Since The Star is running a daily item on the budget impasse, I feel compelled to make some comments.
First of all, keep it up! But I can tell you from sad experience that contact with elected representatives -- a phone call, as The Star wants people to do -- is about like calling the nearest fence post. They don't listen.
What we have is the same old partisan game of chicken we've had for so long that I can't remember when a budget was last adopted on time -- much less when one actually represented good stewardship of the people's hard-earned money. When times were better we could survive this nonsense, even when it hurt us. But we can't tolerate it anymore. Our ability to withstand incompetence in Sacramento has run out.
We need a crushing load of reality check dumped on the Statehouse, something they can't ignore. And what they can't ignore is a real threat of recall. I'm close to making noise for exactly that for the two who represent me. The Stricklands will cry foul, I'm sure. But the plain truth is that they, along with all the rest, stood up and said, "Vote for me, I can handle it." Then, when the chips are all down and the bet's been called, they're just bluffing.
It's time for all of California to say, "Get it done! Get it done now! Get it done right! Otherwise we'll throw you out and put in someone who will get it done!"
Folks, we don't have to tolerate this. We have the power to do something about it. But do we have the courage to take action? They're doing what we give them incentive to do. They'll change only when we change the incentive.
-- Roy W. Hogue, Newbury Park

Re: Mary Altmann's Dec. 26 letter, "Birth certificate suspect":
Altmann is not a Republican or racist. She just needs to stop relying on the Internet for her information.
Does she really think Barack Obama wasn't born in Hawaii just because a Web site questions it? I am also not a Republican or racist, but I gather my facts from reliable sources. I'm pretty confident John McCain would have mentioned Obama's ineligibility to run for president pretty early in the campaign if he wasn't born in the United States. In fact, you can be a naturalized citizen (not born in this country) and still run for president.
Last time I checked my facts, Hawaii is in fact part of the United States and has been since 1959. So, when Obama was born in 1961, Hawaii had been a state for two years! I was able to find that information out without the help of the Internet.
-- Mary Diamond, Ventura

To those who agree with the position of California Attorney General Jerry Brown on Proposition 8, ask yourself: What would you say if this were a proposition you agreed with, and an attorney general of either party refused to defend it?
Judges decide if a proposition is legal. The courts are an adversary system. Brown owes the voters, on both sides, the best defense that a brilliant lawyer can deliver, and nothing less.
I asked Assemblywoman Audra Strickland to introduce a measure to impeach Brown for refusing to do his job.
-- Benedict Lucchese, Camarillo

Re: Mary Altmann's Dec. 26 letter, "Birth certificate suspect":
Is Altmann implying that U.S. presidential candidates aren't thoroughly investigated as to place of birth before they are allowed to run for U.S. president?
All birth certificates are generated from the original. They are computer generated and certified. I have received three birth certificates for people born in 1884, 1935 and 1936, and they are all laser copies generated by computer. They are as legal as the originals.
-- Karol Ransom, Ventura

Let's look at this alleged $50 billion Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme a little closer, please! It just doesn't sit well with me. There is some evil here.
This $50 billion is a huge sum simply for one man to control. Madoff must have had accomplices in order to get away with such a massive movement of money right under the noses of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which begs the question, "How high up in the government does the fruit of this poisoned tree fall?" There must be records of money movements, names of companies, individuals, dates and deals. It is too hard to fathom that those fortunates who have been able to amass millions in legitimate financial dealings would be so stupid as to turn a blind eye and allow one person absolute control of their fortunes, no questions asked. The more money one has, the more astute one must be to keep it. That is the general rule.
So where is the money? $50 billion just didn't up and disappear. Rest assured it is somewhere, and somebody knows where the bones are buried.
We've all had an experience where a certain very important or sensitive file is lost in an office, only to discover later it had been misfiled and was there all the time. If this is a possible scenario, what if the whole Ponzi scheme news story is a fabrication designed to intentionally hide billions of dollars by unscrupulous persons, blame the entire scheme on Madoff, and publish the names of some notable millionaires to give the story credibility? Is this a means for some to secret away their fortunes in offshore accounts to evade paying taxes in these recessionary times?
Whether Madoff acted alone or in concert with others is still to be determined. Since money is the root of all evil, just how deeply do these roots go, and what is the actual evil being perpetrated here?
-- Charles Williams, Oxnard

What would federal receiver J. Clark Kelso do with a $75 million to $100 million monthly budget? Hijack an entire community?
Imagine you've been appointed by one person, U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson, to plan seven prison hospitals at the cost of $8 billion with an increased operating budget of $2.4 billion, thus increasing the annual operational budget to $4.4 billion. Also imagine, with your own personal office budget of $100 million monthly, that you don't have to answer to anyone, especially the people that your prison project will impact the most.
With this budget, you hire a public relations firm and a spokesperson, Richard Stapler, and they also reject any and all questions from local citizens. Yet, we the taxpayers are expected to pay the expenses with no questions asked.
So let me understand: Kelso hands the citizens of California an invoice, but he doesn't allow them to have a voice. He just expects them to pick up bill.
I once read that "absolute power corrupts absolutely." What gives the federal government the right to hijack the citizens' rights of California? What happened to state sovereignty? How did our right to ask questions of our public officials get stripped away and abandoned?
One definition of terrorism is the act of terrorizing by the use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate and subjugate using political policy as a weapon. Isn't this what Kelso's office is doing? If this isn't wrong, I don't know what is.
As of the Dec. 10 public meeting, no person from Kelso's office had answered any of my questions. All my questions, e-mails, and phone calls have been ignored. Where are my rights? Why are the rights of every citizen of Ventura County being discarded like rubbish and pushed to the sidewalk on trash day? I don't think the public nor Judge Henderson would approve of Kelso's tactics.
Kelso must answer the questions that have been directed to him and his office. Where is the transparency he was going to bring to his office? Where is the accountability in his office that he said was lacking from the previous receiver, Robert Sillen?
Residents of Ventura County need to stand up and not allow Kelso to hijack our constitutional rights.
-- Ed Stile, Camarillo

Mound Nursery, Cottage Cafe, Selah Cafe, Plants from Paradise, Taco Bell, Burrito Loco -- the space has hosted many different incarnations. Some may even remember the aviary that housed ducks! Sadly, the charm of 40 Day Road has faded. The current owners have let the space fall into unsightly disrepair. They do not live in the city, and I can't help but wonder that this is business as usual for developers: Let unique space fall apart so people are more willing to let it be bulldozed down to make way for yet another "ditto strip mall."
The owners were approached by many different business owners and church representatives with offers to rent the space, but every applicant found they were priced out of the opportunity by rental costs and/or realized they couldn't afford the repairs needed, as the owners were not willing to make any repairs.
How could our community benefit from the space as is? Perhaps a daytime childcare cooperative with evening artist creation space, food share distribution center, organic fruit and veggie exchange, affordable wedding venue, low-cost community meeting rooms, etc.
If you take a trip from downtown Ventura, where uniqueness thrives, to 40 Day Road, you'll pass no less than 20 for lease/rent signs, including space in the newer strip mall directly across from 40 Day Road on Telegraph Road. Couldn't the next Subway, Starbucks and cell phone storefront move into those spaces?
Space that has unique building character with community history is becoming as rare as Mom and Pop coffee shops in our town. Let's save some charm for Midtown, lest we match any other town in Southern California more completely.
-- Carrie McAuliffe, Ventura

As we are about to embark upon a new year, let us stop and think very carefully about the way our country is disintegrating. Just consider what has been happening the past few months.
This year "Americans" voted a man in for president of the United States whose place of birth -- Kenya or the United States -- is still not confirmed. No one is doing anything about it, including the U.S. Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case.
Sen. Hillary Clinton is constitutionally ineligible for her appointment as secretary of state because of the U.S. Constitution's Emoluments Clause (Article 1, section 6), designed to protect against corruption, and again, no one is doing anything about it! This emoluments or ineligibility clause of the U.S. Constitution says that no member of Congress who has benefited from a salary increase during the time that senator or representative served in Congress can be appointed to an office. While Clinton was a member of Congress in January of 2008, President Bush increased the salary of the secretary of state.
The unions are helping to destroy our country too, with their "jobs bank," their "card vote" bill and forcing companies to pay all their medical costs.
And why should we bail out the automakers? Let them file bankruptcy and be forced to reorganize, which they should have done years ago.
The Christmas season used to be a happy and joyous time when it was automatic to wish everyone a "Merry Christmas," but then the term "politically correct" came in and we had to change our greeting to "Happy Holidays," which just doesn't cut it!
Radio stations used to play Christmas music throughout all of December. Now you're lucky if you hear one Christmas carol on any station with the exception of KHAY. Congratulations to KHAY, for they came through with the carols we were all yearning to hear.
Just think about all these things.
-- Mary Rickman, Ventura

Re: the Dec. 27 essay by Thomas L. Friedman, "Time to reboot America" and Bill O'Reilly's commentary, "Here's wishing Barack Obama a happy New Year":
Webster's defines "juxtapose" as, "to place side by side." Let's juxtapose Friedman's essay and O'Reilly's commentary.
Friedman sees the need for change in our infrastructure, schools and lack of investment in 21st century renewable energy systems to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. O'Reilly continues the Bush mantra of fear.
This juxtaposition illuminates the failures of our society beginning with the Reagan policies of anti-regulatory agencies and bloated defense budgets, through the black hole of Iraq, into which billions of tax dollars have been wasted while our bridges crumble with age.
O'Reilly continues to foster fear with the same weary threats: Terrorists are freely roaming the countryside; former Attorney General Janet Reno is being resurrected through Eric Holder, portending the imminent demise of the CIA; while the resident military genius Gen. David Petraeus continues the failed war in Iraq.
Where is the hope that Friedman and Obama spoke of by calling for change? It can be found in the American spirit to innovate and enervate, to recognize that while we sleep, the world is passing us by. We can have a better education system, we can harness the power of the wind and sun while demanding better and more efficient cars and trucks. We can have corporate executives who are held accountable, as well as honest and responsive government.
We are a nation and a society that urged the world to seek freedom through human rights, democratic ideals and fair regulation of our financial markets, all of which have been eroded or, in many cases, eliminated.
Juxtapose these essays for a moment and ask yourself: Will we continue to live in fear, or will we put our shoulders to the wheel and declare for hope?
Franklin D. Roosevelt said it best: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." Are we willing to join President Obama to begin a journey of rediscovery of our national spirit, to rebuild and reinvent America herself?
-- Edward T. Buckle, Ventura

Re: Alan Sanders' Dec. 28 commentary, "Feds' Casitas appeal for steelhead has local support":
The trouble with environmentalists like Sanders is that they talk out of both sides of their mouth and use words they do not understand.
On one side, he's asking the Casitas Municipal Water District to build a fish ladder at a cost of millions of taxpayer dollars, and on the other, he suggests that Casitas is misusing taxpayer money by hiring professional consultants.
The sense of entitlement that these fanatics possess makes me angry.
Sanders goes on to suggest that the Sierra Club, along with other environmental groups, represents millions of Americans. If that were so, then a small contribution from each of those Americans represented would yield enough money for they themselves to build that fish ladder, thereby eliminating the fight for taxpayer money.
They call for the Casitas water board to do the right thing. Why don't they do the right thing by focusing on what's really important? A quick drive through downtown Ventura and they will see people living on the street, without food or even a pathetic blanket to keep warm. Why all this nonsense about protecting a few fish?
The impact that this project would have is far-reaching. Farmlands would be wasted, people would be without drinking water. Do environmentalists care about that, I wonder?
I must admit there is one positive that will come out of this project, should it come to pass, and that is that the homeless guy living on the Ventura River will now have something to eat.
-- Nancy Low, Fillmore

Re: your Dec. 23 article, "Few disclose how bailouts funds used":
This is a good example as to how our government treats wealthy bankers and Wall Street executives compared as to how it treats small business owners and other self-employed Americans.
In 1960, the top federal income tax rate for individuals making more than $400,000 per year was 92 percent. Today the top rate is 35 percent. But Wall Street hedge fund traders claim their income is from capital gains, which are taxed at only 15 percent. The tax rules are different for small business owners and self-employed individuals. Today, a single small business owner with a net profit of $100,000, claiming the standard deduction, is required to pay $17,680 in federal income tax plus $14,310 in self-employment, for a total federal tax obligation of $31,990, or 31.99 percent. This compares with a hedge fund trader, with an income of several million dollars, who pays only 15 percent.
Incidentally, the self-employment tax on $100,000 in 1960 was $216. In 2007, it was $14,310.
-- Newell S. Gragg, Ventura

It is absolutely incomprehensible to me that the government of the United States of America allows immigration detainees to be treated so inhumanely.
These persons' only crime is that they entered this country illegally. These people left their native country seeking a better life. In their country of birth, many found their lives intolerable.
Yes, they broke the law. However, detaining persons in a windowless, airless building is not right. This egregious disregard of human rights must be stopped. We must demand justice for all.
-- Lois V. Barrus, Moorpark

No one really explained it to me. I figured it out myself.
With all the misinformation, wrong information, outright lies and everything else, long before we went to war with Iraq I told my wife and friends we were going to war. Listening to what was on the radio and on TV and reading what was in the papers, I concluded that it could all be explained in 13 words: "I want a war like my daddy had, only I will finish it."
I have seen nothing to change my mind.
I don't believe President George Bush had any idea he was going to cause so much death, debt and damage. I think he believed he would rid the world of a terrible man and regime and get people who have hated each for centuries and are ruled by tribal and religious leaders to become an American-type democracy.
I stick by my 13 words.
-- Carl S. Walker, Simi Valley

Re: your Dec. 28 article, "Saying yes to anyone, WaMu built empire on shaky loans":
I thought you ought to know something about the "other side" of Washington Mutual, not just the slanted viewpoints presented in this article.
I had the privilege of being very closely associated, both as a consultant and later as an employee, with Washington Mutual Bank's regional headquarters in Chatsworth. My responsibilities included responding to and problem-solving for customers, carried out at the executive level. As such, I was made aware of banking as well as mortgage issues.
By far, WaMu dealt honestly and in a forthright manner with all clients. We encountered customers who lied, who tried to cheat or who were totally clueless, making one wonder how they coped at all in today's world. Yet overall, the customers were intelligent and capable. They were usually cooperative once a situation was explained, even if it took extra detail over and above the usual disclosures.
There were loan applications rejected because there was no evidence of income, nor a showing of sufficient responsibility to undertake the loan transaction. But there were loans made because the U.S. government had a virtual "quota" for putting the maximum number of Americans -- and even non-citizens -- into their own houses. The impetus to write those loans came not solely from WaMu corporate offices. but from Washington. D.C.
For this article, if there were real interviews with WaMu employees, past or present, the writers must have thrown out any comments that were positive. The article makes it sound like WaMu is an evil entity bent on gathering all the money possible with no regard to anyone or any rules.
As a former respondent to customer issues, I can tell you that such is not the case. Not that there weren't problems, but not that virtually every loan was based on bogus data, nor that branch offices were required to press customers to take out loans at every encounter.
WaMu did not build its "empire" on mortgage loans only. Many former savings and loan companies, including Great Western and Home Savings, went into the forming of a great banking institution. WaMu was -- and remains -- a good bank. In conjunction with JP Morgan Chase, it will be even better.
-- Vince Nowell Sr., Simi Valley

