LETTERS: Obama’s inexperience a heavy burden

To the editor:

The United States was supposed to be experiencing better relationships on the diplomatic front after the 2008 elections. What we have instead are stratums of disappointment in the Middle East, as well as with our allies. Our State Department lacks resolve and credibility. We appear sorely inept. After being told for the eight years President George W. Bush was in office that he was incompetent, one has to conclude that President Barack Obama is no more qualified. Despite all the blame and finger-pointing between the parties, foreign policy decisions are mostly the prerogative of the executive branch.

I think President Obama is a decent man. However, like his predecessor, he does not possess the wealth of experience necessary to be an international leader, especially of a nation as important as ours. The past few weeks have proved this to be true.

TOM HOOVER

LAS VEGAS

Distributing hypocrisy

To the editor:

I just finished listening to President Barack Obama once again espouse his major theme of the “inequality of wealth distribution” in the United States. Essentially, he feels it is immoral for some people to make more money than others, and subsequently, he is going to continue to work to change that. It is apparently evil to have money.

I also read in The Wall Street Journal that the president is revamping his economic advisory team. Specifically, he has announced that the new director of his National Economic Council will be Jeffrey Zients. In 2003, Fortune magazine listed Mr. Zients as one of the “40 richest Americans under 40,” with a net worth at that time of approximately $149 million. Am I the only one out there who notices, once again, the blatant hypocrisy of this president?

J.J. SCHRADER

HENDERSON

Gun control

To the editor:

In response to Don Ellis’ letter (“Corporate politics,” Saturday Review-Journal), I have a few questions for anyone seeking tighter gun control laws. Do you own a gun? Do you want to own a gun? Do you own a fully automatic assault weapon? Do you want to own a fully automatic assault weapon? Do you own a pistol? Do you want to own a pistol? Do you own an Uzi? Do you want to own a Uzi?

The answer to most of these questions is most likely no. However, we have some mean, deranged and evil people, for whom the answer would be yes. Pass all the gun laws you want, and the answer to the aforementioned questions for you would have to be no; otherwise, you would be breaking the law. But the bad guys would still have the same arsenal, and you would have no defense.

Remember, the Second Amendment was not passed to ensure you had a hunting rifle or a target practice gun. It was passed to protect Americans from a tyrannical government. Think about that before you go promoting gun control.

I own hunting guns and would never in my life want to hurt another human being. I am a retired veteran and have the utmost respect for human life. If you believe in doing the right thing and respecting your fellow man, you may want to seriously contemplate the effects of tighter gun laws.

JOHNNIE ESTES

NORTH LAS VEGAS

The Legislature and HOAs

To the editor:

More than half of all residents of Nevada reside in 3,000 common-interest communities, or homeowners associations. In the real estate section of Saturday’s Review-Journal, Barbara Holland highlights the flawed, one-sided, knee-jerk reactions by the Nevada Legislature (“Communities out of balance”). Elected officials continue to tinker with HOA governance without hearing or understanding both sides of an issue. As a result, HOAs, their boards and their homeowners are negatively impacted.

Ms. Holland does an excellent job of presenting legal dilemmas facing HOAs. Her recent articles explaining the impact of the NRS 116 legislative Band-Aid is a testament to her good work. However, there is one item that the Legislature always seems to omit when micromanaging processes that send hundreds, if not thousands, of HOA boards back to the woodshed to find an attorney to sort out the latest NRS 116 gibberish. There is never a comprehensive, start-to-finish impact statement with time lines — a flow chart of how HOAs and others are being asked to proceed.

It’s one thing to state when someone must do something; tying it together in a global context to eliminate misinterpretation is a far more difficult task. A recent explanation by Ms. Holland highlighted the current legal flaw whereby the Legislature failed to clarify whether an association can continue to foreclose on a delinquent homeowner if the homeowner is in mediation with a lender. This was an excellent example of why the Legislature must produce a clear chart of responsibilities and time lines. Had it done so, it could have caught the mistake, thus preventing HOAs from hiring attorneys.

Like it or not, monthly HOA dues are an additional real tax levied on their homeowners. This tax allows local governments to shirk their responsibility to provide HOA residents proper oversight and services that others currently receive, while ensuring property taxes that HOA homeowners pay are maximized. If HOAs had the same legal process and right of foreclosure for nonpayment of dues (indirect taxes) as the county property tax collector does for delinquent taxes, then most HOA foreclosure issues become moot — four years of nonpayment of dues, and it’s over. It’s time for someone to organize and fund an HOA-specific lobby. An ounce of prevention is equal to a pound of cure.

RICHARD RYCHTARIK

LAS VEGAS