Home subscribe manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

Opinion
Aug. 04, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

LETTERS: Can immigration swing the election?

To the editor:

The Review-Journal actually allowed readers a peek in the closet of the U.S. government's successes from limited enforcement of existing immigration law. A clear vision of the emerging exodus of uneducated, but willing for any wage, Hispanic workers was presented in a front-page article on Thursday ("Illegal influx into U.S. falling," Thursday Review-Journal).

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Most Popular Stories
  • LETTERS: Professor needs to get with the program
  • LETTERS: Washington loves rewarding failure
  • FROM OUR READERS: We can't do worse than country's current leadership
  • LETTERS: Trickle-down economics is dead
  • EDITORIAL: Tip jar
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Shall we save the economy ... or the government?
  • LETTERS: Don't expect district to cut waste
  • EDITORIAL: Sending the right message
  • EDITORIAL: A tiny bit of good news?
  • EDITORIAL: 'A cautionary tale'



    • Despite the inclusion of many fanciful caveats, we can see the beginnings of a workable solution to several problems.

    Separately, there is also a clear, emerging picture of voters showing contempt for the lack of full law enforcement by the federal government. With so many local governments trying valiantly to fill the vacuum left from non-enforcement, we see the possibility of a latent political force lying in wait.

    The people of this nation are clearly venting a wish for change in government procedures clear of the constraints of the two powerful political parties. Could the dissident undercurrent of our flagging economy, weakened military position, failing schools and hostility over "push '1' for English" produce a winning independent party based upon the desires of the people?

    Richard E. Law

    LAS VEGAS

    Changing her mind

    To the editor:

    In response to your Thursday editorial, "Titus flip-flop," on Dina Titus' support for offshore oil drilling:

    In the first place, isn't that what it's all about -- enhancing your chances to win? Democratic congressional candidate and state Sen. Dina Titus sees what we all have seen develop over the past year, and that is an oil crisis. Voters want gasoline prices reduced, and any election hopeful who supports doing that is on the right track.

    We can take the chance on an oil spill from an offshore drilling site if it prevents truckers from pulling their rigs to the side of the road and stopping the nation's food supply chain. The terrible thing would be for Sen. Titus not to recognize the dramatic turn in the gas situation since her vote in last year's Legislature against offshore drilling.

    As to whether she will be able to vote on it next year in Congress, the current leadership has no lock on their jobs. It's doubtful either GOP Rep. Jon Porter or Sen. Titus have carried their thinking on oil drilling to the extent for which they are being given credit.

    I live in the 3rd Congressional District and, contrary to your assertion that its voters might have "torn up their programs," I am still following the program.

    SAM BOWLER

    LAS VEGAS

    Knuckle draggers

    To the editor:

    In response to your July 21 editorial, "Earth to Al": I find that it's best to get information on global warming from scientists and Nobel laureates instead of knuckle-dragging, market-obsessed editorial writers in sansabelt slacks.

    ELIZABETH COOK

    LAS VEGAS

    Harry must go

    To the editor:

    I guess you all don't need gasoline or other fuels out there, because your senior senator is doing all he can to make sure there aren't any, at least not at an affordable price.

    Unfortunately, the rest of us in this country do need less-expensive fuel. So how about helping out your fellow Americans and voting Sen. Harry Reid out of office next time he runs? We'd sure appreciate your help. We might even be able to afford to come back to Las Vegas.

    Gerry Santo

    DENVER

    Iraq withdrawal

    To the editor:

    The Bush administration says that troop withdrawals from Iraq depend on conditions on the ground, but I think the opposite may be true. Conditions on the ground will be determined by troop withdrawals. Once American forces start to leave, things will deteriorate.

    Not having to face American fire power, insurgents will be emboldened, the Sunnis may abandon the "Awakening Councils" and Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi army will not fear an Iraqi army without U.S. forces to back it up.

    The loss of billions of dollars every month that America has been pouring into Iraq will mean more hardship and corruption. Once America leaves, Iran will step in.

    We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.

    ANTHONY TIDEI

    LAS VEGAS

    Economic illiterate

    To the editor:

    Regarding your Thursday editorial about Sen. Barack Obama's "socialistic" plans to redistribute this country's wealth:

    You mentioned at the conclusion that "all John McCain needs to do is spell it out. Real loud." (I think you meant "loudly.") Your statement ignores the almost daily, steadily accumulating evidence that, sadly, Sen. McCain is incapable of understanding even basic concepts regarding our economy.

    To expect that he would be competent enough to argue the pros and cons of Sen. Obama's economic agenda, is, sir, an unrealistic expectation.

    Linda P. Cavazos

    HENDERSON

    New energy

    To the editor:

    In response to your Friday front-page report, "Exxon profits break record":

    I have contacted Exxon Mobil to consider investing in solar energy development here in Clark County, where we receive 340 days of sunshine per year. I referred them to our congressional delegation for assistance. I would urge your readers to do the same.

