I don't think the 90% figure is accurate, though I think significantly more of those who respond to surveys (and most likely, more throughout) are registered as Democrats than as Republicans, Libertarians, etc. However, I also think that the vast majority of them, however they register, make a strong effort in news columns to set that aside. Editorial pages and Op-Ed pages, of course, properly contain opinion. Those Editorial and Op-Ed pages, when properly managed, contain the opinion of the publication plus those of outsiders (agreeing and dissenting). As for the "mainstream media" label: I view it as a perjorative created by some of the far-out kooks (at both ends of the spectrum) who have no interest in a medium that tries to avoid bias; rather, they simply want it to share their own biases. Be they Left or Right, I have little use for them. Though I disagree with the degree of your premise, I certainly endorse your right to your opinion. Thanks for responding.

It is sad to see such cynicism, though all have a right to that (or other opinion). I think the vast majority of print journalists (daily newspapers) are doing their best in trying times. Sadly, economy-forced cuts have significantly weakened the watchdog function; it is a wonderful time to be a crooked politician (or university administrator, or anything else). The Republic needs a fair and aggressive press to protect it from crooks, as well as from the kooks on both ends of the talk-show game. I am unfamiliar with CU's J-School. But if it is teaching ethics and techniques for finding out what the pols are up to (and trying to hide), it should not be lost. If it is teaching only typing, who cares?

Too bad, but understandable in today's economy (and the context of news about Boulder considering charging non-residents for trail usage -- and the number of non-resident users). I'm a non-resident, and I would be willing to pay -- and I understand why taxpayers would resent it if I did not.

The Daily Camera website carried a story yesterday saying that Trojans condoms ranked CU No. 21 in the nation (condom usage, not football, alas). This was up from No. 48 one year earlier -- an extraordinary jump. Perhaps it's time to have the person responsible for Better Condom Usage coach the Buffs and for Hawkins to go over to the Health Center and help explain how to put on condoms.

Q. When is it inappropriate for a coach to use youthfulness and inexperience as an excuse for dreadful performances
by his team?
A. When he is in his fourth season as coach. In addition to his duties on the field, he is responsible for managing
personnel. He has had time. He must ensure that (1) appropriate players are recruited and signed to keep the pipeline
full, (2) certain players are redshirted to have elibility saved for position needs later and (3) strong and effective efforts
are made to keep players out of trouble so they don't leave or get kicked out of the program. This is the Big XIII. A Big XII
coach is expected to see the whole picture. But since he apparently is not concentrating on managing personnel and
it seems that (with a 2-5 record) he has not been effectively concentrating on X's and O's, I wonder what he has been
focusing on....

Q. What kind of Div. I football coach blames the fans and the media when his team is 0-3?
A. One who refuses to look in the mirror.

Heck, I like Dan Hawkins. But he is working very hard to take away the respect I have. As he has famously said, "This is not intramurals." Same is true for coaching. Man up, coach. You're responsible. Take the responsibility. That's how you build respect among your players, and you need that to win at this level.

The reporter is too easy on the RTD. Consider the following sentence (from the story):
"But construction-cost increases, higher-than-expected property-acquisition costs and design changes have driven the estimated cost of building all of FasTracks to $7 billion, from $4.7 billion five years ago."
Here's how it should have been written:
"RTD officials have consistently underestimated the costs of the projects they have promised because of failure to properly project expenses and revenue. They blame construction-cost increases...."

Remember this: They are PAID to get these things right, to properly forecast costs and revenue. When they fail, as they have, it is time to dismiss them and hire qualified successors. Otherwise, we taxpayers get caught in the common public officials' trick: They low-ball the cost to get us to approve a tax increase, then come back and say they can finish only a portion of the project unless we agree to give them yet more money. This reminds me of the Viet Nam-era "We're in. let's win," nonsense. Hold the bureaucrats and politicians accountable. Then say good-bye to them.