LETTERS: U.S. needn’t babysit parents, just women
To the editor:
Glenn Cook’s column in the July 6 Review-Journal shows his heart is in the right place (“All your children belong to us”). After all, he was tasked with writing yet another column on behalf of the Review-Journal concerning alleged government overreach.
I’m sure the hard-right readers of Mr. Cook’s column foamed at the mouth while sipping their tea, and when asked by Mr. Cook to send in their thoughts, ran to their computers and fired off their predictions concerning the nanny state. Bad, bad nanny state. We can’t have the government tell us how to raise our children. Parents don’t want to be treated like stinkers. Most parents are hard-working and love their kids, and they do not need re-education or state supervision, as Mr. Cook states. He may very well be right.
But nowhere in his column did I see anything about the nanny state and a woman’s rights to her reproductive system. Apparently, it’s OK with Mr. Cook in that respect. The nanny state and its government intrusion (led by a vast majority of older white males) is necessary because all women must be promiscuous and will have abortion after abortion without the government stepping in and making it harder to educate themselves or receive health care that would be conducive to a healthy reproductive system.
Less nanny state for parents because they have their kids’ interests at heart, but intense government scrutiny for women during child-bearing years because, after all, who knows more about the female reproductive system than old white men.
SCOTT KAGAN
LAS VEGAS
Movie-review rage
To the editor:
I am not familiar with Reuters critic James Rocchi, but I was appalled at the scathing review he gave to Dinesh D’Souza’s newly released movie. (“Sloppily made ‘America’ full of slogans, devoid of real thought,” July 4 Review-Journal). In only the first few sentences of the lengthy review, it was obvious that Mr. D’Souza could not have pleased Mr. Rocchi with anything that he produced. Every criticism known to mankind was thrown at Mr. D’Souza’s work, as Mr. Rocchi gave the movie an “F.”
My husband and I are far from what Mr. Rocchi would consider, in his review, low-information voters. After reading his review, knowing the extreme liberal slant imposed upon it, we went to see the movie. We found it to be extremely informative and enlightening and, I might add, well done.
Mr. D’Souza even addressed, much to our surprise early on in the film, the arguments many on the left have about our country. With extreme objectivity, he tackled each and every one with facts. Yes, Mr. Rocchi, facts. It was very well done.
As Mr. D’Souza laments at times in the film, where would the world be without America? One only has to think of Adolf Hitler — that is enough to know that, without our country, the world would not be any place you would want to live. I urge those out there who want to learn about our history to see this outstanding film and judge for yourselves.
Perhaps Mr. Rocchi has his reasons for not wanting us to see it, don’t you think?
CYNTHIA COLETTI
LAS VEGAS
Summerlin development
To the editor:
Last month’s article on the Howard Hughes Corp.-Discovery Land Co. home development had me laughing and shaking my head (“Big homes on big lots coming to Summerlin,” June 23 Review-Journal). Summerlin: so exclusive!
Fly-fishing? Are they digging a river there, too? Cold drinks waiting for you after returning from vacation? Give me a break. Where do these homeowners work? Or did they get fired with a huge CEO benefit package? I could see having a cold drink waiting for you after a hard day’s work, but after vacation? Is this whole thing grounded in reality or greed?
Wasn’t the Review-Journal embarrassed to put this on the front page? It looks like yet another example of the extremely wealthy. Before these companies build this development, I wish they would look at how the rest of Las Vegas lives, including many people who don’t have a home.
CHERYL MILNE
LAS VEGAS
