Seven Days | Vermont's Independent Voice | Comment Archives | stories | News + Opinion | Letters to the Editor

Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: stories: News + Opinion: Letters to the Editor

Re: “Letters to the Editor (7/17/19)

I would like to add to Dr. Antley's letter;
There are a lot of reports coming out of Colorado ER's that the number of Marijuana induced psychoses are increasing dramatically in some places. At what point will this increase be looked at and since there is the push to create a public payer system in healthcare, how much is this going to cost everybody?

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by ConcernedVter on 07/18/2019 at 8:44 AM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (6/19/19)

"Miro is the best reason for term limits for mayor."

I'm sorry, no. Bup Kiss was the best reason. And you know what happened? Terms limits happened. The voters voted him out (even despite the Progs' attempt to make him mayor for life with the "keep counting until Bob wins" IRV scheme, which the voters also jettisoned).

Perhaps if the nostalgic old hippies had put up someone better that Carina "I-have-absolutely-no-platform-but-I'm-Bernie's-stepdaughter-and-I'm-entitled-to-be-mayor" Driscoll, Miro might not be mayor right now.

Prog mayor Pete Clavelle held office from 1989 to 1993 and again from 1995 to 2006, for a total of 7 terms and 14 years. I must have missed it when the Progs were clamoring for terms limits then.

Miro's doing a good job moving this city forward despite the old hippie obstructionism. Burlington isn't the Progs' fiefdom anymore.

8 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by knowyourassumptions on 06/23/2019 at 12:27 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (6/19/19)

More Miro Whine-berger . . . geez. He gets free PR on the local news almost every night, what passes for "interviews" turn into nothing more the sycophancy by the local "journalists". I watched Galin Ettlin on WCAX practically drop to his knees and shine Miro's shoes for him a few months ago during what was supposed to be an "interview". It was disgraceful. Galin sat there with a stupid grin while Miro jabbered about how "everybody" wants the new City Hall park and Champlain Parkway jammed thru.

Miro is the best reason for term limits for mayor.

6 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by NorthOldEnder on 06/23/2019 at 2:10 AM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (6/19/19)

Doesn't Miro currently have a Newport-sized hole in the middle of his city?

8 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by Justin Boland on 06/20/2019 at 5:25 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (6/19/19)

If Miro is so concerned about an alleged lack of "affordable" houses, why doesn't he actually do something about it?

Mayor Whineburger, who whined to the editor for not going to his "housing summit," fails to admit that the way to reduce taxes is to - drum roll - insist that city hall spend less of our money.

The point Whineburger refuses to concede is that houses cost a lot because property taxes are so high.

Skyrocketing property taxes force:

* Landlords to charge more for rent.

* Sellers to raise their asking prices.

See how this works, Miro?

Of course you do. You just pretend you don't so you can masquerade as a leader of the welfare class, which is your political base.

Government shouldn't be using tax money to "create affordable housing," aka subsidize housing costs.

If politicians are so concerned about the cost of housing, they should do something about it.

As in, stop spending so much tax money.

Then, and only then, will housing costs become "affordable."

5 likes, 14 dislikes
Posted by Ted Cohen on 06/20/2019 at 5:35 AM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (5/15/19)

I'm super stoked that Trump's grammar style is spreading. Also, I'm sure that private developer who owns his site is already being financially penalized. That work complete was not free and money isn't either.

Posted by SputnikNuts on 05/15/2019 at 2:17 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (4/3/19)

Mr. KYA, that is a good summation! Thanks!

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Charlie Messing on 04/06/2019 at 5:25 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (4/3/19)

The author of the comment may or may not realize that there were two charges at issue in the judge's decision. The judge did NOT dismiss both charges. The first charge was aggravated disorderly conduct based on Hayden's appearing in person at City Hall and being loud, threatening, and belligerent. The court ruled that the defendant's conduct was NOT protected by the First Amendment and the court did NOT dismiss that charge. The second charge was about sending vile emails to a city councilor at his official city council email address (not to his personal email address). The court found that based on U.S. Supreme Court and Vermont court precedent, those emails were protected by the First Amendment and it dismissed that charge. So the judge did NOT issue a blanket decision protecting Hayden under the First Amendment. Furthermore, Mr. Hayden is charged with five other crimes that were not addressed by this court decision. So it looks like he has six charges against him and certainly will "face the consequences of his actions." PS, we can all agree that the racist emails sent to the councilor were shocking and disgusting, regardless of which email address Hayden used.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by knowyourassumptions on 04/06/2019 at 4:23 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (4/3/19)

[about Not-so-free Speech]
Harassing them is legal because they are Public Officials. He is allowed to say absolutely anything to them, or about them? At any time of day or night? What about threatening their families? He did that too.

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by Charlie Messing on 04/04/2019 at 4:55 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (3/27/19)

It's clear you hit a nerve Ms Edgar . Well done .

1 like, 4 dislikes
Posted by Rich ard on 03/28/2019 at 9:38 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (3/13/19)


3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by ATWA on 03/19/2019 at 11:00 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (3/13/19)

Dear Editor

I am writing you to notify you of my intent to run in the Democratic Primary for President. I want to help the Democratic Party back to where it was when my Dad was a Democrat Voting for President Truman and President Kennedy.