After disagreeing with a number of reviews by movie critic Roger Moore, I think it's time for The Star to go a different direction in this area. The latest example is his review of the movie, "Marley and Me," where Moore states: "It's a relief that 'Marley and Me,' the film of John Grogan's a newspaperman-and-his-dog memoir, isn't better. That's obvious as the weepy third act unfolds. Whatever tears director David Frankel, stars Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston and a very cute dog, may try to wring out of us, the almost lifeless movie that comes before guarantees those tears won't come."
I just came out of a packed showing of "Marley and Me." Throughout this supposed "almost lifeless movie," genuine laughter was the frequent repeated response until the emotional third act, when visible and audible weeping were the dominant emotion coming from both kids and adults -- even though Moore "guarantees (those) tears won't come."
I can't remember when I've seen a movie where there were more laughs or more tears.
This erroneously brazen guarantee of no tears, along with the rest of his review, were so far off they could make Moore the poster boy for why there should be term limits for critics. Maybe Moore has reached a point where he's writing his reviews to impress his peers rather than to simply inform his readers on whether or not they will enjoy the movie. In this case, "Marley and Me" hits its target audience with a bull's eye, and critic Moore misses his by a country mile.
If you've ever owned -- or loved -- a dog, see this movie. It will make you laugh and it will make you cry, all while leaving you thoroughly entertained. For someone who just wants to see a good movie, it doesn't get any better than that.
-- Gary Johnson, Moorpark

Re: your Dec. 27 Associated Press Business article, "GMAC's requested transition buys time":
This article carefully avoids the fact that GMAC owns Ditech Funding, which was part of the mortgage meltdown mess. The article closes its eyes to the fact that Cerberus Capital, which owns 51 percent of GMAC, owns Chrysler, the automobile manufacturer. The article quotes a GMAC spokeswoman as saying GMAC was founded in order to support the sale of GM vehicles. She never once mentioned the squandering of the GM profits on unrecoverable mortgages. She never, never once mentioned that GMAC now is helping to finance Chrysler.
By asking to be designated a "bank holding company," GMAC is opening the back door to hundreds of billions of taxpayer money to bail out not only GMAC, but also GM and Chrysler. GM and Chrysler tried to saunter through the front door to the big bailout bucks. When that did not work, they are now trying a thinly veiled back door end-around sneak into the taxpayers' pockets. GMAC seems to have also pulled the reality rug out from under the Associated Press as well as our elected representatives.
The Federal Reserve and Congress need to take action to stop the lies and take action to build the country instead of rewarding greed and lies.
-- David Collins, Newbury Park

How's this for an economic stimulus plan that benefits seniors, the auto industry and a lot of folks: Have the government issue a voucher (chit) to every recipient of a monthly Social Security check. The said voucher could be worth $1,000 and be good for 90 days only for the purchase of a new Ford, General Motors or Chrysler product.
We have 50 million check recipients. At $1,000 each, that's $50 billion into the economy. It would be spent in less than 90 days and have a multiplying effect.
The seniors would use their voucher or, more likely, sell it for a discount. Even if they sell at an average of 50 percent face value, that's $25 billion into the economy, and the vouchers will add $50 billion to it.
This helps seniors, the car industry and the economy, and it doesn't go to banks or Wall Street.
If we made it $10,000 instead of $1,000, we'd add $500 billion directly, $250 billion indirectly, and we wouldn't bail anybody out of anything.
-- Red Bloomgren, Newbury Park

There is a very effective way for the California Legislature and governor to solve California's budget problems: downsize government bureaucracies. Responsible businesses do this all the time. They eliminate nonprofitable operations, streamline departments and lay off nonproductive employees.
When Ronald Reagan became governor of California he erased a huge deficit by doing the same thing. He slashed state spending by reducing and consolidating bureaucracies, and with the line item veto, he saved the state from bankruptcy.
One rarely hears of government bureaucracies downsizing or reorganizing. Government agencies have no incentive to do this because they have no competition. They thrive on growth as an end in itself, and the only way to do this is to request more taxpayers' money. And if they are mismanaged, they just appeal to legislators for more money to bail them out of the mess, and, unfortunately, they usually get it, even brazenly calling a reduction in projected growth a "cut." Government workers fear a "reduction in force" more than anything! Bureaucrats become masters of obfuscation.
Many government bureaucracies can be eliminated entirely and they won't be missed. Others can have their workforces cut by as much as 90 percent without materially affecting output. If this happens, the few good men and women remaining can perform functions more efficiently at far less cost. Traditionally unread paperwork is eliminated, too.
Even schools and police departments are all too often saddled with oppressive bureaucracies. To improve efficiencies, don't reduce the numbers of teachers and police officers. Just trim the bureaucracies. Bad teachers and professors should not be immune -- revoke their tenure and fire them! Legislative committees, school boards and police commissioners can do the trimming.
There is always plenty of money in any agency to do all the things that are really needed without raising taxes.
-- Lou Gates, Westlake Village

Re: Benedict Lucchese's Dec. 23 letter, "Time for Brown to go":
Attorney General Jerry Brown heads the state Department of Justice and represents all the people of California, not just those with moral agendas. His office serves as chief legal counsel to the state and sees that the laws of the state are uniformly and adequately enforced. Through the department's Division of Public Rights, Californians' civil rights are protected.
In asking the state Supreme Court to overturn the ballot initiative, Brown said that Proposition 8 undermines fundamental liberties enshrined in California's constitution. This request for a review by the Supreme Court may, in fact, bring a halt to what surely will be divisive, back-and-forth initiatives opposed and in favor of same-sex marriage.
I expect nothing less than this kind of thorough review by the attorney general, and I commend him for doing his job.
California's ballot initiative process is designed to allow voters to express their will, but it does not translate into absolute rule, as Lucchese would like us to believe.
-- Bruce Little, Camarillo

Barack Obama may not be a United States citizen. A copy of his birth certificate on www.fightthesmears.com looks phony. It does not give a certificate number or hospital he was born in. He could have been born at home, but where? Let's get the story and witnesses.
Also suspect: In 1961 we did not have laser technology, and in the corner of the birth certificate, it clearly has the word laser.
I am not a Republican or racist. I just want the president of the United States to be born in our beloved country, as the law is clear on this matter.
-- Mary Altmann, Agoura

Who is looking out for the millions of seniors who are surviving on fixed incomes? Seniors are hurting and need a bailout, too, rather than being forced to subsidize financial institutions, banks and auto companies --and next, with their hands extended, the casinos. Where will the giveaway madness end?
-- Bill Gourlay, Westlake Village

Re: Dee Dee Williams' Dec. 22 letter, "Offense isn't universal":
Same-sex marriage is offensive to more people than Williams thinks, with 80 percent against it.
First of all, many people agree that marriage is a privileged institution and not a civil right. I believe it was started on religious purposes. It cannot be redefined due to many legal, moral and even worldwide problems. It's a centuries old institution.
If same-sex marriage is OK, then we have to accept polygamy, adult-child marriages and even people marrying their dog. You cannot deny it could lead to that with the loonies in this country -- and I'm not including most gays!
Williams is also wrong about the hatred of gays. I don't hate gays, and I believe that around 70 to 80 percent once answered a poll saying that hatred of gays was not a factor of Proposition 8. Of course, there is some hatred in this world, but most of mainstream America is tolerant.
Proposition 8 is not a hatred-filled law. It just simply defines marriage between a man and a woman. There is nothing added or taken away from their lifestyle. The gays can pick any type of "union" or partnership" or anything they want, but the heterosexuals and gays have to remain separate. I agree with a recent reader to have a contest to come up with a unique alternate name. They already get most of the same benefits as a man and woman being married.
I am tired of hearing me and others being called hate-filled. I have met many gays I loved and respected. We just don't agree with the lifestyle.
-- Bruce Leeds, Moorpark

Re: your Dec. 22 article, "Simi Valley to consider five-star resort":
I understand that the Simi Valley mayor and some of the City Council members are elated at the prospect of a political benefactor planning to develop the Hummingbird (Nest) Ranch into a high-class spa. I find the news depressing.
The ranch site is a historical location, to begin with, albeit little known in the modern Simi Valley community.
It is the location of some Chumash cave artwork. The ranch could have been a Chumash spiritual site and may even be a Chumash tribal burial location.
We have already lost some precious Chumash art sites on the grounds of the former Rocketdyne-Atomics International field labs. Now we are in danger of losing the Hummingbird archeological treasures.
When it comes to preserving our heritage, money apparently overwhelms concerns about cultural preservation and history.
-- Vince Nowell Sr., Simi Valley

You get sick from what goes into your mouth, and you get in trouble from what you say coming out of your mouth. Watch what you eat and what you say. Start the new year listening.
-- Roger Meyers, Westlake Village

Some criticism of the domestic automakers is justified. However, many of the articles recently on the subject of a bailout have been unjustly harsh and sadly based on misinformation.
One article claimed that domestic automakers don't make vehicles that people want, yet General Motors outsells all other automakers worldwide.
Another article stated the quality of domestic vehicles wasn't as good as foreign vehicles. J.D. Powers recently confirmed that Buick tied Toyota for first place in customer satisfaction. Cadillac was third, and some of Ford's models were not far behind.
Yet another article stated that the domestics didn't deserve to be bailed out by taxpayers. By contrast, foreign automakers already receive far more aid from U.S. taxpayers in various forms of assistance than the domestics, according to a Dec. 16 article in the Wall Street Journal.
Consider the following: In Tennessee, state and local authorities offered Volkswagen $577 million in lowered taxes and other benefits in exchange for plants it is building. This amounts to $288,000 per job created. Toyota is receiving $300 million in support for its plant in Texas, or $150,000 per job created. Alabama provided Hyundai, Toyota, Honda and Mercedes an average of $111,000 in incentives per job created. And the list goes on.
Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mercedes, BMW, Kia and Hyundai all receive financial support from U.S. taxpayers. Domestic automakers will have to repay any loans received, yet the foreign companies, in most cases, receive permanent aid as an incentive to provide jobs for Americans. Congress recently approved themselves a pay raise of almost $5,000 per year, each. They demanded that the top executives of Ford, Chrysler and GM receive only $1 per year. How many American jobs will that create versus how many jobs can be saved by granting loans to domestic automakers?
Leaders of various states in America understand that granting financial incentives to foreign automakers will create jobs. On the other hand, some leaders in Washington can't comprehend that loans to GM, Ford and Chrysler could save jobs. Why not treat America's domestic automakers like they were foreign companies?
-- Kermit C. Beck, Westlake Village

The athletes who compete for the colleges within the Ventura County Community College District are being discriminated against. They are being made to do something that the students who do not participate in athletics are not required to do.
As of fall 2008, all athletes must provide an official copy of their high school transcript in order to be eligible for participation. At first glance this seems like a reasonable measure, and it is. But, there is a problem.
The catalogs of the three county colleges clearly state the transcript requirements for all students enrolling. The catalogs say: "All new students are required to have their past transcripts sent if they have attended high school in the last three years." The colleges have not been asking all students for transcripts, although it states that they do in the college catalogs.
This requirement is clearly not one just for athletes but for all students. The athletes at each of the county's colleges are being told that they must provide a transcript because this is a new policy. You can archive older copies of the college catalogs and see that this is not a new policy and it is definitely not a policy just for those participating in athletics.
Why are the colleges of the VCCCD not asking all students for official copies of their high school transcripts as their catalogs state? If they are not asking for transcripts of all students, then how do they know where the students are actually from? How would the colleges know if the students are residents of California and are eligible for in-state tuition? A high school transcript shows exactly where the students have been.
This comes directly from the college's catalog: "California State law requires each student applying to a California Community College to provide the information and evidence to determine residency or non-residency status." Nowhere does it state that these rules are for athletes only.
As taxpayers, we have the right to know why our dollars are being utilized to support a system that is clearly not complying with state law and is also discriminating against a single group of students based on their affiliation.
-- Jennifer Theiler, Newbury Park

Re: your Dec. 21 article, "Hatching ideas: Startup's founder helps to lead the way as Ventura Ventures Technology Center takes shape":
Hurrah for our new technology incubator! I wish we had more of our job creation money to market it everywhere. But alas, it's been committed elsewhere.
The article failed to mention that a $3 million commitment for job creation in Ventura was handed over to a venture capital firm in Santa Barbara without any requirement that the money be used to create jobs in Ventura. By handing our money for job creation over to the Santa Barbara firm with no conditions that it be used for such, we can hardly expect it to do the job for which it was intended. Perhaps it could be better used to market the incubator and move some of N. Rao Machiraju's impressive friends to Ventura.
I am thrilled to see such a promising first Ventura incubator tenant, Machiraju, founder of reQall, Inc. Machiraju is very business savvy, has terrific connections and could, along with Executive Director Alex Schneider, turn that incubator into a source of home-grown companies to create some desperately needed jobs for our citizens.
I hope they have a good marketing budget to create a real technology community. Machiraju certainly has the credentials and ability, and Schneider would be a great help. This is an exciting opportunity for Ventura.
Continuing the march to being a bedroom community, Ventura city officials recently allowed a five-acre parcel that was zoned for business to be changed to residential to create more dense commuter housing with the token empty storefronts to qualify it as a trendy new "mixed-use" project. So, there is one less place to locate an employer, but maybe we'll get another Subway sandwich shop.
Bill Watkins recently reported in the 2008 Ventura County Economic Report that more people have moved out of Ventura County than have moved in -- and the reason he gave? Lack of jobs.
I think Ventura's government needs to consider a change in direction from development to job creation. Our economy should be the number one priority of our city government; it pays for everything else. The developers were stalled past their windows of opportunity and are unable to build now. During tough economic times, companies are open to making changes if offered the right incentives.
Let's get our 25,000 commuters home to a real job. That would be really "green."
-- Camille Harris, Ventura
(The writer is president of Ventura Citizens for Responsible Development. -- Editor)
www.vcord.org

