Re: “Forcing hospital workers to have flu shots is unfair,” Dec. 1 guest commentary.

It is irresponsible and reckless for an emergency room nurse to care for patients without receiving a flu shot. Guest columnist Carol Bryant’s excuses would be of little comfort if she transmitted the flu to an immune-compromised or elderly patient. Many people are ignorant about the dangers of flu, but Ms. Bryant, presumably well-trained in science and statistics, should certainly know better.

I hope Ms. Bryant quits her job immediately rather than wait to lose it. She’d have more time to write self-righteous guest commentaries far away from patients who deserve better, more compassionate care. I also recommend she reacquaint herself with the Hippocratic Oath; it appears that she’s forgotten it.

Jerry Oksner, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 4 edition.

Thank you, Carol Bryant, for expressing my thoughts so well. I find it ironic that people who scream that they do not want the government making their health care decisions are not up in arms about this. It is much more personally invasive than the government saying I can have an abortion if I want to, or that I am required to have health insurance or pay a fine, or that doctors can be reimbursed for discussing difficult end-of-life issues with me if my situation warrants it.

In light of the study quoted, which said most flu vaccines provide only moderate protection at best, I too hope the Colorado Department of Health reconsiders the flu shot mandate.

Nancy Litwack-Strong, Lakewood

Re: “Medicaid expansion could cost Colorado $858 million over 10 years,” Nov. 27 news story.

Thank you for bringing attention to the issue of Medicaid expansion in your front-page article.

The Colorado Chapter of the American College of Physicians, representing 1,554 internal medicine physicians and medical students in the state, strongly encourages the expansion of Colorado Medicaid under health care reform. The expansion would extend Medicaid eligibility to an additional 225,000 Coloradans.

With the vast majority of the costs covered by the federal government (100 percent through 2015 and 90 percent after 2019), Colorado’s share would be $858 million over 10 years. As per your article, when you factor in lower state payments to hospitals for uncompensated care, that cost goes down to $581 million. In fact, the Urban Institute did a global assessment of Colorado’s costs through 2019 and concluded that the state would save $32 million when all cost savings are included.

This is an opportunity to cover one-third of currently uninsured Coloradans and improve the health and wellbeing of thousands or our citizens.

Al Steinmann, M.D., Golden

Re: “A Super Bowl in Denver? Bring it,” Dec. 1 editorial.

So the National Football League is nervous about Denver’s weather for a Super Bowl game. The weather in February here is rarely bad for playing football. So let’s have some fun with this.

We will offer a weather guarantee. During the game, if the temperature drops below zero or we receive an inch or more of snow, we will offer the outdoor fans $100 a ticket. We can have The Weather Channel install a big thermometer and snow gauge on top of the stadium. They can give reports each quarter on the status of the guarantee. I’m sure some businesses that stand to profit greatly from this event would gladly help to pay the insurance policy. The NFL either gets a good-weather game or credit for caring about the fans.

It’s win-win for all. Through all the hype and hoopla, our little secret would be that a Denver Super Bowl would probably be just another ordinary, beautiful February day.

Scott Gomer, Denver

With the election over, I don’t want to start the Obama bashing, but how in the world can the president of the United States not condemn an Islamist constitution in Egypt which would deny women’s rights, curtail free speech, limit the right of association, and not allow the free practice of religion?

We allowed the Islamic Brotherhood to take power. Why are we now silent in the face of their betrayal of democratic values?

The president needs to be accountable for this travesty. He needs to hear from Americans that this is not OK.

Anthony T. Accetta, Denver

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow DPLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Re: “Some GOP lawmakers now flout anti-tax man Norquist,” Nov. 27 news story.

What is a “fiscal conservative” anyway? Is it someone who just opposes any kind of tax increase and wants to see more tax deductions? That did become the common Republican definition. For years they cut taxes and then went on spending on wars and bigger government, leading to our incredible deficits and debts.

I believe most people and businesses have to view conservative use of their own money, at a minimum, as requiring a balance between their income and their spending. Shouldn’t “fiscal conservative” politicians be committed to balancing our country’s revenue with its spending?

I don’t understand how Republicans could legally, or in good conscience, take an “anti-tax” oath created by an unelected lobbyist — Grover Norquist. They took an oath of office when they were elected that should not allow for taking any other “oaths” while they hold that office. Taking other oaths cannot help but end up putting them in conflict with their obligations to the country.

Norquist has stolen the souls of elected Republicans in Washington.

Wayne Steiner, Highlands Ranch

This letter was published in the Dec. 3 edition.

