USOPC Protests (copy)

U.S. athletes Tommie Smith, center, and John Carlos extend gloved hands skyward in racial protest during the playing of the national anthem at the Summer Olympic Games in 1968 in Mexico City.

Pride in country or in self?

I was disappointed to read the USOPC is allowing the raising of fists and kneeling during the playing of the national anthem at the Olympic trials. The Constitution allows freedom of expression, true; however, there is a time and place for this expression. Grievances in our country should be expressed within the country; not on the world stage.

Just standing in the public eye with a raised fist or kneeling really doesn’t do a thing to help the “injustices” they are against. Instead, go out to right the problem in a positive way: Go volunteer with organizations that work to eliminate the “injustices” and help people to better their lives. It can be done without the public display, or is that what the person wants: a public display with no positive plan or action to actually go out and work for the reform without the headlines? Talk is cheap, as the saying goes.

Or, has the USOPC lowered its patriotic standards just to make a name for itself? Does it want the gold without the high standards for its participants to show allegiance to the country they represent?

I am happy and proud when I see an American athlete stand on the awards podium and receive a medal for his/her achievement, with the hand over the heart as the national anthem is played. Not so, if there is the opposite. Which is it: pride in our country or just someone who wants to draw attention to his/herself?

Erna A. Haring

Colorado Springs

Cut protesters from the team

I believe that American athletes who intend to protest against the United States during the national anthem should be asked about their intentions, before they qualify to be on the American team.

And if they intend to protest, they should be eliminated from the team. American taxpayers should not have to pay to train and support athletes who hate the United States.

Charles Krushensky


Immigrant children are asylum-seekersRep. Doug Lamborn has thrown out the crisis cry for immigrants at our border because Peterson AFB here in Colorado Springs is being considered as a location to house immigrant children. Using the words illegal, crisis, alien and placing blame on the president, Lamborn seeks to use trigger words to rouse fear.

These immigrant children are asylum seekers, coming to find safety in the U.S. Children are fleeing from Central America because of the risk of being sex-trafficked, forced into gangs, and murdered. Up to 90% of these children have relatives living in the United States who are eager to welcome them. Health and Human Services is responsible for the children’s care and getting them to family members waiting for them. The children need health care, trauma counseling, and legal representation for court appearances. While we believe no immigrant child should be placed in detention, the prospect of having them in an unused dormitory at Peterson AFB is preferable to the horrendous detention cages.

These children are seeking asylum, not plotting against the space program.

Patricia Doln

Accompaniment and Sanctuary Coalition, Colorado Springs

A new normal for politics

Why spend taxpayer money on fences and 30,000 National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., when politicians can telecommute? If our representatives think it is too dangerous to work in Washington, let them work from home. Many constituents and their children still work and learn from their kitchen tables. I see no reason why politicians can’t get government business done from theirs. Think of the money that would be saved on big offices and million-dollar Washington staffs!

Politicians can and should work locally. Keep them near the people they represent. Instead of losing touch with voters by moving to Washington and participating in a barrage of cocktail parties with lobbyists. Maybe, they could have dinner and drinks with constituents instead. They have local offices. Wouldn’t it be better to employ a workforce from the area they represent? Make special interests to travel to the local districts, stay in local hotels, eat at local restaurants and use local transportation.

Voters could go right to their representative’s office and have a real conversation. Politicians could look us in the eye to explain their positions and address our concerns. I wonder if as many palms would be greased and deals struck at the expense of the American people if politicians knew their constituents were nearby, watching and listening?

Let’s tear down that wall, send our troops home and let politicians do the business of the American people from the districts and states they represent.

Nichole Stone


Wonderful fodder for a satire

As one of many Democratic Party apologists at the Washington Post, Kathleen Parker (Op/Eds, March 30) spins Joe Biden’s incompetence as really just “empathy” (for the poor souls south of the border). I would have to suspend belief about Biden’s four decades of “service” in the U.S. Senate to buy into this new line of “reeducation” about Biden.

The mayor of Colorado Springs makes about $10,000 more than a U.S. Senator, but the mayor’s salary has been on par with a U.S. Senator’s throughout the past years. But I doubt that the Mayor Suthers has four large estates around the country, a collection of sports cars and $40-plus million in the bank from his mayoral gig. The Washington Post’s attempt to make an incompetent Biden appear as another Mother Teresa is wonderful fodder for a satire more than it is reality.

Mike Menza

Colorado Springs


Load comments