Re: Joe Howry's Dec. 21 essay, "A First Amendment fight":
As much as I admire Star Editor Joe Howry, he made a huge blunder and set the wrong example in violating Judge Ken Riley's gag order. Just about everyone I know disagrees with one law or another, but they are not so brazen as to blatantly violate a law they disagree with. That is what Howry and The Star did, plain and simple. They should be held accountable for breaking the judge's order and made to suffer the punitive consequences prescribed for ordinary citizens who violate the law.
-- Miguel Espinosa Jr., Oxnard

Re: Terry Paulson's Dec. 22 essay, "Sharing gifts with others":
This column was very insightful and thought-provoking. Jesus asks us to love one another. Paulson illustrates so clearly that we should look for opportunities to show that love by serving. He gave us life examples of people who, even in private suffering, did a noble act by reaching out to others.
It's a good message to all of us. We can make a positive difference in someone else's life, and we will be enriched by it.
-- Pearl Hammerand, Ojai

Everyone agrees that we need a bailout plan that gets credit available. Here's my plan:
Change the tax laws so people can deposit their pre-tax money into a 401(k) at their local bank. This would give banks cash to lend, give investors a choice where they could not lose money and give the community financial support. There's no Fidelity, no Prudential, no T. Rowe Price -- no stocks, no bonds, no mutual funds. There's just an account earning simple interest. There's no government bailout.
The banks would compete for people's money, helping to make for an attractive interest rate. Need a car loan? Borrow against your 401(k) at your local bank -- no more credit freeze.
Stockbrokers say that only the stock market will keep up with inflation, but remember, the Dow Jones Industrial Average today is where it was about 10 years ago. There's no increase. It's flat. In comparison, money invested and compounded at 4 percent for those 10 years would have grown by 48 percent.
I'll bet a number of 401(k) participants wish they'd had this choice available to them a year ago.
-- Nelson Wallace, Ventura

Two weeks ago in a speech to the National Health Care Forum in Denver, Health and Human Services Secretary-designate Tom Daschle, on behalf of President-elect Barack Obama, called for local community input into the planning process for reform of the nation's dysfunctional healthcare delivery system.
In less than two weeks, the call has been answered by an ad-hoc, nonpartisan group meeting in Ventura. The group found that the current system in the U.S. provides no healthcare coverage for nearly 50 million citizens and inadequate coverage for millions more -- despite the fact that the nation spends more per person on healthcare than other developed nations where all citizens receive coverage.
It was unanimously agreed that any reform plan in the U.S. must provide universal coverage -- meaning everyone must be included -- and must be comprehensive to include dental and mental health and other essential services.
The group agreed that in order for these objectives to be realized it would be necessary to eliminate unnecessary, wasteful or unproductive functions in the system now performed by private insurance companies -- marketing, advertising, competitive promotion, etc. The government, as a single payer, would assume all administrative and financial functions.
The group approved a recommendation by Mike Weston, head of the Ventura County Progressive Society, and by Martin Jones to endorse House Resolution 676, a bill offered in Congress by Reps. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and John Conyers, D-Mich., which contains the above reform principles.
While the bill has been endorsed by 90 House members, neither of the local congressional representatives, Lois Capps or Elton Gallegly, has thus far signed on to the bill.
The group will meet again in January to discuss and offer community input on this and other issues of national concern. For further information, call Gail Hodgson at 794-0125 or Norman Eagle at 382-0969.
-- Norman Eagle, Oxnard
-- Gail Hodgson, Ventura

It was Dec. 9 and I knew I had to bust the budget and get the presents for my daughter and her family in the mail. My son-in-law is in the Navy and stationed in Guam.
I gathered up the two boxes, one for each granddaughter and the gift for Jeni and Josh that I would have to buy another box for, and off I went to the UPS store close to my house. After three trips, I had everything in the store to mail.
We found the correct box for the gift, and as I filled in labels, the owner weighed the boxes. Priority mail was way out of reach, so I asked him for the cheapest way to send them. He said for all three it would be $111.09.
After I got over the shock, I told him I only had $50 and I would need to go get more money. I went outside and called my husband and told him what the cost was. He said he didn't have any more cash until he got paid and that I would have to get the boxes back and mail them later.
As I walked back into the store I was crying, knowing we might not be able to get the boxes mailed in time for Christmas. I told the owner I would have to take the boxes back as I didn't have enough money to mail them. He handed me the first one and I headed to my car. When I approached the store for box two, he was at the door and told me to go get the box, that he would mail them anyway. I said, "You don't have to do that," and he said he felt bad, to which I replied, "It isn't your fault." He just repeated his request to go get the other box. I got it and entered the store, and he told me to pay him what I had and to pay the rest next month or whenever I had the money.
I was now crying, not because of the money but because of the kindness of this man. He didn't know me and it wasn't like I was a few bucks short -- I had less then half the cost.
I have since paid the balance, but it will take a lifetime to repay the kindness.
Our country is filled with bad news of lost jobs and homes and businesses closing. It won't be the Senate or the Congress that fixes things. It will be people like the owner of the store who will get this country back on track.
Thank you seems so small, but to the owner of that store, please know I will never forget your kindness.
-- Janice Wilding, Ventura

Re: your Dec. 20 article, "Attorney general rebukes Proposition 8":
If Attorney General Jerry Brown will not defend a proposition passed by the people of California, as is his duty under the constitution of this state, then he should step aside and let someone else in his office carry out those duties.
His other choice, since he considers this a matter of conscience, is to resign.
If he does neither, then he should be impeached.
-- Benedict Lucchese, Camarillo

Re: your Dec. 20 commentary, "Global cooling brings early white Christmas":
First, let me thank The Star for printing some good news for a change. The only problem is, The Star buried it in the commentary section and it should have been on the front page in bold-faced letters.
"Global cooling brings early white Christmas": Now that is good news for a change! This article exposes the global warming group for what it is trying to do to the American people in higher taxes and more rules and regulations to govern us by.
Second, if The Star was really interested in informing the public about what is happening to their lives, it would print more articles like this one and also have some of its own reporters digging out the truth on the global warming hoax. The Star doesn't have to dig too deep to find out a whole lot of stuff about this hoax.
-- Bob Moeller, Oxnard

Re: your Dec. 15 editorial, "Prison abuse started at the top":
This subject has been talked about and written about many, many times in the past, but we as a civilized nation that fights for human rights in countries where they are trampled upon should face this again and again -- and face it head-on so we don't fall into such a trap again.
In the words of Sen. John McCain, "These policies are wrong and must never be repeated." Instead of abolishing the policy, it was watered down.
The editorial is very revealing, but we still do not know all the facts. How did we condone it? To face it, it is important to understand the meaning and effect of torture on a living being, be it human or animal. Torture is defined as a deliberate and sustained assault on the integrity of the human person with mental and physical demise of that person, and the destruction of his sense of trust. Abuse an animal and watch it go into hiding with its head down.
Torture is evil and immoral and cannot be justified. Torture is horrific. It is a demoralizing practice, and to face it is daunting, but if we don't face it head-on, it will lead to apathy and despair.
-- Ghanim M. Elias, M.D., Oxnard

I have been following the auto bailout and have read the foolish letters blaming the union for the problems.
First of all, United Auto Workers members do not make $70 per hour. They make in the $25 range. Entry level is $14 an hour.
The UAW has made concession after concession to greedy executives, even picking up the tab for many things the company has agreed to pay.
Is $25 an hour too much for a working man with a family who has been on the job 15 or 20 years? What should he make?
The Republican Party has always hated organized labor. Look back. They were against even child labor laws.
While I am aware of some of the same greed that exists in unions, let us not forget blood was shed to gain the right to organize, to get eight-hour days, vacations, sick days, etc. People died for these rights.
The fact is the labor cost per auto is 8 percent. That's not much. Labor plus parts is 26 percent. That leaves 74 percent per auto. Where do you suppose it comes from? Maybe it's the nine corporate jets General Motors owns or countless chartered flights or the millions in salary and stock options they give themselves. Or maybe it's the 14 layers of management.
I am not saying the UAW shouldn't make yet another compromise, but to blame this on the working man is just not right. The situation is clearly management's fault. Workers have no say in what kinds of cars are made and how it comes down the line and when it reaches them. They perform their assigned task like any other working person.
While I agree healthcare is a costly problem -- hopefully one that will be addressed by the new administration -- should workers not have medical plans?
Check out all the shady deals that were made in those Southern states to bring Toyota, Volkswagen, BMW, etc. there. After the UAW is crushed, they will start working on the workers in these plants also.
Shall we go back to 16-hour days, no breaks, no vacation, child labor and horrible working conditions? I think not.
-- Frank Colletto, Simi Valley

Re: The Rev. Betty Stapleford's Dec. 17 commentary, "Equality falls victim to a political agenda":
The good reverend laments over the passage of Proposition 8. She says she will continue to marry same-sex couples in her church and will continue to support her cause.
She seems to be blaming the passage of Proposition 8 on the religious right. Yes, they voted for it. I would imagine that any form of orthodox Christian church would support Proposition 8.
She does not mention the overwhelming minority vote. They would normally have a liberal view but chose to vote for Proposition 8. But it is so much easier to place all the blame on the Christian Church, which continually denies equality and compassion to those poor, same-sex, would-be spouses.
Perhaps instead of blaming traditional Christians, she should look to a few words from her Bible: Matthew 6:33 "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God."
As for any homosexual who truly wants to be equal to a heterosexual in marriage: If you are male, marry a woman. If you are a woman, marry a man.
-- Tim Robbins, Thousand Oaks

What goes around comes around. So Janice DiFatta and Debbie Sandland are shocked that Debbie was passed over for president of the Simi Valley Unified School District board. Obviously, their definition of "recent memory" does not go all the way back to 2004, when they broke protocol and denied me and Carla Kurachi our turns as board president and clerk. They taught Rob Collins well that the leadership decision is purely political. I'm sure he remembers back that far.
By the protocol, Eric Lundstrom should have been clerk last year. Apparently, they forgot that part of it then, but now they conveniently remember the rules. I don't know how they each can make the statements they made without being afraid of being struck by lightning for twisting the truth.
It gives me some hope to see the board escape from the path those two have chartered. We have a good district, but it needs leadership to make it what it can be -- a great district. That means change, and the two of them have been there so long they don't even understand the need for change. They have become so embedded in the status quo that they take any suggestion for change as a personal affront. Well, times have changed, and the district needs to as well.
So, congratulations to President Lundstrom, and keep up the good work. You can now chart a new course for the district that will improve it for years to come. Good luck.
-- Greg Stratton, Simi Valley
(The writer was a board member from 2002 to 2006. -- Editor)

Re: your Dec. 20 Pa Ventura item, "To sign makers":
I respect Pa's request to leave Christ in Christmas; however, replacing it with an X doesn't remove Christ at all.
As a biblical studies major, I have learned many things about the new testament and the Christmas story. First, the New Testament was written in Greek. The word Christ is not a translation, but a transliteration, just changing the letters from Greek to English. The word Christ, ΧÏ?ιστός (Khristós), becomes Christ.
When scribes were handwriting copies of the gospels, to abbreviate ΧÏ?ιστός, they would simply use the first letter, Χ. Believe me, if you had to hand-write all of that, you would abbreviate too.
For someone who didn't know this, it would be a curious thing to abbreviate Christmas with Xmas. It doesn't make any sense, really. Many people do this not meaning to "cross out the whole meaning of the holiday season," I would hope. But an informed abbreviator, and an informed reader, realizes it's just the old -- 2,000-year-old -- old-fashioned way to write it.
Merry Christmas!
-- Jeremy Zeller, Moorpark

Re: your Dec. 21 article, "Park District seeks to fill board vacancy":
I read about the resignation of Conejo Recreation and Park District Director Mike Berger in The Star. One part of me is really, really happy while the other, the selfish side, is really, really sad.
I'm ecstatic because Mike and Carol are moving to Texas to be with their kids and families and I know how thrilled they'll be in the middle of all that laughing, bouncing, hugging and loving! But I'm big-time bummed out that the Conejo is losing one of its great sentinels -- and not just one who helped create the most envied park system in the nation, or worked tirelessly for a quarter century to secure and preserve our incredibly beautiful environment and open space. I'm also talking about one who made a life's work framing the minds and futures of our children as a local educator and administrator.
Individuals like this are impossible to replace, the distinction of their efforts impossible to define. The quiet selflessness of their actions often leaves those of us more prone to sideline-sitting in moments of self-introspection.
But, so be it then! Off to Texas with you Bergers, and I pray the transition from bunnies to armadillos is a smooth one for the two of you as your amazing journey continues! But as you roll, Mike, take a long look over your shoulder toward the giant footprint you leave behind here in the Conejo Valley -- and smile with pride that it's big enough for our future generations to see where you walked while you were here.
-- Tim Heyne, Thousand Oaks

Where are Keith Richman and Joe Canciamilla when we need them? They were termed out after three terms each.
Richman, a Northridge Republican, and Canciamilla, a Pittsburg Democrat, were the only two Assembly members who would step away from the partisanship that has plagued the California budget process for years. They both stood up to their respective party leaders, saying that we need a real budget, not partisan gridlock. Their belief was that they should be answerable to the people, not the parties.
I always vote against term limits because they take away fine legislators as well as the problem ones. If the voters are tired of their elected officials, they have the opportunity to vote them out.
Pay attention, California. What are your elected legislators doing to handle the budget and the "economic recovery plan?" How are you going to vote in 2010?
-- Gary E. White, Simi Valley

I recently read a car magazine that had an advertisement for Chevrolet. It stated that the new Chevrolet Corvette could accelerate from 0 to 128 mph in a quarter of a mile.
Is this really the company that we should be bailing out with billions of dollars? It is illegal to travel that fast in America, so why advertise it?
The California Highway Patrol had a sign on their cars a few years ago that said, "55 Saves Lives." Let's live with that.
-- Michael J.E. Burge, Ventura

