To the editor:
Since Nevada’s new law banning hand-held cellphone usage while driving went into effect, I have noticed what I thought was a lot of drivers praying. I thought, “Wow, Las Vegas drivers have found religion.” No, I was wrong.
Texting and phone-calling in the car have just dipped to a new level. Instead of drivers holding their phones at the same level as the windshield to make a call or text a message, they now place their phones on their laps or on the seat next to them to do their business. This causes them to drive at half the speed limit and not even look where they are going. This is even more insane than the old way.
I have also come to realize that some of the drivers have phony Bluetooth devices in their ears, texting and trying to fool the cops.
I truly believe that if we could ticket these people, the state would not have any money worries.
Ron Paul fan
To the editor:
Columnist Charles Krauthammer (Jan. 15 Review-Journal) joins the effort by many in the “dead-tree media” to discount Rep. Ron Paul’s viability as a presidential contender. Even after Rep. Paul’s strong finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire, Mr. Krauthammer and other self-anointed political experts continue to ignore the public’s growing support of Rep. Paul, as though it were a fluke.
If the election were held today, Rep. Paul would defeat President Obama. He would win simply by showing our American citizens that we need to rein in our government and that with more freedom, we shall enjoy strong economic growth.
Rep. Paul would win by demonstrating to the American people how President Obama has merely continued the Bush regime’s foreign policy:a wasteful program that puts our nation at greater risk while propagating an endless parade of wars initiated by presidential fiat, but not declared by Congress.
Rep. Paul can win by showing how our military really is not out of Iraq, that Mr. Obama just moved many units next door to Kuwait. He sends them to temporary assignments in Iraq, but technically bases them in Kuwait.
Rep. Paul can win by showing that Mr. Obama has increased our troops in Afghanistan, further reduced our freedoms by expanding federal agency powers over us, continues to operate the illegal prison at Guantanamo Bay and has continued the practice of rendering suspects to other countries, where some are tortured to death.
Rep. Paul can be elected as our next president, and we sorely need a man of his caliber who will restore our liberty while keeping a steady hand on the federal till.
J. Tyler Ballance
To the editor:
These are U.S. Marines. You’ve seen the commercials. Duty, honor, courage? Now it’s just guys urinating on dead bodies.
These Marines tarnished their history. From Tripoli to Bull Run to Belleau Wood to Tarawa and Iwo Jima, and Okinawa, to the frozen battlefields of Korea and Vietnam’s Tet. As a military organization, the Marines stand for the best of America. Service, dedication and unflinching bravery. They are warriors, and true warriors throughout history have shown respect for their battlefield foes — especially their fallen enemies. The dead insurgents in this photo are warriors, too. Maybe not as trained or well-equipped as the Marines, but they are worthy opponents, as borne out by their defeat of the British, the Soviets, and most recently over 10 years of continuous defiance of the most powerful military on earth. When you disrespect your enemy in this way, you also ridicule your own mission, because if your opponents are so worthless, then why are they worth fighting?
When you find your enemy dead on the field of battle, you have won. You have taken everything away from him — everything he is and everything he will ever be. That is victory and humiliation enough. To then defile the dead bodies does not, and cannot, humiliate your enemy any further. It only humiliates us and the principles we are there to uphold.
Who’s the boss?
To the editor:
I was flabbergasted by the Tuesday letter by Roy Scott. How far out of touch with the real world could he possibly be?
Referring to retired public employees and their pension benefits, he states in response to columnist Glenn Cook, “You don’t pay anyone anything. The Public Employees’ Retirement System is a fund paid into by the employee and employer. … Benefits paid out of PERS are paid by the fund, not by the taxpayer.”
Mr. Scott seems to be convinced that the “employer” of all state and local government workers covered by PERS is the “government” and not the people of Nevada. I am a retired federal employee and there is no doubt in my mind that my employers were the people of the United States — not the federal government or the agency for which I worked.
John M. McGrail