I am a conservative and I think that the Democratic Party back then was more conservative than the Republican Party is now. I do not want socialism, open borders or the killing of babies.

I have spent 4 years in the Army Security Agency where I attained the rank of Specialist 5 and 21 years in the Air National Guard where I attained the rank of Master Sergeant. I have worked in industry as an electronics technician, production engineer and as an electronic design engineer. I am a member of the American Legion where I have been a Post Commander, Second Vice Commander and as Post Historian. I have never served in any public office position.

As I am not rich, I am going to need financial help, so could you recommend someone there in Iowa that could help me in my effort to run for President?


MSgt Arthur R. Mason USAF (Ret.)

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Arthur Mason on 03/19/2019 at 10:07 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (2/20/19)

For the better part of half a century, I covered public affairs, politics and elections in Vermont, mostly in radio and TV news, focusing on the city of Burlington. Now retired, for the first time in my life I am endorsing and volunteering for a political campaign. The candidate is Jane Knodell, running as an independent for re-election to the Burlington City Council. Jane faces two challengers for her seat in the Central District. Although I wont attack either challenger, I simply ask voters in the Central District- Wards 2 and 3- to join me in sending Jane Knodell back for another two-year term, based on her record. She has the knowledge, experience and courage to support the best interest of the city, and avoid getting bogged down in frivolous partisan political fantasies. Vote smart. Vote Knodell.

- Andy Potter

2 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Andy Potter on 02/23/2019 at 3:25 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (2/13/19)

It's knowyourassumptions! Welcome to the fray.

"Two obvious allies on the city hall park ballot issue sniping with each other in public view because of reading comprehension issues and snarkery. Keep up the good work."

"In public view" is good - like we should do it in an alley? What are you thinking? "Reading comprehension issues"? You're the one to talk - I've seen your comments. "Snarkery" is actually good, so thanks for that - keep up the good work yourself! Nice of you to contribute. I'll leave it there.

6 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Charlie Messing on 02/14/2019 at 10:41 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (2/13/19)

Two obvious allies on the city hall park ballot issue sniping with each other in public view because of reading comprehension issues and snarkery. Keep up the good work.

8 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by knowyourassumptions on 02/14/2019 at 1:16 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (2/13/19)

Well Ted,
I appreciate your attempt at clarification, with a side order of humiliation, but I cannot take seriously a response which ends in LOL with a sideways symbol of a happy face. Thank you.

1 like, 4 dislikes
Posted by Charlie Messing on 02/14/2019 at 12:22 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (2/13/19)

To Charlie Messing,

The posting to which you refer is very specific in addressing each of your queries.

Read it again. Carefully. Slowly. Word for word. Sentence by sentence.

Therein you will find the direct references to each of your concerns.

It couldn't be more clear aka non-neutral LOL ;-)

2 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Ted Cohen on 02/14/2019 at 6:05 AM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (2/13/19)

Hi Ted.
Everyone else (the Council, the impatient Planners, etc.) were the ones who complained the wording was not neutral. We agree with you that the wording was fine. By "apologize for" or "justify", you mean we need not defend our views? That we should not point out the injustice? Perhaps you are saying we are Right? If so, why not say so? I can't see your point.

4 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by Charlie Messing on 02/13/2019 at 4:24 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor (2/13/19)

The proponents of the save-the-City-Hall-Park trees campaign have absolutely no need to apologize for or justify the proposed wording of their so-far failed effort to get the city council to put their initiative on the ballot.

In fact, ballot initiatives, whether sponsored by the citizenry or by city hall, are not "neutral" by design.

So any councilor who has complained that the proposed ballot question failed the "neutrality" test is simply using a fraudulent and convenient excuse to stop the 3,300 people who have been trying to keep the city from cutting down the trees in the park.

A letter writer above, Matthew Ennis, felt he needed to defend the citizens' ballot initiative.

Neither Ennis nor anyone who is part of a campaign to save trees need to defend their "neutrality." Nor should they.

They are passionate about their cause, which is not born of neutrality. They should defend their beliefs, not waste their time responding to specious arguments about a "lack of neutrality."

Ballots call for choices - about issues and candidates. When voters select between two or more candidates for a council seat, for instance, they are not playing a game of which contender is more "neutral." They are, in fact, making a choice.

The "neutrality" argument is a total ruse - whether or not you want to save more trees in favor of less concrete.

4 likes, 14 dislikes
Posted by Ted Cohen on 02/13/2019 at 11:23 AM

Re: “Letter to the Editor (2/6/19)

RE: Burlington Free Press

I was able to cancel my subscription online with the chat agent in less than 5 minutes. just saying.…

this is the link to the chat.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Diane Pontecorvo on 02/08/2019 at 4:57 AM

Recent Comments

Keep up with us Seven Days a week!

Sign up for our fun and informative

All content © 2019 Da Capo Publishing, Inc. 255 So. Champlain St. Ste. 5, Burlington, VT 05401
Website powered by Foundation