FROM OUR READERS: Quit complaining about caucus -- get involved - Opinion

SAVE THIS

EMAIL THIS Print

PRINT THIS Popular

POST A COMMENT

Jan. 26, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

FROM OUR READERS: Quit complaining about caucus -- get involved

To the editor:

There seem to be a lot of voters upset with the recent Nevada caucuses. They are complaining about inadequate planning, confusion, not enough ballots, etc. Some are even upset they had to park at the far side of the school parking lot.

Most Popular Stories

EDITORIAL: If only we could tax more

LETTERS: With economists like these, who needs enemies?

LETTERS: Brace yourself for coming tax hikes

LETTERS: Nuclear power could be the answer for Nevada

J.C. WATTS: Sonia Sotomayor and bootstraps

EDITORIAL: Firemen's pensions past due for reform

EDITORIAL: Education 'consultants'

EDITORIAL: Internet sales taxes

EDITORIAL: Hoe, hoe, hoe

LETTERS: So now you're in favor of regulation, eh?

They blame the caucus organizers for not telling them they would need to know their precinct number or have proper identification with them. Some complained the candidate they wanted to support didn't have a chance at the caucus because the other candidates' supporters dominated the event. It is, after all, politics, and the one with the most support usually wins.

Once again, no one seems to want to accept personal responsibility.

For weeks in advance, the two parties had been getting the word out through the media about the caucus process. There were numerous articles in the newspapers, news stories on television, Web sites with information that all detailed who, what, when, where and why. Both parties had caucus training sessions all over the valley.

Maybe voters should realize the political process takes more than just showing up to vote. Both parties are in operation 365 days a year, not just on Election Day. And most of it is accomplished by hardworking, dedicated volunteers. If you're upset with the outcome, quit whining. Become part of the solution and volunteer to make it work better next time.

And to all of you upset about the caucus, please recall the news stories of the elections in Iraq that showed voters so happy for the privilege of voting they walked for miles through a combat zone just so they could proudly display a finger dipped in purple ink.

Richard Deeds

LAS VEGAS

Left out

To the editor:

The hollow men and women who would be president have come and gone. While'st here, they begged and pleaded for the Hispanic vote, the black vote, the Asian vote, the women's vote, and the younger vote. But not, it seems, for my vote. White male.

JAMES HARRIS

HENDERSON

Shut out

To the editor:

About the recent caucus: Can any Nevada politician please explain to me why they intentionally left out all of the military personnel who are stationed outside the state of Nevada?

Any members of the military who are currently serving on active duty, whether it be in a war zone, other foreign countries or any state other than Nevada who are legal residents of the state of Nevada, were excluded from voting on who they would like to be their party's next presidential candidate.

How can this state overlook the military, who are sacrificing so much for the United States?

I was very disappointed that none of the many fine military organizations that do so much to promote and take care of the military rights -- such as, but not limited to, the America Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars -- did not question why the military were denied the right to vote in Nevada.

KYLE DAVIS

LAS VEGAS

Powerful gamers

To the editor:

In regard to the ruling on the teachers union initiative petition to raise the gaming tax:

The judicial system once again gave the casino industry a pass. The judge's reasoning was that the petition related to more than one issue, so she threw out the petition.

But why didn't the judges do the same with the smoking ban?

The Nevada smoking ban petition also encompassed more than one issue. It included issues relating to the casinos, giving them preferential treatment over and above other business establishments in the state. The vague, hurried and poorly written Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act was so ill-conceived that it had numerous issues covering such areas as schools, markets, convenience stores, bars and grills, just to mention a few.

Both the smoking ban petition and the gaming tax petition highlight how much of a stranglehold the gaming industry has on the politicians and the entire judicial system here in this state.

Why doesn't one judge stand up to the gaming industry? Serve all the people and not just one industry.

I submit that if the casino industry had backed up all the convenience stores, bars and taverns on the smoking issue, they wouldn't be fighting off this gaming tax petition.

What goes around comes around, casino moguls.

BRADLEY KUHNS

LAS VEGAS

Blame Harry

To the editor:

In response to your Thursday article about Sen. Harry Reid finding jobs for the employees laid off on the Yucca Mountain Project: For the record, the Department of Energy and Bechtel SAIC -- not Sen. Reid -- are doing what they can to find jobs for the 500-plus people Harry has displaced.

