Immigration column short on the facts

To the editor:

It’s disappointing, but not surprising, to see another rant by Vin Suprynowicz against undocumented immigrants or illegal immigrants (Sunday column, “Speaking in code to disguise what they mean”).

Once again, inaccuracies and stereotypes get in the way of facts.

For example, Mr. Suprynowicz writes that people who speak Spanish in his local post office are illegal immigrants, whereas legal immigrants speak English. This is wrong on both ends. Many illegal immigrants speak English. Many legal immigrants don’t speak English. The reality is more complicated than a simple stereotype.

Also, Mr. Suprynowicz writes that illegal immigrants are “functionally illiterate and have no notable skills.” Again, the reality is more complicated than a broad generalization. For example, many illegal immigrants originally come to the United States legally with a tourist visa but then overstay their permission and remain without permission– it’s virtually impossible to get a tourist visa if you are “functionally illiterate and have no notable skills.”

Fortunately, the majority of Americans realize the complexity of immigration and support immigration reform that ensures security while allowing for families to remain intact and for deserving immigrants to have an opportunity to legalize their status.

Adam Chester

LAS VEGAS

THE WRITER IS A LOCAL IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY.

Power grab

To the editor:

President Obama has supplemented the usual White House organizational structure and appointed numerous “czars,” each with a specific responsibility for a segment of the national economy. These appointed “czars” do not require the advice and consent of the Senate before completing their responsibilities, which are assigned solely by the president. These assigned responsibilities involve the executive branch in areas excluded by Article 2 and the 10th Amendment.

The new White House “pay” czar was given the authority to oversee compensation for top executives in those companies receiving federal assistance, confirming that the federal government now runs private companies! I know that the founding documents of our nation are not taught in our failing schools anymore, but shouldn’t there be just a general sense that this arrogated injection of federal government control is wrong?

Article 2 clearly defines the specific responsibilities assigned to the president and executive branch; the 10th Amendment states all other powers not designated by the Constitution are “reserved” to the states or the people.

The president is usurping powers not granted constitutionally. Whether this is a good thing or not is immaterial. The president has seized powers that are not his to have.

That level of government that governs best is the level closest and most responsive to the people. Yet the state wimps, the governors and legislators, have wilted and stepped aside as the feds expanded.

There is no question that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority. Where is the outrage? Where is the reaction? Where are the media? Or are we so beyond Tom Brokaw’s “Greatest Generation” that we just don’t care? Pathetic.

William F. Brennan

LAS VEGAS

Embarrassed white guy

To the editor:

Frightened white men are scurrying like rabbits at the prospect of an Hispanic woman sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court. Patrick Buchanan’s June 13 commentary says it all.

Based on the fact that Judge Sonia Sotomayor may have gained entrance to Princeton University and Yale Law School under affirmative action policies, Mr. Buchanan postulates that Judge Sotomayor lacks “the intellectual candlepower to sit on the Roberts court” and that all of her accomplishments are “because she was an Hispanic woman.”

Excuse me? Judge Sotomayor was No. 1 in her class at Princeton. She was editor of the Yale Law Review. These are monumental accomplishments, and no one gave them to her. She earned them — and beat out white men in the process.

Mr. Buchanan says he prefers “the old bigotry. At least it was honest.” But what, one might ask, is honest about bigotry? In truth, he only liked the old bigotry because it favored white males. Now, facing the prospect of a Latina on the Supreme Court, one vote out of nine, Mr. Buchanan and other conservative white men act as if the world is coming to an end. How pathetic.

It’s embarrassing to be white and male at times like this.

Albert G. Marquis

LAS VEGAS

No rights

To the editor:

First Amendment rights for the tobacco companies (Monday Review-Journal editorial)? I would bet most people don’t even know that corporations are considered persons under the law. Another item for the Obama agenda to fix.

Anyway, if the tobacco companies are persons and have free speech rights, shouldn’t they be prosecuted for manslaughter for the 400,000 deaths they cause from use of their products?

Dale Quale

LAS VEGAS

TOP NEWS
News Headlines
ad-infeed_1
ads_infeed_2
Local Spotlight
Add Event
Home Front Page Footer Listing
Circular
You May Like

You May Like