Yet another move to weaken our military

To the editor:

It couldn’t be that our leaders are intentionally weakening our military, could it? First there was the decision to let gays openly serve in the military. I thought it was a bad decision, because many of the majority heterosexuals will, rightly or wrongly, consciously or subconsciously have a bias against gays, which could have a negative impact in combat situations. The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy made more sense.

Next, there was the decision to let women serve on submarines. I served on nuclear submarines for six years. Having more than 100 mixed-gender people in a close-quartered tube under the ocean for months at a time can result in a reduction in focus and concentration in an inherently dangerous setting.

Now comes the decision to let women serve in combat. The commentary “Mean fighting force or social experiment?” in Wednesday’s Review-Journal reported that a U.S. Marine review found that on average women have 40 percent lower muscle strength, 47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching speed. Why would we want to lower the combative strength of a unit in order to accommodate women? It doesn’t make sense.

Am I losing my mind, or is it that the world is crazy and I’m the only sane person left?



United in sacrifice

To the editor:

Hats off to the Carson City crowd for voluntarily taking a 4.8 percent pay cut (Thursday Review-Journal). All 63 state legislators agreed to stand with pay cuts already in place for other state employees. I hope our U.S. Congress gets the message and does likewise.

Why should our members of Congress get annual automatic pay increases? Why should they have superior health care? If Medicare, Medicaid and ObamaCare are good enough for the rest of us, why shouldn’t it good enough for our elected folks? Congress could easily cut staff, perks and other benefits we don’t even know about and set an uplifting example — as Nevada’s elected servants did this week.




Saturday mail

To the editor:

I’m truly sad about the coming end of Saturday mail delivery, as I certainly do my part to keep spending money at the post office. I send as many as 20 letters and packages per month to relatives and friends back home in New Orleans and Palm Beach, Fla. Some don’t do email.

Oh, well. I guess time is moving forward. But the mail is a big part of my life.



Feeding at the trough

To the editor:

How outrageous that the superintendent of the Clark County School District doesn’t believe anyone should question the viability and salary of one of his hires (“Jones chafes on extension for adviser,” Thursday Review-Journal).

Never mind that when Dwight Jones was hired at a very high salary, it was because he had the knowledge and ability to improve the Clark County educational system. Now Mr. Jones explains that this high-paid personal friend has “a level of knowledge and skills” that Mr. Jones doesn’t have. Why didn’t we hire Ken Turner in the first place and save a lot of money if he is more knowledgeable and skilled than the superintendent?

If you want to know why the Clark County School District lags behind almost every other school district in achievement, you now have your answer. The purpose of the administration is not funding programs to educate our children. It’s to give friends and possibly family thousands of dollars to do basically nothing as it concerns education.

After all, if we don’t adequately educate our children, these kind of people can continue to feed at the public trough for their own benefit without consequence.



News Headlines
Local Spotlight
Add Event
Home Front Page Footer Listing
You May Like

You May Like