On Dec. 17, I had occasion to drive past College Park at 11:30 a.m. There was a large gathering of city vehicles there. I made a U-turn to get a closer look. As I entered, two police black and whites exited, and two remained parked unattended. I counted 64 vehicles, most with Parks Division emblems on their doors. The majority were pickups with trailers containing tools and equipment.
I went home and called the Parks Division. The woman who answered could not explain what I had seen, but she promised a supervisor would call me to explain. I called the Police Department to learn no police vehicle had been dispatched to College Park. There was no one at the City Council offices to take my call, and the City Manager's Office promised I would get a call from "someone." All I got was the woman from the Parks Division who said she thought it was a Christmas party.
I am sending this letter to various Oxnard city officials in hopes of learning the entire cost of the event, including personnel, vehicle and equipment; who authorized the event; and the department or departments that are being charged for it.
Of course, City Manger Ed Sotelo and Police Chief John Crombach were the main aggressors asking for a new tax hike. Is this what the money is designated for?
The city collects $80,000 per quarter for citations issued to residents on street-sweeping day and collects $31.50 each from senior citizens who have difficulty removing their trash barrels from the street right away. Residents have an obligation to inquire about questionable expenditures as well as questionable fees.
Sotelo doesn't feel the city is obligated to adjust residents' trash rates on those several occasions when street sweeping isn't performed or when our trash isn't picked up, yet he will not budge from punishing us when he has the opportunity.
I wonder what it would be like if our city leaders "didn't care."
I hope Irene Pinkard and Bryan MacDonald will not fuse into the "good ol' boys club" and become as hardened toward residents as Sotelo and Crombach have.
-- Miguel Espinosa Jr., Oxnard

One classic definition of insanity is repetitious application of a "solution" that has not worked on any previous application.
As we see our economy deteriorate, largely due to poor credit decisions by businesses as well as individuals, our state Legislature wants to continue spending money that does not exist. The "solution?" Tax the same people who are already struggling so they have less to spend. This will obviously mean less buying, more failing businesses and a shrinking tax base.
This grand "solution" comes from those whose salaries, benefits and perks continue regardless of their impractical proposals.
There is only one long-term solution to budget problems. It is the same one that the average citizen is forced to use: Stop spending and learn to live on what you have.
California has always prided itself on being on the leading edge. It is time for senators and assemblymen to become real leaders and apply a simple but effective solution:
Don't spend what you don't have.
-- Ron Goldsborough, Camarillo

Re: Ruben Navarrette's Dec. 18 essay, "Detailed account, please":
It is rare that I agree with Navarrette; still, his essay was excellent.
There is something about Barack Obama that remains mysterious, and for reasons only known by him and a select few, he chooses to remain shrouded in secrecy.
Rumors abound about his mother and father and where he was born. His paternal grandmother swears she was at his birth. Wayne Madsen, a journalist with Online Journal, published an article on June 9, 2008, stating that a research team went to Mombasa, Kenya, and located a certificate registering the birth of Barack Obama Jr. at a Kenya maternity hospital, to his father, a Kenyan citizen and his mother, a U.S. citizen. I read the headlines of a Kenyan-African newspaper when he won the Democratic primary proclaiming, "Kenyan-born Obama makes history." Nonetheless, we are told Obama was born in Hawaii. Obama and his sister reference two different hospitals in Honolulu as his birthplace. Which of those is right?
Was Obama adopted by his stepfather? It is documented in Indonesia that his name is (was?) Barry Soetoro and he was (is?) a citizen of Indonesia and his religion is (was?) Islam.
On April 8, 2008, while speaking at a fundraiser in San Francisco, Obama mentioned his travel to Pakistan when he was 20 years old. If he is a U.S. citizen, how did he get a U.S. passport to travel to Pakistan in 1981? The U.S. was not issuing passports for travel to Pakistan in 1981. Did he travel on another passport?
As Navarette said, "Wouldn't it be nice if we could have fewer assurances and more facts?"
I know many of you are saying, "Get over it, these allegations are inappropriate." But again, in Navarette's words, "Who decides what is inappropriate? ... What's inappropriate is that so many people seem intent on making either far too much of this matter, or far too little of it, when we don't know enough to decide either way."
U.S. newspapers and U.S. courts have refused to investigate any of these discrepancies, and we the people are supposed to nod our heads in unison that none of this is important. Well, it is important!
How did Obama come to political prominence in Chicago and in Illinois? Much of that is a mystery too, and he has been treated with kid gloves when he skirts an answer.
What did he do as a senator? Navarette hit the nail on the head when he said, "The Senate seat doesn't belong to Obama, who was barely in it long enough to warm it, but it belongs to the people of Illinois."
Well, folks, the presidency belongs to the people of the United States, and for that reason, Obama needs to come clean on a lot of the mystery surrounding his life. He is our president, and if he wants us to unite around him, he owes it to all people to be more forthright in his life.
I recall him saying that John McCain was a Washington insider and that it would be business as usual if McCain were elected. We needed change! Have you noticed all those Washington insiders filling up Obama's cabinet? Maybe he has "changed" his mind about us needing change!
Frankly, I wish he would change and reveal the facts about these and other mysteries surrounding him.
-- Bruce Tabor, Ventura

I find the notion that 15 people can hold a state with approximately 38 million people hostage absolutely preposterous, but it is happening.
Our current economic woes have been exacerbated by the Republican side of the state Senate, which involves 15 state senators who have not only taken but adamantly adhere to the Grover Norquist's promise to not raise taxes regardless of the circumstances. And who is Grover Norquist? Not the friendly character on Sesame Street, nor the second coming of a former president. Nope, Norquist is a Harvard-educated guy who appears to be like Karl Rove, a behind-the-scenes Rasputin who, when he speaks, certain people listen.
Back to California. Our elected officials in the state Senate may believe in this philosophy, but they are not representing their constituents by holding the state budget back because they refuse to do what is best for this time. Yes, we do need to cut programs. Yes, we need to provide economic stimulus. And yes, we need to find revenue, not only by raising taxes but through other ways as well -- and those opportunities are available!
Since California is one of three states that follow the two-thirds majority -- Rhode Island and Mississippi are the other two -- it means that until we change it, this group of extremists will block what is necessary. Why? Because they have taken the pledge, and if they break it, they won't get re-elected.
That drives us to the real importance of why many who run for an office don't really care what the populous wants and needs. They just want to get to a position of power so that after they are elected, the next important thing is to prepare to get re-elected!
People of California: Stop this insanity. We have a budget crisis that will get worse if we do not put a stop to this madness. Like the character in the Oscar-winning film "Network" shouted from his window: "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore."
-- Chip Fraser, Ventura

The simplest way to remember to turn headlights off is simply to always turn them on when driving.
The use of headlights doesn't have any discernable effect on gas mileage, and it makes your car more visible, no matter the weather. This is why daytime "running lights" are available on some cars. When it becomes habit, the lights go on when the ignition goes on, and they go off when the ignition is turned off.
However, if the above is too radical a notion, then perhaps use the rule that I was taught when stationed in Germany: Whenever the sun is not visible, headlights are to be on. This means as soon as the sun has set beneath the horizon, on rainy and overcast days and early in the morning until the sun has risen above the horizon. The reason for the sunset and sunrise rules is that you can see to drive long after the point at which your car is invisible to others, especially when everyone else is using headlights.
Watch this evening: The last car to turn on lights disappears into the darkness long before you can no longer see to drive.
Failure to turn on headlights -- not parking lights -- at dusk increases your risk of collision substantially, especially with those whose night vision is not what it once was, which will be everyone, in time! Turning on only parking lights, besides not meeting the requirements for driving with headlights, often means people forget to change them once full darkness comes.
By the way, we might consider "parking lights" a curiosity, being an intermediate point between "off" and "on" on our headlight controls, but in Europe, where many streets are very narrow, people park with one set of tires on the sidewalk, as close to the building as possible, and leave their parking lights on as a warning to drivers. That's what they were intended for.
-- Rev. Christine Miller, Camarillo

Re: Ruben Navarrette's Dec. 18 essay, "Detailed account, please":
Fact: Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was caught on tape cursing president-elect Barack Obama for not offering anything in return for appointing Valerie Jarrett as White House senior adviser.
Fact: The FBI has stated that Obama is above suspicion.
Fact: Navarrette admits there are no facts-as-he-knows-them to tarnish Obama. However, there could be facts-as-he-would-like-them lurking out there, somewhere. But because Obama won't produce these imagined "facts," he could be guilty of something, somehow. That is, unless he comes up with "facts" to disprove Navarrette's fevered imagination. Hence, if Obama can't trot out "facts" -- because they don't exist -- then he must be guilty. Go figure.
Newt Gingrich has called the phony linkage between Obama and Blagojevich a "destructive distraction." When even moral vacuum Gingrich despises Navarrette's lack of moral fiber, you know he's gone off the rails.
Navarette belongs on trash radio, not in a respectable paper.
-- Raymond Freeman, Thousand Oaks

I find it amazing that amidst all the explicit and implicit corruption ascribed to our president-elect, Barack Obama, which the mainstream media will not investigate by choice and the will of their Democratic-liberal dark masters, that even our electors and the Supreme Court have cowed to "change" -- whatever liberal Saul Alinsky-esque end that actually is -- and simply not held Obama accountable.
We've seen his "certification of live birth," which was vouched for by Annenberg -- the same Annenberg for which Obama was once a member/leader.
However, to the point, has anyone actually proven that he was born in the United States, a critical constitutional requirement for the office of the presidency? Is Obama so "Teflon" that he needs to hire three law firms, instead of just showing the document? Columbia and Harvard will not honor federal subpoenas to disclose Obama's school records, so we cannot disprove that Obama might have attended on a foreign scholarship as an Indonesian national.
Where is the rule of law? Is it now politically incorrect or morally wrong to actually verify people's credentials?
How many people are going to just keep saying the emperor is clothed when he is not? Is this the "change" and "hope" people want? Even our electors this week are certifying for president a man who has not proven he was born in the United States nor constitutionally qualified. This could truly be a Watergate-level cover-up.
Obama was supposed to make us look better in the eyes of the world, but read this: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/106778-Amazing_Obama-0
This is a constitutionally disgraceful day in America, and our electors, like our liberally led government since 2006 and our liberal mainstream media, also have betrayed us in this alleged cover-up.
-- Jonathan Mirabile, Simi Valley

No bailout, please. Chrysler, Ford and General Motors must be allowed to file Chapter 11 bankruptcy to escape the United Auto Workers legacy contracts, to build a viable business plan and to purge their incompetent management structures. It's inconceivable to many of us out here that management was not aware that they were in deep doo-doo until three months before they went broke. They must have seen the handwriting on the wall long before that. They are simply opportunists who want to participate in the "great giveaway" and the further socialization of America.
Why should any American making less than $70 an hour be required to finance the UAW? Let them pay the price for a failed enterprise.
-- Bill Gourlay, Westlake Village

Re: your Dec. 17 article, "Restaurant complaints spur review of permit":
When the nightclub Candlelight opened for business, I suspected trouble. The patronage quickly grew, and so have the problems associated with most large bars or nightclubs. Traffic issues, noise and dozens and dozens of cars leaving around 2 a.m., not to mention many fights and even gunfire, have been reported. There were 74 calls for service this year from local law enforcement, paid for by our taxpayers, and right in the middle of a quiet residential neighborhood!
Some improvements have been made, such as valet-only parking on site and shuttle service to the parking lot at Simi Valley High School. But wait, did I say improvements? Only after numerous complaints did the owners respond to pressure from the community. And now, as the number of customers grows, so do the associated problems, and so, more concessions? Like a powerful new sound system pumping out deafening bass tones in the middle of the night? That will appease the local residents for sure!
I feel sorry for the residents who bought their homes nearby having to put up with noise and traffic at all hours of the night. Is this what they opted for when they moved to the quiet safety of the community of Simi Valley? I don't think so!
But what I found more interesting was the bit about the campaign contributions to Barbra Williamson. She received $3,000 from the club's primary owner, Glen Gerson, and $8,000 from the "people who work there?" Williamson is a known advocate of community improvement, and relating to this issue, is well-known for her stance against the issuance of additional local liquor licenses and implementing restrictions on new businesses that serve alcohol and, hence, the associated issues that come with those issuances.
So why would "the people who work at the Vineyards" want to scrape together $8,000 to contribute to a local politician? Aren't we talking bartenders, cocktail waitresses and other staff? I didn't know they made that much money.
And why is this bar allowed to continue to do business with the obviously negative impact to our local community?
Do we really need the tax revenue from this place so badly? My guess is it's costing us more than we take in in police protection and valuable wasted time of our community leaders to address these issues.
Awhile back I did my own survey. I drove around the parking lot and observed the license plate holders on the cars parked in the parking lot there. Very few were from Simi Valley. Most were from dealerships in Oxnard, Ventura and the San Fernando Valley.
So then I went inside. The place was loud and packed. I'm 6-foot-3, and I felt intimidated. Yes, there were security people there, but far too few to handle any major fight that might have broken out. The tension in the air was obvious. Then a fight broke out! I got the heck out of there.
Councilman Steve Sojka has it right on! What the heck is going on?
-- Bud Hall, Simi Valley

Re: Sarrah Terry's Dec. 17 letter, "Don't bail out a union":
Terry writes, "Franklin D. Roosevelt had the wisdom and guts to handle the Great Depression."
According to the online Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 1939 the unemployment rate was 17.05 percent. I am tired of hearing from everyone, especially the media, about how FDR saved us with the New Deal. He didn't get us out of the Depression. World War II did.
-- Ralph Mauriello, Moorpark

Re: Armando Cardenas' Dec. 17 letter, "How about 'union'?"
Cardenas writes, "The union of two same-sex individuals should not be called marriage, because it will be offensive to all the married couples." Cardenas' arrogance is amazing in that he seems to feel that what offends him will offend all the married couples.
Just for the record, for those of you keeping score, my spouse and I welcome the day that same-gender couples can celebrate love and affirm their love in a marriage ceremony in California.
Shame on those who continue to preach their hate and bigotry in the name of their god.
-- Dee Dee Williams, Moorpark

Now's the time to get rid of this dog once and for all and do what that Iraqi journalist attempted but failed to do: Boot Bush out of here.
With a cry of, "This is a gift from the Iraqis. This is the farewell kiss, you dog," He threw two of his boots at President George Bush during a news conference. What a novel approach! We Americans suffered eight dog years of cowering and sniping around the issue of his incompetency instead of taking direct action and just booting him and trying to hound him out of office.
So let's all throw a boot at Bush! You, too, can join the mass movement and try to hit Bush with a boot. Make his life in D.C. miserable by shipping your used boots/shoes to the White House with instructions to "Throw them at the dog!"
Maybe "heel" get the hint and turn tail and run before his term is over! One can only hope.
-- Jeff Ross, Ventura

Should Americans throw shoes at President Bush? No, they should throw pink slips. They should march in every city and town. They should protest in front of the White House and all federal buildings.
Where are the brave voices of yesteryear? Of course we should show our outrage at Bush and Co. for ravishing and destroying our economy and image around the world.
But, wait. We have more pressing matters on our minds. What celebrity is divorcing? What has become of the "American Idol" winner or runner-up?
There is a price for failing to take an active role in the conduct of our government. It took a brave Iraqi reporter to show us the way.
-- Bernard Lehrer, Ventura

