You are on page 1of 2

Thanks for your interest in the decisions of the editors of the opinion pages of our site and publication.

We
cannot assume why you have such an interest, but we welcome it, although the skeptics among us might lean
to the position that it is based on leverage from "special interest" to which The Daily Caller may be beholding.
Apologies if that seems cynical.

First, the publication of an opinion via a letter to the editor appearing on our opinion pages does not amount to
an endorsement by our publication of said opinion.
You see, unlike some media that pretend to present multiple viewpoints but in reality has a single-minded
agenda and thus censors alternative views or addresses issues in a single-minded fashion to devalue or
debunk them -- be it opinion of the left or right -- we at the Daily Camera strive to afford our opinion pages as a
free market of open debate and free speech of issues worthy of broad community discussion.

We cannot speak for the writer of this letter, but we would concede that he is asking the community to consider
a wide range of potential actions available to it based upon it's moral view of fracking and in light of the
government's position -- across all three branches -- regarding the rights of the oil and gas industry.
Among the considerations:
-- Fracking is an issue of intense public interest here in Colorado and especially Boulder County.
-- Proponents enjoy favorable government regulation and apparent support across all branches, to the
detriment of the opposition, at least in their view.
-- Opponents are suitably frustrated, having attempted to work through the government's system to no
satisfaction.
-- Opponents thus are expanding the consideration of available options, raising a question of moral right and
wrong regarding the community's safety, etc., vs. the industry's interests and profit motivations. Consider the
recent proposition presented to the Lafayette, Colo. City Council encouraging passage of a law making legal
illegal activity to safeguard that local moral interest.
-- Proponents appear suitably concerned, having presented the Colorado Legislature with a bill to strengthen
existing criminal penalties for essentially any action against an oil & gas operator engaged in fracking.

Clearly this is an issue of great public interest and debate, and as a legitimate media outlet intent on fostering
wide open debate by all sides of the wide range of viewpoints, it seems our duty to afford citizens the
opportunity to present questions -- including those of a wide range of civil disobedience -- to the community as
a whole to consider.

Let me ask this as you weigh this local, domestic concern.


How do you and the Daily Caller feel about the airstrike by the U.S. upon Syria in the wake of that country
using chemical weapons upon its own people?
It was clearly retaliation for an action against Syria (a independent nation) by the U.S. -- I supect one supported
by both the right and the left -- based upon moral grounds?
Yes?
It clearly was an act of violence by the U.S. to right (in its view) a moral wrong -- (granted there are also some
international policy questions at play, but in the end I think we can all agree the U.S. action was one of moral
right vs. wrong). Again, I suspect it was a violent act supported by both the right and left, but it also was one
fundamentally based upon a moral question.
Yes?

So it's ok for the U.S., currently under the leadership of a right leaning president, to take violent action on moral
grounds but it is not OK for citizens of Boulder County to ask fellow citizens to consider even violent actions as
a potential moral obligation domestically when weighing the actions of domestic business interests, ie., oil and
gas doing fracking, and potential impacts of those efforts on the community at-large?n

At a minimum, how is fostering simply community discussion of options available to opponents of fracking --
weighing moral viewpoints, rights and wrongs -- inappropriate? While some may construe the letter writer as
advocating violence, in the end he is merely asking the philosophical question.

Again, we are not taking a particular position by presenting this letter and the author's viewpoint, but rather
presenting that question to the community to debate and determine what it believes is the proper course of
action viewing the concern through its own moral lens?

Thanks again. Good day and best of luck.