LETTERS: Overreaction to Wheeler's hyperbole

To the editor:

Can someone please explain to me what the difference is between Assemblyman Jim Wheeler using hyperbole to illustrate that his job is to represent the people who elected him (“Nevada assemblyman apologizes for slavery remarks,” Wednesday Review-Journal) and Sheldon Adelson using hyperbole to illustrate his belief that actions speak louder than words (“Adelson talks tough on Iran,” Oct. 24 Review-Journal)? Granted, Mr. Wheeler used a poor example (of voting for slavery if that was what his constituents wanted) to make his point, just as Mr. Adelson used a poor example (of bombing Iran) to make his point.

But how can anyone really believe that Mr. Wheeler was serious, while at the same time believe that Mr. Adelson was kidding? Why are some people calling for Mr. Wheeler to resign, but not even condemning Mr. Adelson’s comments?

I don’t belong to any political party, but I personally find it refreshing that a politician, any politician, actually believes that his job is to represent the people who elected him, rather than to represent the people who gave him the most money. Most politicians only give lip service to representing the people, but Mr. Wheeler actually practices it.

We should be holding up Mr. Wheeler as an example of what all politicians should be like. He might have put his foot in his mouth, but his heart is in the right place. To believe anything else is to completely miss the point.



Festival not all beautiful

To the editor:

Although the local media will probably state what a success the Life is Beautiful festival was for public relations purposes, this was not the case. Once again, local political representatives and social organizers showed no respect or consideration for those who live and work in the downtown area.

First, there was no reason for fencing off and patrolling the entire 10-block festival area as early as Wednesday night. When I came home Monday morning, there were still many areas that were blocked off and being patrolled. This was supposed to be a two-day inconvenience/festival. There was no communication with locals on how they could find their way through the maze of fencing to get in and out of the location.

Second, there was no excuse for officials to not give some kind of security clearance for those residents who live and work inside of the patrolled zone. Every time someone tried to get in and out of the festival zone, that person was questioned, and a supervisor was needed for clearance. The CSC security officers were all programmed to say, “No wristband, no entry, no exceptions.”

I had to have my bag checked, empty my pockets, and was patted down during this process.

If local elected officials don’t want to represent the interests and concerns of their constituents, we should not take them into consideration when they contact us during come re-election time.



Shutdown furloughs

To the editor:

Larry Cole’s letter stating that President Barack Obama should have kept all federal employees working during the shutdown shows he wasn’t thinking at all about the employees (“Lack of leadership,” Wednesday Review-Journal).

Would Mr. Cole have worked for no pay?

Many people, even government employees, can’t afford to pay for gas or babysitters if they aren’t getting a paycheck. Day-care centers won’t take care of the children without getting paid, any more than a gas station would allow you to fill up your car and pay at a later date.

Keeping employees on the job without pay would have been a real hardship for many families. Not everyone has a large savings account to fall back on. Keeping the employees at home was in their best interest.