I’ve been wondering if anyone else has seen similarities between Grover Norquist and Douglas Bruce. One tried to hold Colorado’s economy at bay while protecting his own financial interests. The other is trying to hold the economy of the United States of America at bay for that 1 percent of wealthy Americans. Colorado municipalities continue trying to rid themselves of Bruce’s initiatives. When will elected officials stop being blackmailed by Norquist and help the economy of the United States? Maybe they forgot who they are “supposed” to be working for? Then again, they might just be paying attention to their own incomes and hoping like heck they can get elected for another term.

Grown men and women in the Senate and House act like spoiled little children who will not compromise because they fear Norquist more than their constituents. Makes one wonder, doesn’t it?

Stephen Jacob, Estes Park

An intelligent, professional ambassador to the United Nations would not go on five different TV talk shows and declare that the Benghazi attack was the result of a video no one had seen. Pure partisan hypocrisy? Give me a break. Susan Rice was a puppet who repeated what she was told by the administration. Check out all the facts. Even Sen. Dianne Feinstein was questioning the coverup.

Four Americans were killed at the consulate and were refused help. It is sad that politics trumps national security, but that’s what we have. I hope Rice is nominated for secretary of state; we may then get some definitive answers. But wait — there will undoubtedly be more coverup.

Kay Robbins, Denver

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow DPLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Re: “Fiscal cliff: Colorado stands to lose $2.1 billion without a deal,” Nov. 30 news story.

Members of Congress need to sequester themselves in Washington until they come up with a long-term financial solution for the country.

No vacations, no going home for the holidays, no weekend junkets — just lock the doors on the Capitol building and stay there until they have a comprehensive and long-term budget that is endorsed by at least two-thirds of both houses. A two-thirds vote will guarantee that all major factions can hold the others hostage, so that they can’t just punt and escape but have to compromise.

Let the Capitol police keep order, have pizza and coffee brought in, but keep the doors locked with no way out until the job is done. And no interim press releases or commentary, so no one gets to prejudice the outcome ahead of time.

Steve Pomerance, Boulder

This letter was published in the Dec. 3 edition.

The easiest way to get President Obama to ensure that we prevent the “fiscal cliff” is to ground Air Force One until Obama gets an acceptable deal with Congress.

President Obama has taken three trips since the election and met with the congressional leaders only twice. Two of these trips were unnecessary.

Melvin Glerup, Highlands Ranch

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow DPLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Re: “Colorado secession petition has 21,900 signatures,” Nov. 24 news story.

The Denver Post recently reported on the growing movement of some citizens to support their states in seceding from the union. At least 25,000 people in each of 11 states have signed petitions to secede, most of them from the South. To these people I say good luck. The U.S. will be better off politically and financially without them and their backward, ignorant views (it’s a well-known fact that the wealthier Northern, Midwestern and Western states subsidize the poorer Southern states through federal revenue transfers). Without the South to hold us back, we wouldn’t be hindered by gridlock at every turn. We could pass legislation, consistently held back by Southern congressmen, which would create the truly progressive democracy so many of us seek. We could realize the world-leading high levels of happiness found in Scandinavia.

John Penberthy, Boulder

This letter was published in the Dec. 2 edition.

Secession supporters, including those who have published their views in letters to The Post’s editor, presumably are consistent enough in their views that they will no longer take the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States of America — “one nation indivisible.”

Similarly, secessionists cannot honestly take an oath of federal office to uphold the Constitution without a non-dictionary definition of the word “uphold.”

R.B. Leather, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 2 edition.

Colorado should secede. It will reduce the size of the federal government. Between 2007 and 2009, we sent about $44 billion to Washington. If we secede, that’s $22 billion a year less Washington can spend. Plus, it means more money for Coloradans because we get back only 90 cents for each dollar we send to Washington. And we will need that extra money. Think of all the additional expense for deporting illegal aliens — back to Texas and Wyoming, not to mention California. This will become especially expensive when we have to deport all those aliens who were not born in Colorado, and who do not self-deport. On the bright side, if we need workers form another country, like Mexico or the U.S., we can charge for an annual work permit and generate even more money. Let’s just hope the U.S. doesn’t charge native Coloradans for a visa to travel to its states.

About the only downside I envision from secession might be for Colorado Springs’ economy. I doubt the U.S. would leave a military base, much less its Air Force Academy, in a foreign country.

W. Edwards, Arvada

This letter was published in the Dec. 2 edition.

Perhaps the Colorado secretary of state should investigate the identity of those who signed the petition calling for our state to secede from the union. Then he should disqualify them from voting in federal elections. Taxpayers of the state have sent him to conferences so that he could heighten his skills to identify unqualified voters.

