A stunning misrepresentation

(Editor’s note: This letter was originally addressed to Aspen Times columnist Roger Marolt.)Dear Editor:In response to your Aug. 18 attack on Kaplan and the Aspen Skiing Co. (“Self-importance rises at Aspen Skiing Co.”), it was NOT so “stunningly clear” to me that Kaplan denigrates second-home owners as a class. Nor that he represents some sort of hypocrisy about the balance between fractional ownership units, second homes and hotel units.Instead, it was stunningly clear to me that Kaplan wants to revitalize the lower west side of Aspen Mountain, that he advocates a balanced mix in this ski community, and that the 1A side of Aspen Mountain is a great place for a hotel. Even Ireland, the swing voter, agrees with that. It seems his objection was only that it needed to be smaller.No, you didn’t take anything out of context. You just twisted and generalized his meaning to suit your agenda. You even admit that you, because you are such a discerning reader, generalize (read: twist) Kaplan’s intention in order to serve the truth – YOUR version of the truth.He probably won’t come out, as you suggest, and say he didn’t mean what he said. But it would be pretty easy for him to come out and say he didn’t mean what YOU said he meant. I don’t think he meant what you said he meant either. I don’t even think he said what you said he meant.And, it is stunningly clear to me that you are already starting a campaign, in case there is a vote, to keep the 1A side kind of a private little folksy area for yourself and your friends. Or is it stunningly clear that you’re just sniping at ASC and nose rubbing – having already won the vote?I love it when you editorialists say “stunningly clear.” It’s almost a code word for, “I will now twist the meaning to make my adversary look like a fool.”Weems WestfeldtAspen