The dire events and national dysphoria gripping us of late have turned this country into one big, unhappy face. Sometimes, we all need that rare, lighthearted moment to lift us out of the doldrums, albeit for a brief time. Here is my foray into necessary humor, a top 10 list of things to do for President-elect Barack Obama upon entering the White House:
10. Scrap that awful Texas interior for authentic Kenyan décor and tribal artifacts.
9. Throw away all gilded ashtrays used by deceased Russian presidents.
8. Learn to make gourmet chicken schnitzel, Swiss cheese, lettuce and mayo sandwiches for the girls.
7. Set aside an exclusive phone line for Her Royal Highness Oprah.
6. Start thinking Camp David instead of the South Side for R & R.
5. Designate a "scream and rage" room for hothead chief of staff.
4. Write a weekly memo to self to give Vice-President Joe Biden something to do. He's looking awfully bored lately.
3. Help the unemployed and sift through those thousands of resumes for White House dog poop scooper.
2. Appoint the combustible Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich as special envoy to Iran, sit back and watch the fireworks! My money is still on Ahmadinejad.
1. Whatever you do, keep Secretary of State Hillary Clinton away from speechwriter Jon Favreau.
-- Maya Teague, Camarillo

Fearing repercussions in the next election, the Ventura City Council has acted to repeal the ill-conceived 911 tax. Good for them. Now it's up to us, as city residents and voters, to take our own action before it's too late and they have time to foist another tax upon us to replace this one.
I personally look forward to the next City Council election when I will have the ability and pleasure to vote against any incumbent I see on the city ballot. Good riddance to the 911 tax and good riddance to this City Council. We can afford them no longer.
-- Roger C. Clarke, Ventura

At the outset, I want to make it clear that I bear no animosity toward homosexual couples. The fact that they enjoy sex in a unique way is their business, and they certainly have the right to do so. However, I must admit that I am probably old-fashioned in my feeling that the intimate details of sexual relationships are a very personal matter, and the details of what goes on in the bedroom should be kept as a matter of privacy between the individuals and not advertised to the general public. However, to each his/her own.
That said, I find it very difficult to find any logical reason why we should rewrite the laws of our country and the Bible just because a group of people chooses to practice sex in a unique way. The gist of the argument to allow same-sex couples to marry seems to be that to prohibit this rite or right is discriminatory and unconstitutional. While it is debatable, I can't imagine that the authors of our constitution intended to write a document that legalized the institution of marriage for same-sex couples. Regarding discrimination, the rite and right to marry applies equally to all races and couples. You can't marry a person of the same sex if you are a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual couple.
The issue of love is also mentioned. Because same-sex couples cannot produce children as a result of their relationship, their sexual act is strictly for personal enjoyment. I don't see anything wrong with that, and I'm sure that friendship, affection and love develop out of some of these relationships. However, love in itself does not grant an individual the right to marry someone. Many people love their children and grandchildren as much as, and maybe in some cases even more than, their wives, but they can't marry them.
Moreover, the domestic partnership act grants homosexual couples the same legal rights that married couples have, so I don't see any basis for a discrimination argument.
The bottom line is, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
-- Al Knuth, Camarillo

It seems that our country over the years has lost awareness of the fact that senators make major decisions that shape the course of American lives. The most qualified individuals are those who have had administrative experiences, such as governors who have actually run the business of their state or individuals from the business sector.
The current selection process is flawed. There are governors who are selling their Senate seats, Senate seats occupied by the unqualified spouses of deceased senators and individuals who have a "platinum name" being considered for the position.
Such is the case with the recent suggestion that Caroline Kennedy should be the replacement for Hillary Clinton as senator of New York. Kennedy's only credentials are her immediate access to President-elect Barack Obama and years devoted to charitable works.
In these times, when senators are making major financial decisions that relate to billion-dollar bailouts, senators should be qualified to read and understand an income statement and balance sheet. The United States is a business and should be run as such. Nearly all of the states are currently running deficits with limited access to financial solutions. It is time that our process affords us the ability to select leaders armed with practical experience who can direct us to workable solutions.
-- Dan Scully, Oxnard

Re: Sharon Grosskopf's Dec. 16 letter, "About charity," and Gary Marshall's Dec. 12 letter, "Tell me a happy story":
A good friend, more than once, has told me, "Kindness begets kindness."
It's a simple and sweet statement that is superbly echoed by Grosskopf's letter. In reporting her wonderful experience, she passes on a message of kindness and peace that, hopefully, will rub off on many. Some may feel that I'm about to make a bit of a long, ideological reach here, but I believe it's time to take total advantage of this type of self-perpetuating positive energy.
Even with times as hard as they currently are, many of us feel a new light shining on us with the upcoming presidential inauguration. I also firmly believe that the prospect of "change" can be realized and initiated at all socioeconomic-political levels -- from a burger stand patio to the White House and everywhere in between.
We need more stories of peace and kindness; more letters, essays, poems, songs.
I, too, agree with Marshall's idea of a positive news page. If The Star would devote one whole page to good news (The Good News Page) my spirit would soar to think of the momentum it would create as we embark on this new, light-filled era of positive change.
Kindness begets kindness and peace begets peace. And the only war now worth fighting is the war against humanity's inhumanity to humanity.
Bless you, Sharon and Gary.
-- Joe Paquin, Fillmore

Re: your Dec. 16 obituary, "Onik Arian: former St. John's Pleasant Valley ER doctor, 61":
As a member of the Ventura County medical community and a personal friend, I was deeply saddened to hear of the tragic passing of Dr. Onik Arian. He was one of the first physicians that I had contact with when I started my career in Camarillo some 21 years ago. My respect for this wonderful human being is beyond words. His knowledge and caring for his patients was an inspiration for my approach to my own practice. I am proud to count Dr. Arian among my friends, and I think that I speak for many physicians in the county when I say that I will greatly miss him. The world has lost one of its best.
-- William Bocash, M.D., Camarillo

Re: your Dec. 16 article, "Judge lifts temporary gag order; Star asserts right to publish immediately":
I thank The Star for stepping forward to assert our essential liberty of press freedom by publishing essential information regarding the Calvin Sharp case. Public scrutiny of all activities of our public officials must be relentless and pursued with commitment. The Star is upholding the finest traditions of journalism in the public service.
Most Americans are not aware of the essential role of the press in our history. Active communication to assert our shared mistrust of any public officials who seek to take action without the active involvement of the public, such as taking a stand against "taxation without representation," is a building block of our nation. The Bill of Rights was added to our Constitution when it became clear that essential liberties were again under attack, the same liberties for which Americans had fought and died in the Revolutionary War. There are always those who seek to operate in secret, out of the public eye, to advance their own power, status and wealth. The Bill of Rights helps us to defend ourselves against those advancing themselves with no regard for "the public welfare" that our Constitution seeks to protect. We must always seek to illuminate the machinations of such individuals by informing the public and encouraging public participation in judging whether the public interest is served or at risk.
Our criminal justice system is also flawed, despite the efforts of many dedicated public officials in law enforcement and judicial service. Bringing information to the public so that the system is persistently under scrutiny, without sensationalism or bias, is the public trust served by journalists in the media. I am proud that my local newspaper, The Star, is committed to such service in fine tradition of American journalism as a guardian of liberty and truth.
-- B. Channing Hillway, Ventura

The Washington Post revealed that restrictions against using bailout monies for CEO compensation were evaded by a single sentence inserted by the Bush administration and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs.
Thus, we find that despite the fact that Merrill Lynch lost $11 billion this year before being sold to Bank of America, former Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain, who received $85 million in executive compensation in 2007, now has his sights on another $10 million from the bailout monies.
The only favorable provision in the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program fund was the fact that one-half ($350 billion) could not be released without further congressional approval.
Congress must not release one dime of those funds before Bush and Paulson leave office. Indeed, it should not release one dime of that money to either Wall Street or the banks, and should, instead, redirect it to the stimulus package and mortgage relief for homeowners.
The insanity of sitting back while these "thieves in high places" raid the national treasury must come to an end now!
-- Ernest A. Canning, Thousand Oaks

Re: DeAnna Brown's Dec. 17 letter, "Thanking Bush":
Brown thinks President George Bush deserves "thanks" because "freedom in the Middle East is bringing hope and prosperity and 2,652 days without terror on our own soil."
This is ludicrous.
Of the 20 countries generally considered as comprising the Mideast only two -- Israel and Turkey -- are ranked as "free" or "partly free" by the authoritative Freedom House organization, which was founded in 1941. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq makes even the "partly free" list.
A 2008 Zogby poll of attitudes in the Middle East shows more than 80 percent of Arabs surveyed have unfavorable views of the U.S. under Bush; 65 percent reject Brown's notion that the U.S. promotes freedom or hope in the Middle East; 50 percent believe that the American-led Middle East peace process will fail; and 30 percent sympathize with al-Qaida's fight against the U.S. That doesn't sound very hopeful to me.
As to "prosperity," suffice it to say that even Fox News has given up that canard.
And as to "keeping us safe," 3,119 days elapsed between the 1993 and 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, which, by Brown's logic, "obviously" means President Bill Clinton was much better at keeping us safe than Bush. Did she thank Clinton when he left office?
Indeed, an even greater number of days might well have passed "without terror on our own soil" had the Bush administration paid attention to the 52 warnings received by the Federal Aviation Administration between April and September 2001 that terrorists were seeking to hijack commercial airplanes and conduct suicide operations or to the August 6, 2001, presidential briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."
Thanks, President Bush.
-- Russell Burgos, Thousand Oaks

Re: your Dec. 11 article, "Judge blocks murder case story":
Regarding Ventura County Superior Court Judge Ken Riley's ridiculous gag order, we citizens need to remember him at the voting booth. Every judge in the United States must uphold the spirit and the letter of our Constitution at all times. This guy can no longer be trusted to do that. The next time he is up for affirmation, vote him out.
-- Greg Rudebusch, Moorpark

We would like to acknowledge U.S. Rep. Elton Gallegly and his assistant manager, Paula Sheil, for their assistance regarding our difficulty with processing Medicare claims.
Due to a number of circumstances beyond our control, we had not been able to submit claims to Medicare for almost 11 months. Because of the financial burden this caused, we were seriously considering "opting out" from Medicare. Thanks to Gallegly's intervention, we have now been able to resume seeing our Medicare patients, many of whom have been with our practice for 35 years.
Gallegly's invaluable assistance has demonstrated that he is truly interested in the health and welfare of his constituents. At a time when many of us have lost faith in our government, it is both gratifying and reassuring that we have a voice here in Ventura County.
On behalf of our many Medicare patients, we would like to thank Gallegly and his staff for their continuing support.
-- Stephen J. Gomberg, M.D., M. Ronald Pizitz, M.D., WestOaks Orthopaedic Associates, Thousand Oaks

Re: your Dec. 7 article, "Long arm of the law has a hand extended":
I read with interest The Star's article about the couple who neglected to pay traffic tickets and were angry when the fines were deducted from their tax refund.
Whatever happened to accepting responsibility for your own behavior? The article portrayed them as victims and the court system as villains. The prevailing attitude seems to be to get away with as much as possible. Just because the tickets were several years old doesn't mean they should be ignored.
Good for the Ventura County court system for going after these fines. It seems to be more successful than Los Angeles and Santa Barbara in collecting past due fines.
-- Joan Cole, Thousand Oaks

Re: Bill O'Reilly's Dec. 6 commentary, "It's the time to watch Jesus versus the atheists":
Again, O'Reilly is wrong, this time on the issue of a nativity scene in the Washington State Capitol building.
Contrary to popular belief, the U.S is not a Christian nation. In the U.S., we have freedom of religion. The First Amendment "free exercise" clause gives each person the right to choose his/her own religion, or to have no religion if he/she so chooses. The First Amendment "establishment clause" prohibits the government from endorsing or promoting one religion over another, or religion in general over nonreligion.
The Christmas holiday has both religious and secular aspects. The religious aspects include things like nativity scenes, baby Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the three wise men. The secular aspects include things like Santa Claus, with his sled pulled by eight tiny reindeer (nine counting Rudolph), decorated trees and Frosty the Snowman.
Our government's designation of Christmas as a holiday is legal only insofar as it endorses and promotes only the secular aspects of Christmas. Inclusion of a nativity scene on government property steps over this line. The only remedies to restore legality are to remove the nativity scene from government property, include displays of other religions and philosophies along with the nativity scene or discontinue Christmas as a government holiday.
Under the circumstances, I think that Gov. Christine Gregoire made a good decision.
-- Charles A. Wilson, Oxnard

Re: Elton Gallegly's Dec. 14 commentary, "Sense of entitlement threatens economy":
Reading Gallegly's rant blaming all of America's economic woes on illegal aliens and union workers was very enlightening. It should show all the voters in the 24th District how totally out of touch with reality he is.
The reality is that we have had eight years of domestic policy based on "good old boy" cronyism that has run amok in America with absolutely no oversight. During these eight years, Gallegly has been the number one cheerleader for this financial raping of our country by voting in lock step with every failed Bush policy -- just as he had been instructed to do in his Republican National Committee playbook.
At least the majority of people in the 24th District had the sense enough to vote for President Barack Obama so we Democrats do have some voice in Washington. It is just too bad that they also voted in Tony Strickland, an Elton Gallegly wannabe, to "represent" Democrats in my area. This leaves us voiceless on the state level.
In some ways, I feel bad for Gallegly. With the total rout of his party in November, his small minority has no real leader to tell him how to vote, and since Obama plans to throw out all the lobbyists, there will be no one in that role to instruct him either. Since he will never do as his constituents wish, he is really up a small river without means of propulsion. Perhaps he will go to flipping a coin to decide on how to vote. I almost hope he does, because then I will have more representation than I have now.
-- John Darling, Ventura

A quick question on the arrest of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich: Why was he "escorted in handcuffs" when led away? Blagojevich was unlikely to resist arrest or flee, and if he did flee, he'd be recognized and caught quickly.
The short answer to my question is that, well, cuffing is the way it's done nowadays, including cuffing and manacling a 60-something-year-old friend of mine -- a peace activist arrested for trespassing when he civilly disobeyed an order to leave a congressman's office when it closed. In that case, the sheriff significantly took care to wait until the cameras arrived before leading out this dangerous pacifist; the sheriff wanted and got the shot on the local evening news.
So part of the motivation for cuffing is desire for good, tough-on-crime public relations. Other parts are fears, but often less fear of violence and/or escape than fear of bad PR and lawsuits for discrimination and/or lawsuits for injury to an uncooperative arrestee. If you cuff everybody and treat everybody like a dangerous criminal, you won't get complaints or get sued for cuffing young blacks or Hispanics or other historically oppressed groups.
Even under a President Barack Obama, the U.S. will still be a country where most things are at least "inflected" by race. Still, we might be moving to a time where police can say again, "Will you come along quietly, or do we have to cuff you?" and use cuffs sparingly, thereby treating unconvicted, at most moderately dangerous citizens with some respect.
That would be better than treating every arrested American like a convicted felon and hazard to the arresting officers and the general public.
-- Richard D. Erlich, Port Hueneme