I am a victim of his $100 million budget cut, but I am not a disgruntled employee. I just speak from experience and the truth. I am too young to draw full Social Security benefits and too old to find another position. My only recourse is to sell my house in the depths of a housing depression and move to a more affordable state in the Midwest.

Sen. Reid has taken my job, my house and most of my retirement. He is personally responsible for the hundreds of well-educated, skilled workers that will no longer be contributing to Nevada's economy.

Sen. Reid, likewise, has not told you how much the government's liability is every day for the lawsuits from the utility companies because their waste has not been removed as required by law. The money for the project, contributed by ratepayers (not taxpayers), is sitting in a nuclear waste fund that Sen. Reid has the power to make available for this pressing national need.

I will not argue here about whether you are for or against the project -- the science speaks for itself. I am just concerned and sorry that the voting public does not know about the havoc Sen. Reid has caused in hundreds of lives and to the economy -- and instead, probably believe what is printed.

Bonnie S. Ballard

LAS VEGAS

Good man?

To the editor:

I read in the Wednesday Review-Journal that Rep. Shelley Berkley has written a letter asking for leniency for Don Davidson, who was convicted of wire fraud.

She states that, "I believe Mr. Davidson to be a good man who behaved badly and I am certain he is extremely remorseful for his activities. His actions were wrong, but he is not a bad person."

I am sure there are numerous people in our prisons who are not bad, but behaved badly, and are also remorseful. That does not justify the crime.

What I would like to know is how much money, if any, Don Davidson or his family has contributed to Rep. Berkley's re-election committee in the past.

If this fact were known it may help to understand her position.

