tom Graham, Arvada

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

During these uncertain economic times and with the global proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, we need a senator who has the national and international experience and who, upon arrival within the halls of Congress, will have immediate credibility.

Gary Hart is consulted on a regular basis by high-level governmental officials and even advises President-elect Barack Obama. An expert on Russia and international affairs, he knows the current threats to homeland security. We need that expertise now, not later, in assisting with the shaping of U.S. policy.

Mr. Hart understands the needs of Colorado — energy policy, open lands, federal lands, and security — with a unique perspective of Western states. Colorado does not have the time to have a newly appointed person learn the ropes of Congress when we have so many state, national and international issues to be addressed.

This appointment is for only two years, and Mr. Hart could serve us very well while Colorado sorts out who should fill the Senate seat by election. Gov. Bill Ritter would be wise to appoint Mr. Hart, and then allow the citizens of Colorado to make a choice in 2010.

Gary D. Laura, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

More from eLetters

• Disappointed in Sen. Ken Salazar
• Salazar’s Senate seat: 5 letters
• Unions in Colorado: 4 letters
• Advice for Ritter in replacing Salazar: 4 letters
• Democratic nomination: 4 letters

eLetters Recommends

• 3 reasons there’s backsliding on climate change (The Spot)
• Another Republican eyes the governor’s race (The Spot)
• Politico picks at Norton’s NRSC ‘wound’ (The Spot)

Re: “Mean-spirited Mallard,” Dec. 29 letter to the editor.

Letter-writer Jim Schatz’s criticism of Bruce Tinsley’s “Mallard Fillmore” is typical of liberals wishing to censor all thoughts, ideas and statements that aren’t liberal. The so-called conservatives who approve of Barack Obama’s Cabinet appointments are weak imitators of real conservatives. I give The Denver Post a big attaboy for printing Tinsley’s cartoons as a welcome and necessary balance to the fawning coverage of Obama by most of the left-leaning press. We true conservatives love “Mallard Fillmore.”

Darrell Arnold, La Veta

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

More from eLetters

• Disappointed in the shrinking of the newspaper
• In defense of the media
• Running shoes in the office?
• Delighted by increased use of color in The Post
• The costs of waging war

eLetters Recommends

• Where in the world is Jared? (The Spot)
• Douglas Bruce, in the news again (The Spot)
• In defense of Larry Liston and Lexus lanes (The Spot)

Re: “Hands-free devices are an acceptable compromise,” Dec. 28 letter to the editor.

A recent letter-writer stated that “the required use of a hands-free device is an acceptable compromise” regarding cellphone usage while driving.

Absolutely not! Credible research has shown repeatedly that there is no difference in distraction between handheld cellphones and hands-free phones. The cellphone companies should take a lesson from the alcohol companies — teach your customers to use their products responsibly and they will live longer to use more of your product.

Cellphone usage should be absolutely prohibited while driving.

Jarvis D. Ryals, Pueblo

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

The recent spate of letters to the editor concerning cellphone usage while driving covered a lot of territory. However, no one made the most important point of all: The only drivers who necessarily need to answer a cellphone call while driving are doctors and maybe attorneys or bail bondsmen.
Think about it: How did we ever get anywhere driving before the cellphone? And how did we ever do our grocery shopping before them?

And how many more people have to be killed by drivers talking on their cellphones?

Jim Kenfield, Elizabeth

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

More from eLetters

• Eminent domain and open space: 2 letters
• Driving and talking: 2 letters
• Colorado voting issues: 2 letters
• Natural gas prices: 2 letters
• Romney and religion: 2 letters

eLetters Recommends

• Arizona, immigration and "anchor babies" (The Spot)
• Of scrap metal and Nazi Germany (The Spot)
• Caldara and the tax credits (The Spot)

Re: “‘Jersey Boys’ should have used a live band,” Dec. 25 letter to the editor.

Letter-writer John Orlando is right — he didn’t see musicians in the orchestra pit, because that’s not where we put them.

But he certainly did hear a live band, with 13 (not four!) instrumentalists: conductor/ keyboardist Andrew Wilder, keyboardists Chris Haberl and Caren Cole, Ted Chubb on trumpet, Terrence Cook and Chris Miele on reeds, Brian Silverman, Nick Dickerson, Eric Bates and Matt Bailey on guitars, Leo Huppert on bass, Mark Papazian on drums, and Buck Hujabre on guitars and drums.