    B.B. Williams

    HENDERSON



    Leave Your Comment 37 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.
    Current Word Count:

    mark wrote on August 05, 2008 07:38 AM: Here's what most bloggers sound like.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WALIARHHLII&NR=1 The average American IQ wouldn't know the truth if they were hit over the head with it!!!


    abc wrote on August 04, 2008 08:34 PM: The premise of "Who Killed the Electric Car" is flawed. It claims General Motor had dishonorable intentions when they ended development on this early vehicle. However, GM is currently spending a lot of money on developing (guess what...) a plug-in, hybrid, ELECTRIC VEHICLE called the "Volt", which will be available in a couple years. This proves that (despite the conspiracy theorists) GM does not have anything against the concept of an electric car.


    Sad Summerlin wrote on August 04, 2008 07:06 PM: I love how everyone cites Who Killed The Electric Car (a documentary) as evidence that the oil companies are blocking change to the energy industry...

    Here's a rebuttal to one of the conclusions in the documentary (from Wikipedia):

    Rumor: There were 5,000 people who wanted an EV1, but GM wouldn't let them buy it.

    Fact: There were 5,000 people who expressed interest in an EV1, but when GM called them back and explained that the car cost $299-plus a month to lease, went between 60 and 80 miles on a full charge, and took between 45 minutes and 15 hours to re-charge, very few would commit to leasing one (not too surprising, is it?). The film likes to quote a figure of 29 miles as the average American's daily driving needs, but that is a national figure and the EV1 was only sold in California and Arizona, primarily in Los Angeles. Anyone wanna guess what the average L.A. resident's daily driving need is? I'm betting it's higher than that national average....

    I bet if the Electric Car came out today, there would be a dramatically different reception rate --- perhaps that's why Toyota is currently developing this type of technology overseas... hmmmm?

    Real example here... I own alternative energy stocks. They have been falling dramatically of late... if this is the technology of the future, why is it that companies that are investing in this technology are not making profits... (oh yeah, and one is a traditional energy supplier too... down 45% since last summer... OUCH).


    dig it up wrote on August 04, 2008 05:36 PM: Helen Weils - once again thanks for the laugh. LOL


    Common Sense wrote on August 04, 2008 04:04 PM: Helen Weils once again proves she is a communist.

    Why don't you just ordain McCain as the saviour of the republican built recession. They caused it, he can fix it.


    Vegas Vic wrote on August 04, 2008 03:57 PM: George
    No one is saying the holy trinity won't work. What's being said is that the green weenies block the construction of the transmission lines to bring that "green power" to the people. If you can't connect to the power grid, NONE of that technology is going to do squat to help our power needs. Get those bozos off their high horses and you'll see the technology put to good use. Otherwise, it's worth less than a fart in a hurricane.


    Linda wrote on August 04, 2008 12:25 PM: Helen:
    You do have SOME of your facts straight in your grocery list of complaints about Sen. Obama, but some of the others border on personal sounding "rants" which unfortunately then have the effect of negating your partially logical statements. Your comment regarding Obama being a "brotha" and that he "WILL" pander to the ". . .96% of the blacks that will vote for him. . ." is just this side of offensive. Also, are you not telling us about your degree in psychiatry and/or mind-reading which qualifies you to determine the motives of Sen. Obama's grandmother, father,and step-father? Since you truly do sound like an involved citizen, please take some time to educate yourself; it may prevent further bitterness.

    p.s. If McCain is not your first choice, who is? An explanation of how McCain was "spot on in the Iraq situation" would be much appreciated. I had been under the impression that there is a war in Iraq, with more than 4,000 lives lost, not a "situation."


    Only in Vegas wrote on August 04, 2008 11:33 AM: Formula one racing is going green and whatever they develop normally finds its way to the modern motorcar.

    http://www.motorauthority.com/news/motorsport/brake-energy-regeneration-in-f1-by-2009/


    bk wrote on August 04, 2008 11:25 AM: The reason we went to Iraq was because of Oil(Lots of money for Nothing). If Saddam Hussein had been spending his Oil money on schools, hospitals and infrastructure instead of shopping the world for weapons we would not be there, (yet). Iran is tap dancing on a land mine.
    Travis, If the USA fails it will be from within. (IMO)


    Travis wrote on August 04, 2008 11:00 AM: Perspective can be a very valuable thing.

    How many insurgents were in Iraq before we invaded? Did Al Quaeda exist in Iraq before we invaded? Were there frequent terrorist attacks in Iraq before we invaded?

    If another country invaded us and overthrew our government, how would you react? Would you become one of those insurgents fighting the occupiers?


    Read All Comments