This election too important to waste your vote
To the editor:
It is apparent the voters of Nevada would have preferred two other candidates for U.S. Senate than Sharron Angle or Harry Reid. Unfortunately, these are the candidates.
According to most polls, they are in a statistical dead heat. The undecided voters will determine the election.
The question: How does the undecided voter decide for whom to vote?
This election is turning into a popularity contest, with voters voting for the candidate they dislike the least. There is one individual, however, who can honestly tell you who is the right candidate. That individual is the face in the mirror. You.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: Am I voting for the best candidate or against a candidate I dislike?
This election is too important to waste your vote. It is a decision that will impact the country, Nevada and you.
H. BLOOM
HENDERSON
Desperate Harry
To the editor:
I got a flier today from Harry Reid’s campaign. It says if I think things are bad now, they’ll just get worse if I vote for his opponent.
So the Democrats have finally figured out that there is nothing positive to advertise about Sen. Reid. “Hey! We know our guy’s a useless waste of space, but the other person ‘might’ be worse.”
Political desperation is always fun to watch.
Harry Kirchoff
Henderson
Bet on Dems
To the editor:
Thumbs up to John Mayes’ Wednesday letter to the editor suggesting we vote for candidates who hold constitutional limits sacred.
In that regard, I would bet $100 that a historical study of state and federal legislation passed by a majority Republican vote has been held to violate the U.S. Constitution more often — perhaps way more often — than state and federal legislation passed by a majority Democratic vote (particularly in court decisions in the modern era, say, since World War II).
I would also be interested in a study of how often a Republican Justice Department has supported a law found unconstitutional, and conversely challenged a law as unconstitutional which was found constitutional, vis-a-vis a Democratic Justice Department.
Again, I’d put my money on the Democrats.
Dan Wulz
Henderson
Free speech
To the editor:
The First Amendment is hailed as one of the treasured protections that makes America great. Freedom of speech.
But it doesn’t mean much when it is not really applied all the time. Perhaps we should take another look.
Did our forefathers really mean to include the uttering of heinous and disgusting, unjustifiable speech? I hope not and I do not think so.
The members of the Westboro Baptist Church not only expressed their free speech, but went out of their way to do it at a solemn event (Review-Journal editorial, Wednesday). Those nut jobs are extremists and should be vilified universally. To think our Supreme Court is going to allot precious time to this issue reflects how far off the course we have come.
I guess the real issue — and the very reason why Americans are so frustrated — is in practice free speech has become selective. If it doesn’t fit the politically correct or is not embraced by a vocal minority, it doesn’t apply. If a group of white extremists attended a black funeral and started shouting truly hurtful and obnoxious things using the “N” word, all hell would break loose. If the offended mourners beat the crap out of the idiots, it would be OK because some things are understandably provocative.
But I guarantee the great government of the United States would jump in and indict the evil doers for violating the civil rights of the “victims.”
I hope the court recognizes this issue for what it is and rejects any argument on behalf of the bogus church. Enough is enough. At some point, what is right should be done.
Never mind the “holding the nose” stuff. Westboro should get what is deserved. Pay up.
William C. Dwyer
Las Vegas
Lesser program
To the editor:
I am so tired of politicians taking something that works just fine and screwing it up to benefit themselves and the special interests who make campaign contributions to the detriment of the taxpayer.
County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani, who is a big buddy of the firefighter unions — again to the taxpayers’ detriment — now wants to disrupt the trash collecting and recycling program for which we have a very long-term contract. I do not see the aroused citizenry banging on the doors of the commission chambers demanding that we be allowed to pay more for a lesser program.
Give it up, Ms. Giunchigliani, and try to confine your efforts to doing something for the taxpayers and not to them.
Jerry Ernst
Las Vegas