All "Bush bashers" and anti-war zealots should consider this: On Dec. 15, we had gone without a homeland terrorist attack for 2,652 days.
Although President George Bush has made it clear that Saddam Hussein was not connected to the 9/11 attacks, his decision to remove him from power cannot be viewed in isolation from the attacks. After the United Nations sanctions and resolutions proved ineffective, the president acted to protect the American people and liberate 25 million Iraqis. Within days of Saddam's capture, Libya's leader, Col. Moammar Gadhafi, announced that Libya had halted its weapons of mass destruction program and turned over or destroyed their centrifuges, longest-range missiles and other deadly equipment.
Bush identified a lack of freedom as the principal cause of threats coming from the Middle East. The war on terror is an ideological struggle. The president has advanced a broad vision of liberty that includes economic prosperity, quality healthcare, quality education and women's rights.
Several Arab nations have held free elections, something unheard of prior to our involvement. Women have run for office in several nations and have been named to important government positions in Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen. Trade and foreign investments have expanded. Several nations have opened universities, and Internet use has expanded sharply.
Expectations about government responsiveness are rising. People are defying the condescending view that the culture of the Middle East is unfit for freedom.
Freedom in the Middle East is bringing hope and prosperity to the Middle East and 2,652 days without terror here on our own soil.
Thank you, President Bush.
-- DeAnna Brown, Camarillo

Re: your Dec. 12 stories, "State OKs cut in emissions by 15%" and "State faces prospect of giving out IOUs":
The juxtaposition of these two excellent articles presents a classic example of why it is impossible to govern this state.
On one hand, the California Air Resources Board approved a list of anti-global warming measures that will pulverize an already teetering California economy. Two pages later, we are told that the revenue shortfall for California over the next 18 months will be a disastrous $41.8 billion because of California's poor economy. How can anyone make sense out of what's going on?
For one thing, over the last 10 years, the world temperatures have not been rising. In fact, more and more scientists, such as the Nobel laureate Ivar Gaiever, are coming to the conclusion that anthropogenic global warming is not a serious problem and that a more rational approach, such as long-term, market-driven, alternative energy programs, should be undertaken if for no other reason than to achieve energy independence.
A number of European countries that signed up for the Kyoto Protocol Treaty are now beginning to back-pedal. They are finding that the apparent benefits are not being realized while the damage to their economies is quite evident. Is there a lesson here?
-- George Niznik, Oxnard

Re: Nicholas D. Kristof's Dec. 12 essay, "A new 'secretary of food'?"
Kristof's essay may mislead consumers about high fructose corn syrup, which is a natural sweetener, made from corn, that is nutritionally the same as sugar.
The American Medical Association in June 2008 helped put to rest misunderstandings about this sweetener and obesity, stating that "high fructose syrup does not appear to contribute to obesity more than other caloric sweeteners."
Contrary to the article, high fructose corn syrup manufacturers do not receive government support payments.
Consumers can see the latest research and learn more about high fructose corn syrup at www.HFCSfacts.com and www.SweetSurprise.com.
-- Audrae Erickson, President, Corn Refiners Association, Washington, D.C.

I am a registered nurse, currently employed at Los Robles Medical Center in Thousand Oaks. I'm writing this letter because I believe the public has a right to know about some of the changes that will be taking effect in the near future at our medical facility.
The administration has decided that the hours of the nurses aides and secretaries, among others, will be cut, effective next week. The reduction in hours will have a significant effect on the level of care that the patients receive at our facility.
The proposed staff reduction will result in a demised level of care, which concerns those of us with responsibility for serving the patients. I don't think the public realizes that this change is going into effect nor the consequences of this decision.
These changes mean, for example, that there will be one aide on a 30-patient unit, for an eight-hour period of time. This aide is responsible for taking vital signs, helping patients to the bathroom, bathing patients, changing linens, feeding and turning patients, etc. The nurses on the floor already have their hands full taking care of the patients to whom they are assigned.
Patients sometimes wait hours, even days, for an available room due to a lack of staffing levels. A reduction in hour could have a catastrophic effect on patient care. These consequences include, but are not limited to, an increase in the number of patient falls and injuries, medication errors, increase in the number of bed sores, longer waiting times in the emergency room, etc.
The staff at our hospital believes that our patients deserve, and are entitled to, proper care. Imagine that it's your loved one in the hospital. Would you want your mother or father on an understaffed unit?
The staff at Los Robles genuinely cares about our patients' well-being, and we want them to receive the best care possible. We don't believe that our patients are receiving the care they need at this time, and the problem will only get worse if these aides and other staff are laid off.
Our workers -- dedicated and hard working -- have been diligently working to compromise with the administration, but to no avail. The administration unfortunately has no idea of what it's like to spend a day on one of our units, nor do they realize the amount of time and energy it requires to care for our patients.
As someone who spends several hours a day caring for the sick, I want the public to realize the changes that are occurring. I put my license on the line every day that I work. Reduced levels of staffing will negatively impact patient care. The community needs to demand a high level of care or these changes will go into effect permanently. Our hospital staff strives to maintain a good reputation in the communities that we serve, but that reputation will be negatively impacted if these draconian cuts are instituted.
Staff morale has been significantly impacted due to the lack of proper staffing and diminished support from our superiors. The administration sometimes appears more concerned with financial gain than with a prudent level of care for the patients. The community must speak out on this issue or suffer a diminished level of care.
It is up to the community to make a change.
-- Suzy Goldman, Thousand Oaks

Re: Gary Marshall's Dec. 12 letter, "Tell me a happy story":
This letter is indeed sensible. I agree that The Star should add positive news on the front page each day. We certainly do need a more rosy outlook.
-- Hazel V. Munger, Newbury Park

It is wrong, outrageous and un-American to expect non-union, jobless U.S. taxpayers to subsidize a bailout of any labor union. When a unionized entity exists only to support its bloated labor burden, innovation, creativity and viability quickly disappear.
The United Auto Workers has controlled the Big Three for decades, both CEOs and board members. Union employees enjoy lucrative pay and benefits despite economic downturns. In lock step, the Big Three continue to crank out unsalable versions of the same old basic car. Now UAW weeps and begs for our tax dollars, but on its terms.
If Detroit needs money, oust the union and its corporate dummies for a huge fiscal savings, take across-the-board 10 percent wage and benefit cuts and launch a new approach to industry.
As usual, Congress has shown neither the wits nor the stomach to conduct tough negotiations on behalf of American taxpayers. It just hands over unbelievable sums of our tax dollars gratis, no questions asked, no payback. Finger-pointing across the aisle is a tiresome habit.
This is not a partisan political issue. It is a national issue that personally affects every American taxpayer and our future economic growth. The solution is change. Franklin Roosevelt had the wisdom and guts to handle the Great Depression -- and he did it all from a wheelchair.
-- Sarrah Terry, Moorpark

Re: Joe Conason's Dec. 14 Pulse page commentary, "Dangerous bias against Detroit automakers":
I've some bad news for Conason. My tolerance for fools is wearing real thin. I didn't care that Detroit executives flew to Washington, D.C., in their corporate jets. I also don't like the idea of letting the Big Three go bankrupt. But when a manufacturer like Toyota can make a go of it with a labor hour cost of about $48 and still keep their employees happy enough that they don't go union, while Detroit spends more than $70 for the same labor hour, that tells me something.
But the real killer here is this: When I find out that one of the benefits a laid-off United Auto Workers member can expect to get is 90 percent of full pay for a period measured in years, I draw the line. If I lose a job because of hard times -- and I have -- it's, "Goodbye, and don't let the door hit you on the way out."
I no longer care a hoot if GM, Ford and Chrysler stay afloat or not. Let the UAW explain to its members why they have no job at all, if they can. There's a limit to the nonsense the taxpayers of this country will tolerate.
Then there's another little matter. In my garage I have a 1998 Toyota Camry and a 2001 Buick Le Sabre. If Conason will come take a look, I'll open up the hood on each car and show him that the metal work on the Toyota is all nicely finished, as it's done by someone who has pride in workmanship and the product that person makes and sells. Not so the Buick, where the metal looks like it was cut with a torch and not even smoothed, just painted and jammed into the vehicle. There are even little globs of metal that he torch left. I've nearly cut myself on this stuff several times. Perhaps then Conason can tell me which manufacturer I should have the greater confidence in -- the one that paid attention even to details I don't see all the time, or the one that didn't.
Our whole problem in this mess is loss of confidence. The UAW has now shown us that we can't have any confidence in their willingness to do what it takes to get through tough times. When, at the age of 69, I'm watching my retirement assets go down the drain, they can either ante up or go down the drain themselves. It's their call. I'll not cry if they make the wrong choice.
-- Roy W. Hogue, Newbury Park

Although my preference would be to allow the Big Three to go through the Chapter 11 bankruptcy process, that would be disastrous not only for U.S. companies but also for Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW and VW, all of which assemble cars in the U.S.
All those companies buy parts from U.S. suppliers. General Motors, Ford and Chrysler currently owe those suppliers $13 billion. As general unsecured creditors, they could not be paid until the closing of the bankruptcy, and they would likely receive a small percentage of their bills in cash. Very few have the ability to stay in business without the cash flow. If they go out of business, then the foreign companies cannot buy parts here.
Thus, according to Toyota and the others, if only GM went under, it would destroy all domestic assembly, whether U.S.- or foreign-owned.
Although I have opinions about possible remedies, I do not have sufficient information about potential consequences to decide on a course of action, and I am experienced enough in bankruptcy law and business insolvencies to know that there is no benefit to making decisions in haste, only to regret at leisure.
-- Raymond A. Greenberg, Thousand Oaks

Re: your Dec. 11 article, "Review of campaign financing law urged":
Councilman Steve Sojka's call for a review of Simi Valley's campaign laws is to be applauded. During the campaign he was the only incumbent who publicly stated there are problems with how the city does certain things.
As a former and likely future candidate, I can state categorically there is no way to level the playing field; incumbents will always have the edge. Mayor Paul Miller's suggestion to lower the maximum contribution per individual to $500 will not work. The amount does not matter; people will always try to find a way around restrictions. In this case, discloser laws worked.
A clarification of the language may be in order, but if the council wants to make it fairer to all candidates for local office, I would suggest limiting all outside contributions to, say, the yearly salary of the position sought. Beyond that, candidates could contribute as much as they wanted from their personal funds. After the campaign is over and all final duties are paid for, any remaining outside contributions could be donated to the organization the local office represents. Fundraising could begin on the first day following the acceptance of the candidates. This way, all candidates would enter the election season with zero dollars in their campaign funds.
These kinds of problems seldom occur in the first or second term at all levels of government. Something seems to happen to too many politicians; it is as if they come to believe the office cannot survive without them -- their importance is bigger than the office. Term limits of no more than two terms per office would go a long way to solving many of the problems this country faces. And no, we would not lose our best politicians; they would go on to different offices.
-- Daniel R. Jenkins, Simi Valley

Re: Judy Lakkis' Dec. 12 letter, "Eggs don't get baptized":
Despite what Lakkis thinks, we who believe in the sanctity of life believe that "fertilized eggs" are human beings. That is why we are also opposed to intrauterine devices.
A better solution is to give them up for adoption and let them have a chance at life. As is usual, people make "choices" upon their fears and feelings rather than on the intrinsic right or wrong of killing babies.
-- Claudia Satori, Thousand Oaks

Re: your Dec. 11 article, "Protest calls for immigration reform":
I am an immigrant who used to prepare amnesty and other immigration applications.
Activists critical of efforts to reduce illegal immigration should know that many Hispanic Americans have also been violently harmed and some were even killed by illegal aliens, although not all illegal migrants are violent criminals. Open border advocates, therefore, may be the next victims of illegal aliens.
The U.S. is bankrupt due to many of our foreign and domestic policies. More than 10 million Americans of diverse backgrounds, including many Hispanic legal immigrants, are out of work. President-elect Barack Obama should urge Congress to enact some sort of immigration moratorium good for all legal residents.
-- Yeh Ling-Ling, Oakland
(The writer is executive director of the Diversity Alliance for a Sustainable America. -- Editor)

Why doesn't the environmental impact report, or any report, evaluate the prison hospital's impact on property values?
Staff claims that property values are not negatively affected, based on the Folsom Prison real estate values, thus dismissing Camarillo residents' concerns. This report is using flawed logic. The prison existed while the housing developed around the prison. In our case, homes, schools and businesses have already been established while a proposed prison hospital is planned near homes and schools. This is the exact opposite of the Folsom report. We will be negatively impacted financially without compensation. The federal receiver will have negatively affected our property values using eminent domain. If the prison goes in, we need to be compensated.
Staff needs to review the aerial photos taken of the Camarillo location. It seems the pictures were taken at angles to eliminate the local housing development. Since staff may not have visited our area, this information -- the photos -- is misleading and makes this location seem like there's no impact on the housing. This conclusion is false.
Is staff aware that Wright Road is a two-lane county road that elementary school buses use to transport children to surrounding schools? According to the receiver's plan, Wright Road will be used for all construction traffic. This will never work.
I was surprised at the Dec. 10 meeting when Richard Stapler, spokesman for receiver J. Clark Kelso, preferred to rudely run and hide rather than stand up and answer questions. As a taxpayer, I do have the right to ask reasonable questions regarding how my tax dollars are spent. There were many people who witnessed his deplorable behavior, which we reported to the court reporter. I've never been treated so poorly by a paid public official.
Stapler did accomplish one thing on Dec. 10. He revitalized the convictions of Ventura County citizens to stop the prison hospital. Congratulations!
-- Ed Stile, Camarillo