We share Mr. Orlando’s disdain for pre-recorded music and are proud to be playing live at every performance. In fact, seven of the 13 musicians have been with the tour from the beginning — over 800 performances each.

Ron Melrose, New York City

This letter was published in the Dec. 31 edition.

More from eLetters

• Delighted by increased use of color in The Post
• With TABOR’s return, drastic measures needed
• Setting the record straight on ethanol fuel use
• George Bush’s legacy
• DNC is one expensive show

eLetters Recommends

• Hummers show back on – underground (The Spot)
• It’s official: No Hummers show this year (The Spot)
• Shaffer's kid does the darnest thing (The Spot)

President George W. Bush’s decision to give Detroit automakers the much-needed loan to prevent a descent to economic depression will be for naught unless he and President-elect Barack Obama both insist on a complete top-to-bottom fundamental change of Detroit’s very culture — from that of planned obsolescence and shoddy workmanship to a culture of quality and reliability. GM and Chrysler cars consistently rank at the bottom, while Toyota and Honda are at the top of the reliability scale.

To be realistic, under the best of circumstances, it’ll take at least three model years to achieve this credibility with the American public.

All of the push for economic viability, fuel efficiency, and improved emission standards, won’t work without this fundamental change.

Detroit, with such a major overhaul, could label all of its new post-overhaul reliable models with a tag of “Plus,” like Cadillac STS-Plus, etc.

John J. Sie, Cherry Hills Village

This letter was published in the Dec. 30 edition.

You can see the credibility of the auto industry when you go to purchase a car. Their goal: to swindle you out of your trade and anything else they can. That published price in the paper is a bait-and-switch tactic with rewards if you recently graduated from college while fighting in the Iraq war while driving around in the car you previously purchased at that dealership. That leaves me out of the rebate picture.

They’re no better than the banks that are now refusing to account for how the bailout money was spent. It’s all legalized organized crime. This money would be better spent by giving it to the taxpayers, who could purchase a new car or pay off their debt.

Devron Campbell, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 30 edition.

At the beginning of World War II, the American car companies stopped producing cars for four years until the end of the war. Instead, they made tanks and military vehicles. In a nuclear war, perhaps tanks will not be needed. Still, the United States needs to keep the car factories functioning, if only for the possibility of need in a wartime emergency. Are we going to ask Toyota to build our military defense vehicles? Save our car manufacturing companies for our national defense.

Anne M. Sunderwirth, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 30 edition.

More from eLetters

• Bennet in the Senate: 3 letters
• Unions in Colorado: 4 letters
• Shoveling snow in the city: 3 letters
• Child poverty in Colorado: 3 letters
• Bikes in parks: 3 letters

eLetters Recommends

• Mother of three dismembered, dumped in bags (Cold Case Crimes Colorado)
• The Feds and medical marijuana in Colorado (The Spot)
• Road trip ends in murder (Cold Case Crimes Colorado)

Re: “TABOR placed on table,” Dec. 23 news story.

Incoming state Sen. Rollie Heath lamented that the TABOR amendment limits government spending. Yes, Mr. Heath, that indeed is the very purpose of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. With TABOR, state government cannot spend more than an established amount based on the previous year’s budget plus a percentage for inflation. That is how TABOR protects us taxpayers from excessive, irresponsible government spending. During our current economic downturn, when everyone’s budget is limited to an amount far less than last year’s, surely our government should exercise similar fiscal responsibility.

Moreover, in response to Rep. Joe Rice’s spending justification, citing that old dodge about needing the funds for schools and roads won’t work again. As the rest of us must do, the legislature should allocate money to vital projects (such as schools and roads) and reduce discretionary and frivolous expenditure (such as “entitlements”).

Remember, too, that Referendum C still provides the state a moratorium from TABOR’s constraints. Thus, Mr. Heath and Mr. Rice and any other legislators clamoring for higher taxes have no grounds for complaint.

Peg Brady, Centennial

This letter was published in the Dec. 30 edition.

More from eLetters

• TABOR and the future of Colorado’s budget
• Governor’s mansion belongs to the people
• Bobo the dog’s ordeal
• Rearranging the chairs on education’s Titanic
• To the Point: DNC edition

eLetters Recommends

• 3 reasons there’s backsliding on climate change (The Spot)
• Another Republican eyes the governor’s race (The Spot)
• Gail Schwartz's 15 minutes (The Spot)

Re: “Digital switch will leave a few in dark,” Dec. 25 news story.

