Letters for February 24, 2005

This is not intended to put words into the mouth of Harry Reid, just my opinion of the situation.

Harry Reid is not an obstructionist. He’s doing his job.

He is doing what any member of a political party who has opposite views of the party that is in power is doing, being a politician. If Harry were to go along with the GOP, then he would be a Republican, but he’s not. He’s a Democrat, and as a Democrat and an elected leader, he has to question the motives of the GOP.

When Clinton was in office, he sent to the Senate the names of judicial nominees that the GOP majority Senate rejected—a few for being too liberal. Reid is doing the same thing, except that the Bush nominees are too conservative. Same with Social Security and any other proposal that comes out of the White House or from the GOP side of the Senate. It doesn’t mean he opposes or supports the idea, he must question it first before voting. Voting record shows Reid has voted with and against the Republicans. The Republican minority leaders in the past also voted with and against the Democrats. (Would you call a vocal Republican who opposes the White House changes to Social Security an obstructionist?)

This country has a two-party political system until another Ross Perot comes along. It’s the duty of the party not in power to challenge the party that is in charge. No more, no less. And no more name calling, yet at some point it always does. We, as a country, must do better than becoming 5-year-olds again.

Dewey Quong
Reno

Don’t eat at the deli
Re “Russian roulette” (RN&R, Food Finds, Feb. 2):

Brad Bynum is an embarrassing crybaby.

A Russian friend of mine has told me authoritatively, Moscow Market and Deli is not a restaurant. It is a place to purchase ethnic delicacies, not sit down to a meal.

Brad Bynum was insulting by writing, “The courteous woman who helped us had a distinctly Russian accent.”

If Bynum had bothered to inquire, the woman is Ukrainian, not Russian. Them’s fightin’ words over there.

Brad’s, “Wah! Wah!, I didn’t like my lunch!,” was spoiled-American-brat drivel.

The only food Brad Bynum is authorized to critique is a bucket of hot wings from Stucky’s Strip Club.

Hey, Brad, SHUT IT!

Kevin M. Sak
Reno

Things that make you go, “Huh?”
Re “This Modern World” (RN&R, cartoon, Feb. 17):

I’m very distressed over the seemly overt plagiarism exhibited in the cartoon. This is straight out of the “How to Serve Man” episode of The Twilight Zone without any reference to the author or Rod Serling.

Although one might see a similarity between Mr. Serling and the character in the first box of the cartoon, I don’t see that has given credit to the originator.

Before taking on Social Security, perhaps Tom Tomorrow should revisit “yesterday” and journalism school to assure that he can be more original “today.”

Tim McClung
Reno

Bush’s budget is immoral
Re “More heat than light” (RN&R, editorial, Feb. 17):

The morality of those governing our state and nation is better measured in actions than in words. Budget priorities are the clearest way to determine whether a lawmaker would leave the sick and the elderly to die by the side of the road, or like the Good Samaritan, stop and lend a helping hand.

Your editorial is wrong to state that the Bush budget can’t be called immoral. And Sen. Harry Reid is perfectly correct in his statement: “This document is immoral for what it does to those who can’t defend themselves.”

Consider that the Bush tax cuts give a total of $89 billion to individuals making $400,000 or more. Yet, if the president’s budget is enacted by Congress, 300,000 kids will be cut off of food stamps, which are their last line of defense against going hungry. Over 10 years, the total amount of cuts to Nevada totals $166,037,000.

This will hit highway funding, education, law enforcement, poor people and the elderly. Under-funded veterans programs in Nevada will take a deeper hit. Ninety percent of veterans in Nevada will be denied residency in the state nursing home if they can not self-pay or use a third party.

A federal budget that singles out vulnerable populations and the middle class to solve our nation’s fiscal problems is not fair, and it’s not balanced.

And because it will cause more kids to go hungry, it’s damned immoral, too!

Bob Fulkerson
Reno