As California nears what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has called "financial Armageddon," what's missing from the debate is a good faith effort by legislative Republicans to offer real budget solutions.
Rather than offer concrete solutions to close our budget gap and protect vital health, education and public safety services important to all Californians, Republicans have submitted what amounts to a set of ransom demands. They would use the current crisis as an excuse to delay diesel pollution and greenhouse gas reduction plans (AB32), gut environmental quality protections and even eliminate meal breaks for workers. Even if implemented, these demands move us not one dime closer to a balanced budget.
Let's get real. To close our massive $27 billion budget hole over the next two years with cuts alone, we would have to eliminate the equivalent of the entire statewide prison system as well as all support for the University of California and California state colleges.
Californians have repeatedly stated at the ballot box that they are willing to pay for critical services that maintain our quality of life. Using the historic financial crisis as an opportunity for political extortion or posturing for re-election is a failure of legislators' duties as policymakers.
Our current crisis should force the state Legislature to rise above partisanship once and for all. Let's see real budget solutions and stop holding Californians, and the laws that protect California's quality of life, hostage.
-- Anthony Rendon, Los Angeles
(The writer is the interim executive director of the California League of Conservation Voters. -- Editor)

I write to pay The Star a compliment. I learned as a child that if you are going to complain when you're dissatisfied, then you must also offer praise when you approve of something.
The Star's new look appears to me to be an efficient platform to offer the news. The features I am accustomed to remain, and the paper reacted when other readers complained about some of the changes. I laughed aloud when I read about the decision to take the comics back out of the Sports section. The argument that people in too many households wanted to read both parts of the paper at the same time could have come directly from our home!
I am aware of the rapid increases in the cost of newsprint, the cost of electricity and the slowing economy's impact on advertising. For those reasons, I know how hard it is to put out a high-quality product every day without losing money.
I congratulate The Star on its commitment to local news. As a former sportswriter and a former member of the Ventura County Board of Education, I have seen both sides of the page -- so to speak -- and I can tell you that we do not function as a democracy without a strong news media. Journalism starts at home, so thanks for being there.
-- Lee Elder, Oxnard

First, let me say that I have every hope that the Big Three will survive. But before someone attempts to bail them out, we had better know why they are failing.
The problem can be traced to government regulations. It's not safety regulations, but the Corporate Average Fuel Economy regulations that are the main problem. This current bailout will do nothing but add to their woes in the long run.
The problem is that the CAFE regulations distort the market. Let me explain. It costs almost as much to build, let's say, a Chevrolet Aveo LS as it does to build an Impala LS. The only difference is that slightly less material is used in building the Aveo. The labor and basic number of parts assembled is close to the same. But the only way they can sell enough of the Aveos to meet the CAFE standard is to sell them well below the cost to manufacture them, then hope to make up the losses by selling pickups and SUVs.
Another example is the very popular Toyota Prius. I believe it costs Toyota about $37,000 to build each Prius. But did you pay that much for your Prius? This applies to virtually all of the hybrids. It costs more to build them than they can be sold for.
As a teenager in 1964, I worked for a local Chevrolet dealer in Ojai as a lot boy. The most expensive Impala had a sticker of about $4,000. The most expensive pickup had a sticker of about $2,800. Those prices represented a true cost of manufacturing the vehicles. Of course, this was well before the CAFE regulations.
The bottom line is that CAFE regulations force the manufacturers to build and sell small cars below cost to meet the CAFE standards. Anything that Washington does that forces the automakers to distort the market with fuel economy standards will only hurt, not help.
-- James A. Verkuil, Ojai

I have a number of friends who call themselves "gay" in the modern, frivolous sense of the word. They are fine people, whom I am proud to call my friends. Further, I insist that they have, and should have, exactly the same fundamental rights that the rest of us enjoy, including the right to "marry" anyone of their choice from the opposite sex.
What to call their unisex relationship is their business, but after all, the term "marriage," over many centuries, has been pre-empted and used to describe a relationship intended to promote the orderly procreation of our species. This is much more fundamental and important than is the personal gratification of any individual.
Whatever their relationship may be named, all other subordinate rights enjoyed by married couples must certainly be extended to those in this relationship. Importantly, no stigma should be attached.
-- Hal Wilder, Camarillo

Congress sits there contemplating a bailout for the Big Three automakers, and I'm sure it will happen eventually.
Who will buy these cars? The dealers' parking lots are already full of cars waiting to be sold. Anyone thinking of buying a car will have to have a loan. Where will they get a loan? There are no loans to be had.
This is getting to be a big joke on the taxpayers, and we are just sitting here thinking they know what they are doing in Washington, D.C. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The one thing I know is that we the taxpayers are going to buy a car, but we won't be able to ever see it. The government will end up owning them all.
-- Gary L. Parker, Ventura

Re: Beverly Kelley's Dec. 10 commentary, "Celebrating 107 years of a true Nobel endeavor":
As for Kelley's worshipful piece extolling the virtues of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, let me tell the story of a little lady.
During World War II, she was a contractor hired by the Nazis to do work in the Warsaw Ghetto. She went to work every day, carrying her big toolbox and her bags of parts, driving her van with the big, mean dog in the back.
She was smuggling out Jewish babies to be handed over to Polish families for safekeeping. She would carry the infants out in her toolbox and the older children in the bags.
The dog was trained to bark and snarl whenever anybody but her opened the back of the van, like Nazi guards.
She was caught. In interrogating her to find out where the babies had gone and who had helped her, they beat her so badly that they broke both her arms and legs.
She never talked.
She survived the war, and afterwards, she dug up the records that she'd hidden, and she worked for years trying to reunite the families of those babies.
She was up for the Nobel Prize.
She lost out to a failed American politician who had used suspect pseudoscience to trumpet his environmental agenda.
Nobody can expect a politician to be a man and do the gracious thing, like step aside so that a real humanitarian and hero could win the award. But one might expect such exalted saints as the Nobel Committee to set aside their political agendas to honor a real hero.
No, I guess not.
Anyhow, this woman who didn't rate being recognized for her sacrifices died soon after the award was given, and the Nobel Committee does not grant posthumous awards.
So please forgive me if I don't share Kelley's reverence for the masters of Stockholm.
-- Stephen J. Schrader, Thousand Oaks

Instead of billions of dollars going directly to bail out General Motors and Chrysler, only to be swallowed up and disappear, the government could order billions of dollars worth of cars. That would keep autoworkers busy so they wouldn't lose their jobs or go on dole.
What to do with the cars? They could be allocated to working-age, low-income applicants who need cars or replace old cars that shouldn't be on the roads anyway.
-- Miriam Jaffe, Thousand Oaks

On a recent morning, I had an unexpected visitor ring my doorbell. Not quite ready to greet a "salesperson," I waited until he had left to open the door and retrieve the small bag he'd left on my doorstep.
Inside the plastic bag were several envelopes full of grocery store coupons, and I recognized my neighbor's writing on the envelopes. I called her to ask if she'd lost her coupons, and she said she'd accidentally left them in her basket at Ralph's on Moorpark Road in Thousand Oaks the day before. She'd returned to the store to look in the carts and ask the manager if they'd been turned in but came home disappointed.
Inside her coupon stash was a piece of mail with my address -- hence the gentleman who found the coupons knew to return them to me. Unfortunately, I didn't learn who this kind person was in order to thank him.
We both hope the man reads The Star and knows how grateful we are for taking the time to return these coupons. It's reassuring to find Good Samaritan instincts still alive and well.
-- Millicent Rathbun, Thousand Oaks

Do I understand this right? Barack Obama came out of the cesspool of Chicago politics where the corruption and dishonesty has been so well documented for the last 50-plus years -- and he is clean? I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.
Connect the dots, people! Obama is anything but open and transparent. If he were a Republican, the press would be in a feeding frenzy.
-- Ann Telling, Thousand Oaks

Re: Michael S. Vorac's Dec. 10 letter, "Embryo solution":
An embryo is the developing human individual from the time of implantation in the uterus to the end of the eighth week after conception. Then it becomes a fetus. The key words here are "implantation in the uterus." All fertilized eggs that are frozen are embryonic, not embryos. So being thawed and baptized does not make any sense.
There is no such thing as a frozen baby, just a fertilized egg, a laboratory specimen. It is creepy to call a fertilized egg a frozen baby to be baptized. An intrauterine device prevents a fertilized egg to attach itself to the uterus -- should that fertilized egg be baptized? What is Vorac thinking?
-- Judy lakkis, Thousand Oaks

Re: my Nov. 21 commentary, "Let's have a pep talk, not gloom":
The point of my commentary was to illustrate the constant barrage of bad news from all forms of media, including The Star. Furthermore, I noted that most stories go beyond describing what has happened to also include a dire forecast of what is coming. Never before have I heard, "It is going to get worse before it gets better" used by so many members of the media as in the last year.
Apparently The Star didn't get my message.
The Dec. 9 front page had two big headlines: "Grim financial outlook grimmer" and "County job losses likely."
What is it with the media today? Is coverage based on the axiom that "bad news sells?" This daily drumbeat of "the sky is falling" is unsettling to most people, and it causes them to change behavior, like not buying that new car or TV, or maybe a house, or maybe even not going out to a restaurant or movie, and to just hunker down and wait for the end of mankind as is being described and predicted. I wonder how many people would board a plane if it were announced prior to boarding that the plane had a good chance of crashing. It's the same effect.
Stop this nonsense. Tell us what has happened and report the actual news, bad as it is. Stop telling readers that the worst is yet to come. The Star has no way of knowing. This entire economic fiasco is largely based upon fear, the common factor in every person on this planet and what ultimately drives all markets -- fear of job loss, fear of loss of savings, fear of loss of home. I have empathy for those who are caught up in any of the above for real -- those who have lost a job, a house, their savings. But most of us are still doing OK and hopefully have our health, our homes and our jobs -- and some money. We should keep doing what we have always done, and if enough of us do, we will be on a quick road to recovery and good times.
There are plenty of nice things happening. The weather has been lovely lately. Gas is back under $2 and most commuters are saving hundreds of dollars a month. Home prices are back to 2003 levels, and with low interest rates, it's a great time to buy a home. My 23-year-old son plans to do so early next year, and he never thought he could buy a place in this county. Stores are offering sales from 30 percent to 70 percent off retail. What bargains can be had this Christmas!
And according to my calculations, more than 92 percent of our county's workforce is doing just that -- working!
Tell us some good stuff. Like my mother said, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything.
-- Ronald J. Peters, Thousand Oaks

This is to thank the city of Ventura and all around Victoria Avenue for not allowing Wal-Mart's big box store to open there. We here in Oxnard appreciate the fact that we will soon be getting it here.
In these tough economic times, we probably need the extra income in our city coffers more than Ventura does, as well as the extra money donated throughout the city to a lot of organizations that really appreciate it.
I've shopped in Wal-Mart's big box store and was very pleased with the prices and the quality of the products. I also appreciated saving a dollar or two per pound on their quality meats.
Again, thanks to all of you who made this possible for us.
Oh, you also did this to Home Depot, and we appreciate that, too.
Please keep shopping on our side of the river because we are very appreciative.
-- Raymond Beaulieu, Oxnard

Seeing the front page of The Star every day makes me wonder if there is ever anything good worth reporting. Headlines are certainly all doom and gloom. I suggest The Star start doing something my wife has come up with lately: Whenever I see anything negative, or tell her about something negative, she tells me, "Now tell me a happy story." It is all about balance, and a positive attitude can go a long way towards building confidence.
-- Gary Marshall, Santa Paula

After going 1-15 last year, the Miami Dolphins are now 8-5 and actually have the inside track to win their division. Once again, Bill Parcells is proving to be the greatest turnaround artist of all time, adding to his legacy after having performed miracles with the New York Giants, New England Patriots, New York Jets and Dallas Cowboys.
I say we fire the CEO of General Motors and put the Big Tuna in charge.
-- Tony Sereno, Simi Valley

Re: your Dec. 2 article, "U.S. judges to rule on prison crowding;" Karen Baxter's Dec. 4 commentary, "Brandon Hein case made for clemency from governor;" and J. Clark Kelso's Dec. 3 commentary, "Federal receiver responds to prison hospital concerns":
Three Star articles in the past week addressed prison issues -- California's "dirty little secret."
-- Three federal judges in San Francisco are about to render a decision regarding the massive overcrowding situation and its resulting problems, primarily in healthcare and overincarceration.
-- Baxter's article affected me the most, since I am deeply involved in the long overdue release of a former employee and friend. Convicted early in 1987 and incarcerated under indeterminate sentencing -- 17 years to life -- she is still in prison. Release was approved by the Board of Parole Hearings in July 2004, but that decision was reversed by the governor. At four subsequent hearings, she was repeatedly denied. How can someone be approved for release and then turned down four times?
Yes, our state legal and judiciary system has thrown away all sense of mercy, and the taxpayers of California continue to pay for hundreds of inmates who have been approved for parole, some four or six times, yet remain incarcerated.
My wife and I have written numerous support letters to the governor's office for women who have received dates from the BPH, awaiting his final action. We receive the same scripted reply. I would not count on the governor to exercise the powers of his office for clemency or commutation. It's not politically correct.
-- Kelso wins the battle regarding the arguments put forth to build a prison hospital in Ventura County. A report, "Dignity Denied," shoots down any argument that, to quote District Attorney Greg Totten, "an inmate healthcare system ... is already the most extravagant in the country." Interviews with 120 female inmates 55 and older reveal the cesspool they live in, especially for so called "medical care." Society treats animals better than prison inmates. This report makes you heartbroken and angry.
-- Bob Fitch, Thousand Oaks

Why don't the oil companies take some of their outrageous profits and bail the car companies out? When do the bailouts stop? Maybe it is time to stop supporting the world and focus a tad on our own country for awhile.
-- Mel Erlich, Camarillo

We are once again in the cross hairs of "ballot box budgeting," the phenomenon where voters enshrine yet another costly initiative in the state Constitution without rationally considering all the other budget choices that won't be possible if it passes. This time, we passed Proposition 9, the Victim's Rights and Protection Act, with 53.3 percent voting yes. Law enforcement is now restricted from early releases of certain prisoners and is saddled with the clerical burdens associated with victim notification and participation.
Roy Ulrich, president of the California Tax Reform Association, said of Proposition 9, "The monies that this is going to cost will take away money from our schools, from health care, from nursing home care for seniors, from firefighting. It will increase spending on corrections, but it will be on autopilot because it can't be changed. It will be in the California Constitution."
Here we see the Legislature abdicate its responsibilities, leaving both the taxing and the spending to the voters. So who's to wonder why we see voters who are more than willing to increase spending, such as voting yes on 9, yet refusing to increase taxes, such as the 34 percent who voted no on Ojai's parcel tax.
One legislator was heard to say, in support of Proposition 9, that we have been able to increase law enforcement without raising taxes. Yes, we've passed laws increasing prison populations -- which have had the budget side effect of decreasing college populations. This year, the California State University system will accept 10 percent fewer students. Yet Sacramento is able to continue to argue that it has done all this without raising taxes.
Voters have to stop ordering up costly new law enforcement programs without dedicating the funds to pay for them. Until that happens, we will continue to see education funds docked to pay for law enforcement initiatives. And the only effect that can produce is the vicious cycle of more crime and punishment.
-- Kathi Smith, Ojai
(The writer is president of the Ventura County School Boards Association. -- Editor)