Thank you for the warning regarding the switch to digital television. As one who installed a converter several months ago, I am disappointed already. My analog setup was crystal clear, resilient and reliable. My experience with digital includes the following:

1. Quite frequently, a program on my screen dissolves into a cascade of little colored boxes while the audio hiccups and groans unintelligibly. This may be repeated so many times that I abandon the program as unwatchable.

2. The audio and video do not synchronize, so programs with people moving their lips come across as a bad dubbing job.

3. I lost, not gained, channels.

4. Get ready to temporarily lose several channels when the wind blows or the snow flies.

I can’t imagine what people in outlying areas may experience, as I am located centrally in the metro area and would expect good reception. I’m afraid this brilliant idea is going to cost those of us who still use analog, in addition to the price of the converter, some $50 to $300 more for an outside antenna — that is, of course, if we want to watch any TV at all. Like we can afford that.

Susan P. Williams, Lakewood

This letter was published in the Dec. 30 edition.

More from eLetters

• To The Point: 4 letters
• The switch to digital TV: 2 letters
• Don’t delay transition to digital television
• The Gospel according to Tancredo
• Reactions to the VP debate: 3 letters

eLetters Recommends

• On the Spot: Cheri Gerou, R-Evergreen (The Spot)
• Hickenlooper declines to take tax stance (The Spot)
• Look, Buck said what he said, despite his protests to the contrary (The Spot)

My wife, oldest granddaughter and I helped out with Father Woody’s annual Christmas party. I was overwhelmed to see all the volunteers who filled the ballroom at the Sheraton. It was announced that they needed men to go outside to direct the people into the building. I quickly grabbed my hat and gloves and headed out the door. To my amazement, I saw families and homeless people in a line waiting to enter the building. After 200 people passed me, I noticed a little girl who had only a blouse and sweater on; the temperature was 12 degrees, and her nose was running.

My heart went out to this little girl because her mother was carrying a baby, and the baby could not have been more than 3 years old. Perhaps, I thought to myself, this was the only way in which they were able to get a present. I immediately pulled the scarf off of my neck and wrapped it around hers. I remembered when I was this girl’s same age at a Denver orphanage, and I was bused to Christmas events. We never had to experience this type of an ordeal just to get a gift. We did not have to fight the elements to get a gift.

I waited until the last person entered the building, and we returned inside. I witnessed my granddaughter using all of her senses in a learning experience. Her eyes: seeing the homeless; her ears: listening to the joy; her hands: wishing them a Merry Christmas; but the most important thing, she tasted life. The experience was one of recognition of how fortunate she was.

As I went to bed that night, I felt my feet still cold from standing outside. As I rolled onto my pillow, so too did my tears, thinking about the girl who was standing out in the cold. I thank Father Woody for serving as the change and compassion we need to see in the world. I know that my tears and scarf must serve as initial action and connection to a world that is not widely seen or understood. I have come to understand that both sides of this line benefit from the knowledge of the other.

Perhaps, beyond the chill of a well-needed giveaway, we need to imagine a way in which this sort of event becomes obsolete as a result of our daily thanksgiving and deeds. In doing so, we find our solidarity through our common sacrifices for the common good of all.

Frank L. Vigil, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 29 edition.

More from eLetters

• Obama and McCain on the economy: 2 letters
• Concerns about the water supply — and journalism: 2 letters
• Supporting the troops – and the end of the war
• Terrorism and the water
• Bibles in the classroom and the prison cell

eLetters Recommends

• The Feds and medical marijuana in Colorado (The Spot)
• Arizona, immigration and "anchor babies" (The Spot)
• Joel Judd and the other 99 (The Spot)

A legislative solution to control cellphone use while driving would be useless. A ban would be all but unenforceable; do we really want to hire phone police?

However, a technological solution is practical, maybe even foolproof. The technology already exists to bundle a GPS device in a cellphone. Simply require cellphones to be programmed so they would not work if the phone was moving faster than, say, walking speed. You’re a passenger? Ask the driver to pull over.

Chas. E. Lehnert, Riverview, Fla.

This letter was published in the Dec. 29 edition.