BRYCE A. LEE

LAS VEGAS

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	21 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. P@YM wrote on January 28, 2008 10:35 AM: It still amazes me the ignorance of some people in this state! Rather than spend a little time (and brain power) investigating for themselves the storage of waste at Yucca Mountain, they'll believe every word in news print or that flows from the mouths of political hacks (the NV delegation, Loux, Goodman, et al) -- and not one of them a scientist! Nor for that matter have those opposed to Yucca produced any reputable long-term scientific study to the contrary of the science developed over the last 30 years by some of the BEST scientific minds (where are your reports from the national laboratory community Harry??). Why can't people see that the opposition to Yucca isn't based on the science, safety, or quality, but on politics and the ability to get their names in the paper. If it wasn't for the topic of Yucca, politically, Nevada wouldn't be a dot on the map - just a place for quick marriages/divorces, gambling, booze, and "adult play". So spend a little time in the library or even on the internet people! If you're going to be opposed to the storage of nuclear waste in NV, at least be so because YOU did the research and made YOUR OWN decision! Remember - the last thing politicians want is a well informed public (they tend to ask pertinent questions and demand answered that aren't just rhetoric). yucca_insider wrote on January 28, 2008 08:43 AM: Five things that are far, far more likely to happen than "radiation seeping into Las Vegas:" 5. Las Vegas runs out of water (getting there...) 4. A runaway chlorine tanker rolls through town. (check) 3. A major strip casino catches fire (yup) 2. Your home goes into foreclosure (odds are about 1 in 150 these days) 1. A person dies from inhaling emissions from a coal-fired power plant. (happens 28,000 times a year in the U.S.) Irwin, I think your priorities need adjusting... Herb wrote on January 26, 2008 01:15 PM: James Harris, join the Republicans, they are not as hostile towards white males as the Democrats are. -D wrote on January 26, 2008 12:27 PM: In response to what Irwin wrote:"we don't want radiation seeping into Las Vegas. We're only 100 miles away, right?" Irwin you need to get your facts straight. I don't think you know anything at all about Yucca Mountain or what is going on there or what will be going on there. There has been way too much panic sensationism touted as truth just to keep people stirred up against it. Find out the facts then open your mouth until then, SHUT UP! oldlawdawg wrote on January 26, 2008 11:35 AM: Mr. Kuhns: Your appeal for judges to "stand up to the gaming industry" is misguided and dangerous. Judges are not advocates. They are there to be neutral and objective, not to "stand up" to anyuone or anything. You may well be correct that the smoking ban and gaming tax petitions were equally offensive as muti-issue petitions. You may be correct in decrying judges who ignore their duties out of political fear. And to the extent our highest state and feneral appellate courts serve an anti-majoritaion check on tyranny of majorities, they may appear to be "standing up for the little man." But it is just an appearance. It is dangerous to empower the judiciary to take sides and stand up to one party to an action against another. In the courts, the fact that today's winner could be tommorow's loser is merely a function of objectivity. Yes, our courts are corrupt and political to the core. But aking that they stand up to or against those you disagree with is an ivitation for them to stand up to you, as well, and do so based upon who you are or your status rather than the merit of your claims. I appreciate your frustration regardless of whether I agree with your views. The remedy you suggest, however, is a dangerous one indeed. oldlawdawg wrote on January 26, 2008 11:20 AM: Mr. Deeds, you are clearly out to lunch. The vote in Iraq provides no analogy to partizan caucuses -- absolutely none. For them it was freedom itself at stake,not partisan delegates to a partisan convention. Primary voting is and should be a simple matter of voting and vote counting. The caucus system was forced upon us, and one should not have to get involved with the partisan political process in order to have his/her choice of candicate be respected. The causes are not even about a "vote" at all, but rather some extremely complicated system of selection designed to avoid a staight up or down vote where the one with the most votes wins. Caucuses are beauty pagents,at best,and voters have a right to feel manipulated when the ability to propel your candidate to the general election is thwarted by a system designed to prevent one vote cast from equalling one vote counted. The day my vote does not count as one vote equall to all others is the day I have been disenfranchised. The day the polling system is manipulated to assure it is easier for some to vote and harder for others is the day I am disenfranchised. The day I cannot vote by way of a truly secret ballot which frees me from criticism of my selection is the day I am disenfranchised. The day I must belong to a political party in order to propel my candicate to th egeneral election is the day I am disenfranchised. The primary system is a partisan one, to be sure. But to require voters to "get involved" with party politics in order to be heard is unacceptable. Yopu are wrong,Mr. Deeds. Voting is just as imple as showing up and casting your ballot. Everything else is partisan manipulation. John F wrote on January 26, 2008 09:50 AM: Dennis #1, If you read what Geezelouise said, I think you'll agree that perhaps (s)he does understand the constitution. You'll note that (s)he specified that people want "health care, social security AND the freedoms they were promised in the Constitution." The use of the word "and" is an explicit recognition that the constitution does not guarantee these things. KD, The constitution allows for Congress to levy taxes to "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States..." This is an implicit recognition of the fact that the government has not only a right but a duty to take action for the benefit of all. The constitution would not confer that power upon Congress if the founders wanted us all to take care of ourselves without any hope of assistance. Where I think we get lost these days is in our definition of the general welfare. Too many people seem to believe that what's good for them or their particular interest group constitutes being good for the general population. I disagree. To be in furtherance of the general welfare, a program needs to benefit rich and poor alike, as well as people of all races and creeds. When Congress, therefore, levies taxes for medicare, national defense, or social security they are acting within their authority. Irwin C. wrote on January 26, 2008 09:32 AM: Sorry Bonnie, we just couldn't take the chance. Politically well-connected Bechtel built the Big Dig tunnel in Boston, and it is riddled with leaks. They just paid off the city to the tune of more than $400 Million to keep from being hauled into court. Speaking of millions, millions of gallons of water are still seeping onto the roadway monthly.... You see, Bonnie, we don't want radiation seeping into Las Vegas. We're only 100 miles away, right? You made a choice-you're going to move. I don't have that choice. Thanks, Harry. Bye, Bye, Bonnie. Joe C wrote on January 26, 2008 09:25 AM: To bida, It always entertains me how some supposedly educated take a too bad, tough luck, you should of received a education attitude; toward those less educated who make a decent living doing the work the educated wouldn’t dream of. Some of it back breaking, smoke filled hard work. Most of these hypocrites claim to be so tolerant to other cultures, illegal immigration, and all kinds of social issues, but when it comes to someone less educated making the same or more money the claws come out. Having worked in gaming and other industries, the idea anyone can work in gaming or do the backbreaking work some housekeepers do is nonsense. The insult some spout freely about hard working honest people proves that education does not always mean tolerance or intelligence. KD wrote on January 26, 2008 09:21 AM: "constituants (sic), who want health care, social security" What, voting for bread and circuses again? What about the constituents who don't want socialized medicine (from the folks who brought you FEMA and the USPS)? What is right for this country is still a matter of debate, but you will find no support for your ideas in the Constitution. The Constitution will say, "take care of yourself". Read All Comments