Previous Page 2 of 3 Next

Continued: Readers Write: (June 6): Health exchanges, Minnetonka grad, Mark Ritchie, national security

  • Article by:
  • Last update: June 5, 2013 - 7:28 PM

While I greatly admire Michael Golz’s determination and hard work after being dealt the hardship from both parents’ untimely deaths (“Despite loss, Minnetonka grad stayed on task,” West Extra, June 6), his sister-in-law, Allison Umberger, also deserves great respect. A young woman taking in a teenager and guiding him is very inspirational. Bravo! Really loved reading about her strong encouragement for the homecoming date. She’s a jewel.

The three “men” in her immediate family — her husband, Joe, her son, Bennett, and Michael — are very lucky guys. I hope they appreciate her kindness, attention and obviously willing spirit to do what needs to be done for her family.

Great story. Kudos to Allison and the rest of her family.

Jan Clymer, Minneapolis

* * *



Labeled ‘controversial’ for no legitimate reason

Really, Strib? In your subheadline regarding Mark Ritchie’s decision not to run for re-election for Minnesota secretary of state, you state that he “was in the eye of multiple political storms” during his tenure.

Curious, because I didn’t remember controversial actions; the two recounts that happened while he was in charge were a big part of this “controversy.” He had nothing to do with the close counts in the first place, and he ran clean, above-board, transparent recounts to all but always-grousing Republicans, but this is enough to cast doubt upon his effectiveness?

You have responded in fine accord to the playbook of Republicans who repeatedly raise molehill issues to the status of mountains, both on a state and federal level (e.g., voter fraud, IRS, Benghazi, Associated Press) just to raise doubt in those not paying attention to the capabilities of prominent Democrats. The real story should be the lack of any real, positive, evidence-based, problem-solving legislation by these same Republicans.

Nancy Ruhland, Roseville

* * *



Seems like there’s a fairly fuzzy line

Just a few pages apart on June 5, two articles appeared in the Star Tribune. One acknowledged secret e-mail addresses within a few government agencies, reporting on the right of the media and Congress to demand full access to this government correspondence. The other was about a man accused of sharing government secrets online and his related criminal trial. The accused is said to have revealed some information that Osama bin Laden used against U.S. troops.

I’m curious. At what point do our rights for full government transparency end and life in prison for “aiding the enemy” begin?

  • related content

  • Illustration: Mailbox.

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters