Letters for February 18, 2010


Re “I could eat a horse,” (Notes from the Neon Babylon, Feb. 4):

I found it interesting that your February 4th issue began with a letter to the editor regarding the fact that people don’t give much thought to where the meat we eat everyday comes from and ends with Bruce Van Dyke’s argument that we should at least consider eating or selling the meat from the wild horses rounded up in Nevada. It is an idea that is repulsive to us in America. He says that we shoot and eat deer from areas where there is a threat of starvation (which is the reasoning behind the roundups) and that horse meat is a healthier option than beef. I would add that these horses live a much better life than the cows, pigs and chickens we consume already. However, I couldn’t eat a horse, and there lies the rub. We have horses as pets, and we love our pets. Perhaps we worry that it is a slippery slope to go down. Could “man’s best friend” be next?

Laurie Woods
Tahoe City, Calif.

Another angle

Re “I could eat a horse,” (Notes from the Neon Babylon, Feb. 4):

Bruce, envision a chain of “Wild Horse Burger” stands throughout downtown Reno and Sparks and maybe one in Virginia City, operated by the homeless. Two birds with one stone.

Karl LarsonMoab, Utah

Civilized dialogue

Re “I could eat a horse,” (Notes from the Neon Babylon, Feb. 4):

YOU SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Julie Corwin
Lindenhurst, NY

Cattle vs. horses

Re “I could eat a horse,” (Notes from the Neon Babylon, Feb. 4):

Leave the Mustangs alone on the land that was legally designated to them in 1971. They are perfectly capable of managing themselves. Why don’t we concentrate on culling our human numbers and eliminate corruption, greed and plain stupidity? The land is being stolen from them so that 200 cattle to 1 horse can ravage the PRIVATE land that is legally theirs!!!

Lori Schmiodt
Hartford City, Ind.

What’s mine is theirs

Re “One more time” (Editorial, Feb. 4):

Well, I had no idea that most of the mining that is done in Nevada is done by outside companies from places such as Canada. If this is the case, we would be foolish not to levy taxes on them, especially when we need the revenue so badly.

Gail Dietrich

We try

Re “One more time” (Editorial, Feb. 4):

I think the “One more time” editorial was exceptionally well done. I don’t know of an editorial in any other newspaper that is quite so factual, straightforward and informative on the subject of raising mining taxes. It’s an issue that affects us all

Jerry Purdy


Re “Burst your bubble,” (Feature story, Feb. 4):

Where did these people get the idea that banks are “partners” or “investors” in their homes??? The bank loaned them funds to pay someone, developer or former owner, for the house. They agreed to repay that loan. When they refinanced did they get cash out? Will they return those funds to the bank?

If they buy a car do they consider the car dealer to be an equal “investor” in their vehicle? If I loan them $5,000 and they can’t repay me, are we equal losers in the deal? Yes, banks made ridiculous loans to people who couldn’t afford the payments, and they deserve the toxic mess they are in, but let’s take some responsibility for being unrealistic, greedy and economically clueless.

Karren Smith

Civilized dialogue

Re “Burst your bubble,” (Feature story, Feb. 4):

I was an actor in a similar movie during a previous recession. We lived in California and walked away from an underwater house, experiencing all the mixed emotions Burghart describes. Fortunately for us, we really couldn’t afford to keep it, which kept us from pouring money into a lost cause. We got over it, though, and rented for several years while saving money and biding our time for better times, which returned back then and will again down the road. I’ve been there, so I know it’s tough, but keeping some of your money for a (hopefully) more sane future is way better than continuing to fund the crooks who have already stolen your bread. Let them eat some of their own cooking and start a new pot of your own.

I don’t see where moral obligation has anything to do with going down while trying to stay in a hopelessly underwater home. Predatory lending and bald-faced greed created this situation—lenders did not hold up their end of the bargain by operating in an honest and fiscally responsible manner. That brings up the ending question in Burghart’s article, one I’ve been asking for a long time. Why aren’t a bunch of these thieves in jail and forced to use their ill gotten gains to help out some of their victims? Get a rope.

Stan White

Our opinioncolumn is slanted

Re: “Weak leader Obama made a good call” (Reviled & Revered, Feb. 11)

Your column is so far slanted it is difficult to read. You remind me of Sarah Palin, not a lot of substance but a lot of sarcasm. If you want to influence someone you should be a little more middle of the road and state some facts. As far as the President being weak or not holding control over Congress—I gather that you must have missed his open Q & A in front of the Republican members of Congress. You know the one that Fox decided to cut off early so their commentators could do commentary rather than let it finish. The same one that one of the Republican senators said, “This was a big mistake to have this on live TV.”

The role of the president is not to control Congress. There is a reason for a balance of power as prescribed by our constitution. The role of Congress is to listen to their constituents and then react and act like adults, not like children by blocking anything that the opposing party tries to pass.

Perhaps this will not get read or published, but I feel better knowing I stated my opinion.

Gail DietrichSparks

Lowering ed

We are entering another round of budget cuts. UNR and other institutions are being looked at to shoulder the burden of the cuts, again.

It is time to stop looking at band-aid approaches to the state budget crisis. Let’s look at long-term solutions which will actually solve things, like developing ways for the areas within the budget which are not self supporting to become self supporting. Let’s stop sacrificing the areas bringing in revenue.

The tuition being charged to students at UNR, for example, is not kept by UNR but rather is given to the state which then gives back a portion, and the portion keeps getting smaller and smaller. UNR can sustain itself with the tuition revenue it generates. If a business is unable to support itself, it finds ways to either generate additional revenue or cut expenses. The business would not cut the areas that are generating income. The state is no different and should not look for solutions that are worse than the problem!

UNR is capable of managing itself and should not be the sacrificial lamb for the state. I believe we need to demand that the state allow UNR to self manage.

Dawn Overbay