Lacking credibility |

Lacking credibility

Editor’s note: The following letter was written to Aspen resident and blogger Elizabeth Milias.

Dear Editor:

As you have already told me that you could not ever support me based on my arrogance, I am wondering why I would bother with this? At least the papers don’t decide who to support until they hear our answers, print letters from people regardless of their opinion, and don’t use overt ridicule to put down others personally.

This whole thing is so funny, the Abbott and Costello routine of who is Elizabeth really supporting and do candidates want anyone else to know because it hurts them with over 75 percent of the voters? Who’s on first, Elizabeth? No, who is on second? You clearly think your opinion is very important so why don’t you tell us all now so we can factor the candidates you like into our decision?

I suppose it would be too much to ask that if you disagree with a candidate’s answers submitted that you refrain from name calling, belittlement and other school-yard bully tactics designed not to convince, but humiliate or intimidate (or is it just get attention?). I am always game for a respectful discussion, particularly when it is about the future of the community I love, and enter each with the intent to learn (or teach). I don’t come in to a conversation looking for conflict; I enter it looking to convince, or be convinced. Your commitment, dedication and attention to detail are admirable, but I so abhor your tactics for me it offsets most, if not all, the good work you might do – it certainly discredits it. I feel like I am being recruited to be on a reality show designed to get ratings, not make a positive difference.

If you would put a word limit on the answers and promise to print the whole answer unedited I will reply and you can make fun of me and call me names all you want. Gee, isn’t this grand? I wonder why more sincere, honest, good people choose not to serve?

Scott Writer



See more