Partisan debate reactions not surprising
In response to your Thursday “They said it” column about the debate reaction:
Why use precious space to run comments from Democrats Harry Reid, Dina Titus, Judy Chu, Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton and Republicans James Settelmeyer, Michael McDonald, Reince Priebus, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump? What did you expect them to say? They added nothing to the discourse.
You could have listed the names and quotes in two columns and asked us to match them. The only quote that belonged was from UNLV professor David Damore.
You should have had a panel of undecided voters watch the debate with your reporter Ben Botkin and then reported their reactions.
My take away from the column is that voters in state Sen. Settelmeyer’s district should question his viability as an elected official if he really believes that, “Donald Trump scored a decisive victory” in the Las Vegas debate.
Les Gilbert
Las Vegas
Won’t get fooled again
I watched a TV interviewer question Donna Brazile, head of the Democratic National Committee, about her role in or knowledge of the leaking of a debate question to the Clinton campaign. As expected, Ms. Brazile claimed over and over that she was not involved and that no one in the DNC would do such a thing.
But I doubt that many will believe her because her plausibility is affected by Hillary’s lies, Obama’s lies, and the many lies fomented by the Democrats in general.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Owen Nelson
Las Vegas
Bean counters
Reporter Karl Ritter of The Associated Press wrote a remarkably dumb story about the fact that none of the Nobel Prize winners in 2016 was a woman (Review-Journal, Oct. 15). So “diversity” is supposed to be the rule in the selection of Nobel Prize winners?
Should the Nobel Prize committee allocate a certain percentage of prizes to blacks, Muslims, American Indians, Albanians and to the disabled in a formulaic manner? Or should these prizes be awarded on a meritocratic basis, as has always been the case?
Should the next Albert Einstein be denied the Nobel because significant numbers of minorities also deserve their turns? Would this be a good idea? How would you like to live in a world in which 10 percent of Nobel Prizes in physics, chemistry and medicine had to go to Hispanics or 3 percent to Native Americans?
Should the U.S. Congress weigh in on this pressing issue and demand a boycott of Sweden? Or should everyone who applies to receive a Nobel Prize receive one just for showing up, as in grade-school soccer tournaments?
Perhaps Mr. Ritter should take a job with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and sue on behalf of all minorities denied Nobel Prizes.
Henry Soloway
Las Vegas
Free stuff
Uber-rich, uber-liberal Mark Dayton, governor of the great state of Minnesota and heir to the Target retail fortune, loved Obamacare — until his constituents started complaining about the cost. It wasn’t until he realized that this program was not only going broke, but he was going to lose the votes of those who actually work for a living and pay for the free health care of those who don’t.
Apparently socialism is attractive only as long as no one realizes how expensive free stuff becomes. If you think government-subsidized, poor-quality health care is expensive, wait until a college education becomes free. Not only will you be paying for your neighbor’s education, you’ll be doing the same for non-citizens who do not pay taxes. The quality of that education will tank as well.
Remember: Socialism works only as long as there are more people who vote for a living than work. The ultimate downside is that those who vote for a living feel entitled to take from those who work for a living. One can only hope those who feel entitled become complacent — and fail to vote.
Skip Blough
North Las Vegas