More from eLetters

• Phones and driving: 2 letters
• Press and DA to blame in death?
• Driving and talking: 2 letters
• Be nice to animals and bugs
• Hybrids are a solution to too much idling

eLetters Recommends

• Who dat? Hudak. (The Spot)
• "Curiouser and curiouser" (The Spot)
• And Washington grinds to a halt (The Spot)

Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich is being investigated for a pay-to-play scandal involving the “sale” of the Illinois U.S. Senate seat; Democratic Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. faces queries about his interest in buying said Senate seat; key players in the Obama presidential transition team — White House Chief of Staff-designate Rahm Emanuel and adviser Valerie Jarrett — are being asked about their contacts with the good governor from the great state of Illinois; a federal grand jury is investigating Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson, Obama’s nominee for secretary of Commerce, for his part in a pay-to-play scandal involving New Mexico government bond markets; and Bill Clinton disclosed that his foundation collected at least $41 million from foreign nations such as Saudi Arabia, complicating Hillary’s ability to serve as the U.S.’s top diplomat.

Kinda makes you nostalgic for the Bush years, doesn’t it?

Steve Schurman, Arvada

This letter was published in the Dec. 29 edition.

More from eLetters

• Bush Democrats and the Iraq war
• Obama and the Brits
• McCain and the truth
• Obama and the stimulus bill: 8 letters
• FDR and the Depression

eLetters Recommends

• "Curiouser and curiouser" (The Spot)
• Rock shocker and the Newsboys (Higher Note)
• The Feds and medical marijuana (The Spot)

Even conservatives are giving Barack Obama a break as he approaches inauguration: David Brooks, for instance, just gave him an “A” on his Cabinet appointments. But Bruce Tinsley (“Mallard Fillmore”) continues his petty mean streak with a sarcastic comment about Obama not believing in “commerce.” He has become unreadable in his mean-spiritedness and I do not see why you carry him.

Jim Schatz, Northglenn

This letter was published in the Dec. 29 edition.

More from eLetters

• Smoking at DIA
• Why can’t RTD turn to eminent domain?
• A fever in Washington
• Mean-spirited? What about Wellstone’s funeral?
• Protecting teen drivers

eLetters Recommends

• Bad hair days mean good times for Democratic delegates (The Spot)
• Hey, I’m no Democratic Party strategist … (The Spot)
• GOP big tent: This time we mean it (The Spot)

Re: “Girl’s death renews push for cellphone ban,” Dec. 22 news story.

A 9-year-old girl in Fort Collins was recently killed by a driver who was distracted while talking on a cellphone. In response to a request to the state legislature to enact a law banning the use of a cellphone and texting while driving (except with a hands-free device), state Sen. Greg Brophy stated that “there are all kinds of distracted driving going on out there, from eating a cheeseburger to talking on a cellphone to talking to your kids in the back seat.” He also said, “Just singling out texting or cellphones doesn’t solve any problem.”

What planet is Brophy living on? I defy him to drive around for an hour and count the number of people who are eating a cheeseburger or talking to their kids in the back seat, and the number of people who are talking on a cellphone. Then compare the numbers.

And, if talking on a cellphone is distracting, texting while driving is just plain asking for an accident to happen. I see people not only talking on a cellphone, but writing notes, reading documents, handling a cigarette. And it has been proven that most people slow down while talking on a cellphone, thus causing traffic jams and even road rage.

I think that talking on a cellphone while driving should be prohibited, but the required use of a hands-free device is an acceptable compromise. And teenagers, who are the least-experienced drivers, should be prohibited from cellphone use altogether while driving.

David Acheson, Aurora

This letter was published in the Dec. 28 edition.

Re: “Phones, driving a dangerous mix,” Dec. 23 editorial.

Nice editorial on cellphones and driving. England does not allow anyone to operate a cellphone while driving. Cellphone accidents statistically are as high as drunken driving. It is a shame to think that we would allow something that has the same potential to injure and kill people as drunken driving go unregulated because it is convenient.

Please keep reporting on this and get it in front of the public.

Steve Ekblad, Fort Collins

This letter was published in the Dec. 28 edition.

So we need to be protected from distracted drivers, eh? Then be sure this law includes protecting us from commercial interests, such as cabbies and utility workers using telecommunication devices while driving. And aren’t fire, rescue, and law enforcement personnel human enough to get distracted, too?

Fess up! Isn’t this really just a move toward getting talk radio banned?

Bennett Rutledge, Centennial

This letter was published in the Dec. 28 edition.

More from eLetters

• Phones and driving: 2 letters
• Driving and talking: 2 letters
• RTD and FasTracks: 4 letters
• Technological solution to driving and talking
• Mileage taxes and transportation funding: 3 letters

eLetters Recommends

• Spotted This Morning: Buck and Norton go to War (The Spot)
• More claims and counterclaims in GOP treasurer’s race (The Spot)
• The Feds and medical marijuana (The Spot)