Phillip K. Tompkins, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 2 edition.

I have a few questions for those 21,900 people who signed the petition to secede from the United States. First, just where are you planning to live? Second, who is going to help you out if forest fires or tornadoes devastate your new country? And, finally, who will be issuing your passports, should you wish to come back to visit the rest of us?

Thomas Olkowski, Roxborough

This letter was published in the Dec. 2 edition.

Re: “One nation, (maybe-not-so) indivisible,” Nov. 25 Paul Vandervelder column.

Paul Vandervelder does not seem to understand why six states want to secede from the union. Vandervelder is mocking the very moral foundation of what made this country great. Show me the fossil records proving the Earth is more that 6,000 years old. If Lincoln was leading this country today, we would definitely not be heading into socialism! What is wrong with not wanting to murder more babies in their mother’s wombs along with respecting the sanctity of marriage? Why would you want to destroy a person’s incentive to work hard and keep their earnings versus forcing them to pay for those who choose to be nonproductive in our society? Why on Earth would you want to forgo your freedom to live under the oppression of socialism?

I have a prediction for you, Mr. Vandervelder: We Christians will be the ones handing out food to people like you at the soup kitchen when the rug is soon pulled out from underneath the United States of America!

Taryn Logan, Lakewood

This letter was published in the Dec. 2 edition.

I’m tired of the Romney voters whining and talking about secession. Only 28 percent of the eligible voters in the U.S. (according to the Census Bureau) voted for Mitt Romney. That means 72 percent (148 million) did not vote for Romney, either by voting for President Obama or abstaining. Get over yourselves and your agendas. Tell your elected officials to do their jobs and work for fair and equitable laws. Democracy has always been about majority rule, compromise, and taking care of the underprivileged and needy. If you think secession is your only answer, why not give up your citizenship and move to Canada or Europe? That’s a lot easier than seceding. At least you’ll have health care, whether you have a job or not, and even with a pre-existing condition.

David A. Robinson, Denver

Re: “Commerce City police officer fatally shoots restrained dog,” Nov. 26 news story.

How Commerce City police officers came to kill Chloe, a lab/pit bull mix, provides a tragic opportunity for reflection. The officers were clearly unprepared to either evaluate or assist this frightened dog. As a dog trainer and behavior specialist, I assessed Chloe’s body language in the video and could see she was terrified, not dangerous. Officers in these situations need specific, compassionate, non-confrontational, non-violent training. Chloe, who was away from home and disoriented, needed containment, not killing.

When government employees behave in such a brutal way, they seem barbaric, unprofessional and unintelligent, and do not serve their community. I can’t help but wonder if the pit bull stereotype came into play with Chloe’s killing. Had she been a Golden Retriever, for example, would officials have responded in the same way? We must confront this absurd prejudice that has no statistical basis locally or nationally. One goal of a new coalition, No Kill Colorado, is education. We need to understand what dogs are communicating and why, so that reactive public officials don’t kill more vulnerable unattended dogs.

Lorraine May, Lakewood

Re: “Rising threats to homes lands Colorado among catastrophic states,” Nov. 25 news story.

What I found missing in your article was whether insurance premiums will rise uniformly for housing in Colorado or for those most at risk — e.g., houses in the wildland-urban interface (WUI). This is galling for those of us who live in the urban areas and low-risk areas for the most recent series of catastrophes giving rise to the insurance premiums. It is further annoying that if we value the view sheds in many areas of Colorado, we are helping subsidize those who want to live in those areas, often the WUI, which is most susceptible to fires.

In these days of ever-finer models of risk analysis, you would think insurance companies would be able to distinguish risk factors and associated premiums which capture fire danger, versus hail damage.

If this distinction is not being made, then this is the same as decried by many about the Affordable Care Act in pooling risk.

It is interesting that there are few complaining about such, given the hue and cry over the health-care pooling.

Will Smith, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 2 edition.

It was with some consternation I read your front-page article on the crisis for insurance companies, resulting in a further burden on policy holders, due to recent Front Range catastrophes. As an avid reader of The Denver Post and The Wall Street Journal, I am confused by a recent WSJ article recommending investing in insurance stocks because “the industry” has a cash surplus problem.

It seems that while we have dutifully paid our premiums and accepted exclusions, rate increases and other such crocodile tears, the insurance industry as a whole increased its gross capital reserves, for the decade 2001-11, from $190 billion to $590 billion.

I can only think of Mark Twain’s quote: “There are lies, damn lies and statistics.” The noble profession of actuaries has been reduced to damn lies.

Damien A. Mulvany, Littleton

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow DPLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.