Heller brave enough to speak the truth

To the editor:

U.S. Sen. Dean Heller recently told a Hispanic audience that he doesn't support the DREAM Act, which, among other things, gives taxpayer subsidies to college students who snuck into this country illegally (Saturday Review-Journal).

It's also been hinted that Sen. Heller is racist for not wishing to treat people differently because of the color of their skin. This turns the definition of racism on its head.

The liberals tell us Hispanic-heritage U.S. citizens will not vote for a politician who declares that our country's laws shouldn't be enforced differently because of someone's race. I doubt that is true of most, but those who do feel that way should look in the mirror and ask what's more important: their United States citizenship or their racial identity?

Sen. Heller is also being called inhumane for his willingness to vote to end automatic citizenship for U.S.-born babies of illegal aliens. But there's nothing inhumane in eliminating an incentive to break the law.

How odd that for the rather unremarkable act of telling the simple truth about immigration issues, Sen. Heller is being hectored by the left as a heartless monster, while being congratulated by normal Americans for his bravery.




To the editor:

Your Sunday article about the use of pets by panhandlers ("Effort to ban animals on Strip faces hurdles") raises an important issue that is of concern to many of us who care about animals.

County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani's proposed ordinance is aimed not at discriminating against the rights of the homeless to have pets. Rather, it addresses a specific problem, contrary to what ACLU attorney Allen Lichtenstein claims. The problem is animal exploitation, neglect and cruelty.

I fail to see how this ordinance targets homeless people, some of whom were quoted admitting that they chose their living situation. Animals don't get to choose their living situation, and I very much doubt that any of them would choose to sit directly under a hot Nevada sun in the middle of summer while their owner panhandles, whether or not those animals are wearing Foster Grants or whatever their keeper places on them.

I question how adequately a homeless person is able to care for his pet. If they fall under dire circumstances, instinct will govern them to care for themselves first and their animals last. Companion animals need stable homes where their welfare is secure and their future isn't quite so unpredictable. How would a homeless person, who can barely take care of his own needs, respond if his animal required medical attention? I'd hate to think that they'd neglect caring for it in a proper manner.

Through my volunteer work at the local shelter, I see thousands of animals that are routinely abandoned by foreclosed-upon families who once had stable lives. If the hard-hit middle-income sector can't hang onto their pets, how is it that the homeless can provide regular food, grooming, dental care and health care for their animals?

This issue of acquiring animals for the purpose of panhandling has many of us concerned, as it might set a precedent for more homeless persons to follow suit. While no one should be discriminated against with regard to having a pet, I think we need to think about what is best for the being who is affected the most -- the animal that depends upon humans for his care and welfare.



Wants to help

To the editor:

Bill Edwards' Monday letter to the editor, critical of County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani's proposed ordinances against feeding pigeons and having dogs on the Strip, is unfounded. Ms. Giunchigliani is merely trying to "help" our fair citizens.

In the Legislature, she gave us a green buildings tax credit that primarily benefited casinos. Her intentions were good, and she was merely trying to help our fair citizens.

When she created a disruption in the UMC Emergency Department and then dissed Dr. Dale Carrison, head of that department, during a meeting, she was merely trying to help our fair citizens.

When she ran unsuccessfully for mayor of Las Vegas, she was merely trying to help our fair citizens. Just think of all she could do if we had home rule, and she could create and raise local taxes and provide even more help for our fair citizens. All those years in the classroom as the head of the teachers union, as a state legislator and as a commissioner have all prepared her to help our fair citizens.

She merely wants to be your government "nanny." So give her a break.

Richard Laird

Las Vegas

Floyd Mayweather

To the editor:

So Las Vegas Justice of the Peace Melissa Saragosa has been exposed as being ethically challenged in her handling of the Floyd Mayweather case (Saturday Review-Journal). The bigger question concerns the Nevada State Athletic Commission. Why hasn't the commission revoked his boxing license, based on his convictions, for the entire term of his probation? A license is a privilege, not a right.

Both Judge Saragosa and the commission just further illustrate that money and the big hotels are what count in this state. Mayweather is a rich, punk athlete and we continue to further enable him and his celebrity status.