The March 1 edition carried two examples of inadequate commentary.
The first was James Cameron, who joined Henry Bornstein in criticizing the idea of armed guards in schools. He sketched an elaborate list of reasons why such factors as school layout prevent effective coverage by full time guards.
He then stated: "I gather from Mr. Bornstein's detractors that there isn't a lot of support for arming teachers. A very bad idea and I totally agree."
First, he ignored my suggestions along that line, expressed in prior letters to the Vail Daily.
Second, he didn't provide the reasons for his conclusion.
Third, he did not offer an alternative that addresses the problem of school violence except to say: "Message printed on doormat: There is nothing inside worth dying for. I guess I would amend that with the caveat, unless you are the family inside."
Actually, if Cameron's non-solution is followed, the message on the doormat should read: "Gun Free Zone." Boy, that'll stop the next Adam Lanza.
The next example is Don Rogers, who criticized Republicans for the present difficulties over federal spending. He gave no picture of what the problem is - spending more than is being taken in. And running up future obligations that aren't being adequately funded, such as Social Security and Medicare.
Rogers did not acknowledge why politicians are so antsy about dealing with the problem. Like the Democrat-controlled Senate, which hasn't produced a budget in years.
He might have considered why the legal requirement to produce budgets isn't being observed. I'll offer my take: A budget tells who is going to get money and how much. The problem if you do that is you have to tell voters, who are dependent on federal spending, who are the winners and who are the losers.
And a budget has to tell taxpayers where the money is going to come from. Just upping the take from rich people won't do it. And the half of the electorate who don't pay any income taxes need to be assured that they won't be required to put some skin in the game. So the budget would have to admit how much more will be borrowed from China and other lenders.
What Rogers needs to do is specify what the financial problem is and what kind of solution would gain his approval.