Letters for July 29, 2010

Win, win?

Re “Money’s good; a good plan is better” and “Immigration goes to pot” (East of Eden, Reviled & Revered, July 15):

I see a compromise to the Jen Huntley and John Barrette columns. Barrette is giving a hooray to Arizona for standing up to illegal immigrants. On the preceding page, Huntley is talking about the under-funded Nevada schools. If Barrette kicks out the illegal immigrants, will Huntley have enough funding for the schools? I know they are different states, but hypothetically, where would schools be financially if U.S. taxpayers weren’t paying to educate illegal immigrants? The illegal immigrants’ work for cash so they don’t pay taxes, which go to support the very same under-funded schools they attend.

I’m all in favor of full funding for schools. Give all the teachers a raise. Add more programs. But not when bilingual classes are added or when classes are filled with illegal immigrants children. Schools, like the government, don’t need more money. They just need the government to let them spend it wiser.

There are an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. Those are tax dollars that should be going to clean the parks they use, pave the roads they drive on, and fund the social programs they collect from. The illegal immigrants put nothing in and take as much out as possible. They are robbing this country from both ends.

I’m not opposed to immigration. I’m married to an immigrant. My great grandparents were immigrants. Legal immigrants. But they learned to speak and read English, and they pay taxes.

Matthew Larsen

Bad P.R.

Re “Girl, you’ll be a woman soon” (Feature story, July 15):

I am proud of being Latino and our traditions. For a 15-year-old to have tattoos is just wrong. A better candidate should have been chosen for this story. The images just show the negative stereotype towards Latinos. I am disgusted seeing the images in the front cover, just wrong.

Sergio Venegas

Barrette’s a hack

Re “Rory 2010 is a disguised Daddy Morebucks” “Immigration goes to pot” (Reviled & Revered, July 8, July 15):

Since coming to Reno in January, I have tried to read John Barrette’s column with an open mind. I generally find the quality of opinion columns in alternative weekly papers to be superior to those in mainstream outlets. However, with his last two columns (on Rory Reid and on immigration) Mr. Barrette has revealed himself to be a run-of-the-mill hack.

It’s too bad your paper wastes valuable page real estate on him.

Jay Goldfarb

Name the names

Re “We need Rory” (Letters to the Editor, July 22):

David Sharp failed himself as well as your readers in his letter. I quote: “But let’s not forget in the midst of the weekly right-wing screeds and borderline personal attacks, that Brian Sandoval is just another establishment politician in the true Nevada tradition of Kenny Guinn, Jim Gibbons and John Ensign.” In this paragraph he fails to mention Harry Reid! If there were ever a “career” politician, Harry is definitely one. Just because you may belong to the same party as any person you do not wish to name, does not mean that they are not part of the problem. If you are going to name names, than make sure you include all who truly deserve to be named.

Brad Hippert

You dissed Fred

Re “Censor family news” (Letters to the Editor, July 1):

I got irritated by your answer to Fred Speckmann. Are you getting a little too bigheaded for your own good? Perhaps you could come to the Center for Spiritual Living on a regular basis, where you would learn respect and self-respect and gain a little class along the way. Your “Editor’s note” as a reply to the letter is nothing less than a slap in the face of Fred Speckmann, a vile act of cowardness in a country proud of its freedom of speech, or is it only as long as one agrees with you? Where is your humility? Any courage on the horizon for apologies? And finally, as far as the “family newspaper” as Mr. Speckmann refers to, the overlooked word is “arguably,” meaning looks like a “family newspaper” but certainly is not. So in order to not deceive numerous members of this community, maybe your publication needs to be renamed. May I suggest “sleazy sheet”? Food for thoughts, anyway.

Martine Riviere
via email

Food supply

Re “Food stamps in Washoe County” (Feature story, March 22, 2007):

I know of some people who live in that area, I don’t want to mention exactly where, but they live in Washoe County. There are three of them, and they live in a not so nice place, but they can’t afford to move or pay more money than they do now. Anyway, only one of them works, one has a felony, and the other is a student and has a behavioral problem. Apparently, if you have a felony, you don’t get hired, no second chances there. Well, they have to use the food banks to get a little something to eat. They have applied four times for food stamps—haven’t received them though. They have been told that their food stamp application has been misplaced once again. They to this day have not received their food stamps.

So maybe this is the real reason half of the people who are eligible to take advantage of the program have not yet received their food stamps.

That does not mean that they haven’t tried to get the food stamps. Do you think that all of their applications have all been misplaced, thrown out to possibly cut down on the work involved to approve applicants for the food stamps? I know that could be, given the workload they now have due to the bad economy, no work, loss of homes, and their income.

I hope things change for all soon. I can’t wait to hear from them again to see if they ever got their food stamps.

Patricia Whitten
Nampa, Idaho

The show shouldn’t go on

Re “Show on the road” (Feature story, July 22):

I must agree with the user comment on the website: This is not really a story that’s making you guys look good in the eyes of the discriminating reader. It plays like a complete self-congratulatory pat on the back: A staff writer promoting his own band via a cover story. Yikes, conflict of interest, much?

Austin Anderson

Pot’s not important

Re “Immigration goes to pot” (Reviled & Revered, July 15):

The use of the conflict in the medical marijuana laws between the states and the federal government sounds like the old argument that “if I let one person break any law then everyone will be able to break all the laws.” That’s not how the world works. There is a big difference between smoking medical marijuana and breaking immigration laws. Some laws are more important to our safety then others. The federal government is spending its time and money on more important laws like illegal immigration. I prefer the federal government is encouraged to concentrate its efforts on important problems like illegal immigration instead of arresting medical patients using alternative treatments.

Bob Reeves
Bellingham, Wash.


In “REpiaNO” (Musicbeat, July 22), we misidentified pianist Armando Garcia as Hernando Garcia. We regret the error.