Henderson chief should apologize to public
To the editor:
"We didn’t know he was a diabetic. We just thought he was drunk." Am I the only reader who finds this Henderson police excuse for beating a helpless, handcuffed driver to be a self-incriminating attempt to defend their actions ("Video shows man beaten by officers," Wednesday Review-Journal)?
This leads us to believe that a beating is standard Henderson police procedure and business as usual when stopping a drunken driver, but off-limits for diabetics. Wow. The Henderson police chief, Jutta Chambers, owes the public an apology, and the officers involved deserve discipline more than the usual police union-approved slap on the wrist. "No comment" doesn’t absolve her of her duties as police chief. A lengthy internal investigation would be a joke.
Tom Lane
Las Vegas
Cost analysis
To the editor:
Most of us like green energy. The idea of getting free energy from the wind and sun has tremendous attraction.
But in our free-market economy, any innovative industries, started by entrepreneurs, must be useful and efficient so they make a profit standing on their own without financial aid from government.
Currently, wind power costs a little less than twice what it costs to build and operate a natural gas-fired plant of equal wattage. But in Nevada, solar power is being emphasized, and those operations cost about five times more than gas plants. Solar power is getting government subsidies to mitigate some cost. But NV Energy still must raise power prices to consumers to carry the solar and wind power. So the consumer gets to pay twice for green power: first in government taxes (or debt) and then in the electricity bill.
What is not talked about much is that sometimes we have no wind, or the sun does not shine. When that happens, NV Energy must have backup energy sources for green power, which is another cost increase for the consumer.
Recent newspaper ads and TV spots, paid by the American Wind Energy Association, have been urging us to contact our congressional representatives to ask for an extension of the "Production Tax Credit" in the name of protecting U.S. manufacturing and construction jobs. That is a distorted message which asks taxpayers and ratepayers to financially support the wind industry. That is not how a free market works.
The wind association advertisement asked me to call Rep. Joe Heck to ask him to support their tax break. So I called the congressman’s office and said we should kill all the tax breaks and subsidies for wind, solar, and ethanol energy. If they cannot stand alone without government help, they will have to reinvent their technology or go out of business.
The cost economics of the competing energy systems clearly say we should emphasize the use of more natural gas plants because we have gas in great abundance.
Richard N. Fulton
Henderson
Trickle up
To the editor:
This November, you will be voting on trickle-down, the snarky liberal term for free market capitalism, versus trickle-up, the welfare state of government dependency.
Examples of Democrat trickle-up are the FICA payroll tax holiday, an additional 14 million new food stamp recipients and green subsidies — crony capitalism tax money handouts to campaign contributor CEOs, the Democrat 1 percent. Barack Obama hearts wind farms and solar energy, but his war on big oil is killing real jobs and has doubled gas prices.
The Democrats have succeeded in holding interest rates at near zero, good for government borrowing but not for the housing market. Savings accounts that earn zero lose value in the face of inflating consumer prices.
Trickle-up glorifies poverty while demonizing prosperity and the dignity of work. Obsessing over "income disparity" breeds covetousness and resentment of success instead of inspiring people to succeed. Mr. Obama demands that the rich pay their fair share of taxes, but the biggest concentration of tax cheats works in the federal government.
For more than 240 years, free enterprise made America the dominant world economy. JFK, who instituted an across-the-board tax cut, said that a rising [economic] tide lifts all boats.
Lynn Muzzy
Minden
No butts
To the editor:
I was amused by Sunday’s article about "big butt" surgery ("Behinds: Ahead of the curve"). In the ’40s and ’50s, Frederick’s of Hollywood advertised women’s panties with enhancing pads sewn into them. They had at least two advantages over the current fad: They were much cheaper than surgery, and when you wanted to return to your original "profile," all you had to do was change your underwear.
Charles E. McManis
Las Vegas
Birth control
To the editor:
Before you get worked up listening to Republicans criticizing the Obama administration for forcing the Catholic Church to provide birth control coverage for their employees in their hospitals and schools, there’s a few things you should know.
First, 28 states, including Massachusetts, already have that requirement on their books. And apparently the clergy in those states have learned to live with it.
Second, surveys show that 98 percent of Catholic couples practice birth control. So Catholic bishops are way out in front of the faithful on this issue.
What is interesting about Massachusetts having this requirement is that then-Gov. Mitt Romney, besides supporting abortion rights, also endorsed this requirement that Catholic institutions had to provide birth control coverage. But to hold to these beliefs today would mean he wouldn’t get the Republican nomination. So another flip-flop by him was necessary. Rather hypocritical, isn’t he?
Richard J. Mundy
Las Vegas