We read of terrorist attacks in India, economic crisis, climate crisis, water crisis, auto manufacturer bailouts, California's budget crisis, California's prison crisis and Camarillo's prison hospital. The early December news is hopeless.
But there is hope, if we know where to look. I have hope because people are responding to calls for innovation. You would expect people to expend considerable effort for cash prizes offered at Innocentive.com. Innocentive demonstrates the power of the Web to innovate our way out of crisis. But Innocentive is not why I am hopeful.
I am hopeful because more than 100,000 ideas were submitted to Google's Project10tothe100.com. I am hopeful because the 100,000 ideas represent perhaps a million people-hours dreaming and then crafting 1,000-word explanations. I am hopeful because people expended a million people-hours without expecting prize money. It isn't even clear anyone other than Google will know where the winning ideas came from. Google is only offering to pay the best people to make the ideas that help the most people happen. The idea generator gets nothing but personal satisfaction.
The deadline for idea submittal is past, but you can still help in three ways:
-- Vote for your favorite ideas after Jan. 27. Google will have sorted and condensed the 100,000 ideas down to 100 ideas. Your vote will select the 20 most helpful ideas.
-- Suggest President-elect Barack Obama ask Google for those ideas most helpful to Americans, which might illuminate our path through national crises.
-- Suggest Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger ask Google for those ideas most helpful to Californians, which might illuminate our path through California's crises.
I have hope because I have confidence some of those 100,000 ideas will help a lot of people. Will you help?
-- Mark E. Capron, Oxnard

This is in protest to the treatment of Ivan and Jennifer Amodei.
A few months ago, I spoke with a woman in the Ventura County Planning Department, telling her I wished to write a letter of recommendation that the Amodeis be allowed to have weddings on their property. That woman informed me, in a not too pleasant manner, that the Amodeis were committing illegal acts by having weddings before their permit was issued. That woman said that if I wrote such a letter, I would be supporting them in their illegal venture, but if I wished to go on record supporting a crime, that was my decision. That woman suggested I write a letter stating I support their being issued a license, ending with an officious, "Unless of course, you wish to enable them to commit a crime."
I was subsequently informed that when the Amodeis applied for their license, they were told to go ahead and have weddings. They were told multiple venues have operated in the same area while awaiting their license -- with no repercussions -- until their license was issued. That woman at the County Planning Department omitted giving me this information. Why was Villa Amodei the only one targeted?
Neighbors have harassed and tried to embarrass the owners of Villa Amodei. When weddings were held at Villa Amodei, the neighbors claimed loud noise and filed police reports. Noise studies say there is no impact! Villa Amodei is much farther away from neighbors' homes than most other venues.
The treatment of Villa Amodei smacks of favoritism, discrimination and a vendetta! It appears that neighbors who are politically connected and/or friends of county employees are using those connections and abusing the system!
This is reprehensible! We have enough trouble with the abuse of persons in our federal government! Do we have to suffer the same mistreatment from our county government? Do we now have to create a paparazzi environment to monitor the actions of our county employees and their friends to ensure fair and honest treatment of all residents here in Ventura County?
The residents of Ventura County deserve better from their county government! The Ventura County government is here to serve the people, not to harass, play favorites and jeopardize the financial status of small business owners!
-- Naomi Fisher, Camarillo

I am writing this letter in the hope that other Ventura visitors will not be victimized as I was.
Last May, I left Target and was getting on Highway 101 northbound from Main Street in Ventura when I saw the strobe light flash. I thought, "Maybe I am getting a ticket."
Sure enough, I received a citation for running a red light from the Ventura Police Department, signed by Officer Tom Randall, stating that "violation was not committed in my presence." The bail amount was $361.00.
I began wondering why they thought I ran the light, since I almost never run red lights, and I try not to. I wondered if perhaps the yellow light was set too short, and it is. I went back and timed the light for several cycles with my stopwatch. My measurements showed that the yellow duration for this light is 3.4 seconds.
Then I went to the Web and found the California state standards for yellow light timing, and it states that the yellow light should last 3.9 seconds in a 40 mph speed limit zone. This allows enough time for drivers to stop before the light turns red.
So this light was, and probably still is, set about a half second too short. I noted that the video of the incident showed I entered the intersection 0.49 seconds after the light turned red. Aha!
I posted bond and requested a trial. One issue was, how could I prove in court the light is too short? My little video camera makes movies, so I returned to the intersection again, and made two movies which showed that it is too short, reasoning that if video evidence can be used to convict, it can also be used to show reasonable doubt that any violation took place.
When I appeared for trial, my case was dismissed because Officer Randall did not appear. I think probably they never appear on these cases, because they do not wish to explain under oath why they are doing this.
But probably the light is still too short, and probably the Ventura Police Department issues 20 or 30 tickets a day here, even though no violation has taken place. This seems very unprofessional to me.
I do not think the city of San Buenaventura should be doing this.
-- Michael Armstrong, Santa Barbara

Re: your Dec. 6 article, "Veterans may get a new healthcare clinic provider":
I would to thank the veterans who requested a separate waiting room with exterior door, in light of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's statement at the opening of the U.S. Capitol Visitors Center that the American public has a distinctive odor. To commingle veterans with the public does them an injustice. Whether veterans served two or 30 years in peace or war, the American public should know we need to be with our own.
We swore to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. You know the document that starts with "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Or these words from the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."
Do you disgruntled veterans understand what you swore to when you enlisted? Did you ever read the documents? What makes you better than the people whose rights and privileges you served in the Armed Forces to protect? If you do not want to commingle with the American public, you have two options: wait outside until called or visit the Veterans Medical Complex in Los Angeles.
Myself, I am happy to be able to visit a clinic run by Community Memorial Hospital. The staff is courteous and well-trained, and the service is prompt.
-- Timothy F. Buckley, Ventura

Re: Bill O'Reilly's Dec. 6 commentary, "It's the time to watch Jesus versus the atheists":
O'Reilly is trying resurrect his "war on Christmas" rant again this year. He seems to think that Christians should be able to use government to promote their celebrations, and if anyone thinks differently, it is offensive and insulting and they should "shut up," as O'Reilly is fond of saying.
Well, I'm offended and insulted by the assumption that religions should be exempt from critical examination and protected from contradiction.
Just to remind O'Reilly of a few facts:
Christians celebrate on Dec. 25, not because there is the slightest evidence anyone named Jesus was born on that date, but because it was a popular pagan holiday. It was the winter solstice, an astronomical mark promising the return of spring and the regeneration of life in the northern hemisphere. It has probably been celebrated as long as man has watched the stars and pondered the future. So atheists aren't stealing Christmas. It's Christians who are stealing the winter solstice.
O'Reilly thinks it's wrong that atheists put a sign denying the existence of God next to a nativity scene. But if the nativity scene had been on private property, as it should have been, instead of a state capitol rotunda, there would have been no question of putting up a sign next to it.
O'Reilly excuses the state government promoting Christianity because he thinks the U.S. is a "Christian nation." This conveniently ignores the fact that none of the first six presidents were Christians. They were unitarians and deists.
Finally, I agree that we should "just get along," not only for a few weeks in December, but all year round. But getting along means being able to take it as well as dish it out. Christians bash atheists all year long. So they'd do well not to whine about a simple clash of ideas.
And by the way, while O'Reilly worries about atheists, retailers and advertisers have pretty well trashed the idea that Christmas is about anything but spending big bucks. And why not? O'Reilly's buddies had "In God We Trust" put on, of all things, the money!
-- Brent Meeker, Camarillo

Re: J. Clark Kelso's Dec. 3 commentary, "Federal receiver responds to prison hospital concerns" and your Dec. 2 article, "U.S. judges to rule on prison crowding":
California's dysfunctional, rampantly overcrowded prison system is attempting to enter our carefully planned county. Kelso, federal prison healthcare receiver of Sacramento, addressed his choice of our concerns in his commentary.
My concern is that the environmental impact report will not be based on future likely conditions at the proposed facility. Most importantly, if Kelso's proposed design capacity is used to evaluate the environmental impacts on our community, we could be in for a nasty surprise.
The prisoners exist as shown, for example, in The Star's Dec. 2 prison crowding story with a picture of inmates housed in three-tier bunks in the "multi-purpose recreation room." An aging prison population will create increasing demand that could swamp any notion of design capacity.
Kelso builds a prison to his nominal capacity and does "his job." The prison system has to do something to meet its expanding prisoner healthcare needs. But, how can a nominal design capacity limit be held in light of shocking, overcrowded conditions in the rest of the system? Good medical care will create the conditions and very easily the rationalizations to "pack them in."
My non-professional guess is the EIR capacity should be done at the existing degree of overcrowding at prison healthcare facilities. I don't believe the state has the funds to get ahead of this wave of aging prisoners, and an EIR based on nominal capacity will not correctly evaluate the impact on our community.
-- Denis Decker, Camarillo

Re: your Dec. 6 article, "Veterans may get a new healthcare clinic provider":
I received a letter from Veterans Affairs about changing the healthcare provider for veterans in Camarillo a few days before the story about separate waiting rooms and entrances being a major factor appeared in The Star. I can't believe that waiting rooms and entrances could be an important part of getting a contract to treat veterans of Ventura County.
I have been a patient of the Community Memorial Health Systems facility since it opened for veterans of Camarillo several years ago. I like the facility. I like the doctor I see there, and I like the way the office personnel treat me. I don't have any problem with the entrance or the waiting room. I like the idea of having a VA clinic here in Camarillo and would be very unhappy if I had to drive to another city in the county for treatment.
What's next, a separate parking lot? I am very happy and satisfied with the treatment I am receiving and hope the contract with CMH will be continued.
I wonder if the reason for the separate waiting rooms is that the veterans will contaminate the general public or that the people of Camarillo will contaminate the veterans. I'm willing to take my chances and vote to keep the clinic in Camarillo and the other clinics in the county as well.
-- Greg Mazza, Camarillo
(The writer is a disabled veteran of World War II. -- Editor)

I'm offended as carmakers beg. I am more offended by the statement made by United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger that "consumers would not buy autos from bankrupt companies no matter the terms of the arrangement."
I guess Gettelfinger thinks we, the car-buying public, are stupid. He already knows that the Big Three and Congress are a few bricks short of a load in the thinking department. When United Airlines declared bankruptcy, we still flew on United. When US Airways went bankrupt, we still flew on US Airways. When Delta Airlines went bankrupt, we still flew on Delta. Give me a choice of a quality car with decent fuel economy at a decent price and I would buy it.
Sure, bankruptcy is not pleasant, but it does result in a recovery business plan. That is a requirement of the bankruptcy. Without a plan to recover, the bankruptcy court will not allow you to proceed.
Feeding the Big Three to stave off bankruptcy is an unconscionable use of taxpayer money. Loan guarantees are one thing, but handouts are just not an acceptable option.
The Big Three CEOs came to Washington with no business plan. They came with no assurances. They came with hands out and nothing but hollow promises that they would be good boys and fix their problems. The Big Three have cars they are producing in Europe and South America that could instantly give them a leading position in fuel economy and quality here in the United States. They want us to bail them out while they already have some slam-dunk solutions waiting in the wings.
Chapter 11 bankruptcy would do more to turn the Big Three into a globally competitive provider of quality automobiles and trucks. Congress needs to deliver some tough love to the Big Three and then step back and do the same to the financial/investment industry.
-- David Collins, Newbury Park

There will be no winners in the automotive industry.
Main Street is not happy with corporate jet travel for automotive CEOs asking for a bailout, but they will also not be happy once they find out more about the job bank for the union automotive workers.
The job bank was initially created to retain workers while the automotive industry changed models. It is has morphed into a permanent place for approximately 3,500 idle workers being paid to create nothing. The cost of this is passed on to the consumer in the purchase price of a car.
When the focus shifts from creative production methods to protecting workers' salaries and jobs, the overall industry will suffer when stacked against global competition.
Some of the factories outside the boundaries of the United Auto Workers are truly amazing not only for the volume of the cars produced, but by the production methods of integrating robotics, suppliers and workers under one roof.
We have the technology and skills. Let's remove some of the barriers and allow the market to create a more efficient factory.
-- William F. Klepper, Simi Valley

Re: your Dec. 1 article: "Conejo Free Clinic director retiring":
Shortly after my wife and I first moved to the Conejo Valley nearly 25 years ago, we had the great fortune to meet Sharron Baird. She quickly enlisted me as a legal volunteer at the Conejo Free Clinic. I and other attorneys continue to devote one evening a month to seeing clients at the clinic. Of course, the availability of free medical services is well known.
Over the years, it has been a common misconception among many that there was no need for such services in our "affluent" community. That has never been the case, and there have always been many among us who have been unable to afford basic medical care for themselves and their families. The ability of persons without financial wherewithal to obtain legal advice has also been extremely limited; it is still inadequate, of course, but the clinic provides a necessary and much appreciated resource.
Sharron is a caring and thoughtful person who had a vision of what was needed more than 33 years ago. Moreover, in the face of significant adversity, she had the determination and drive to make it a reality. Under Sharron's leadership, the clinic has expanded its services over the years. Throughout it all, she has remained utterly devoted to the well being of clinic patients and clients.
It is difficult to envision the clinic without Sharron. Yet, she has left a lasting legacy that will continue to benefit the community well into the future.
-- David Shain, Thousand Oaks

Re: your Dec. 7 article, "Unused embryos pose question of their disposal":
A couple must not make children outside of the marital embrace. If they do, then the mother must carry each one of these to term. If she were incapable or unwilling, then the embryos should be restored to nature -- that is, thawed and conditionally baptized. Finally, after they expire, they must be buried.
-- Michael S. Vorac, Thousand Oaks

Are the Big Three automakers just greedy, have their eyes closed, or just don't get it?
Yes, these are large companies who pay their CEOs many millions to do whatever it is they do. Why, then, do they turn to the taxpayers to get them out of what they have caused themselves?
For many years they have bought up patents, ignored our government and the people and kept right on making and selling these big gas-guzzlers only to find themselves in this predicament. Why not go to the big oil companies for whom they have made billions in profit and see if they will bail them out? I'm sure they have the money to spare.
Another thing: Do these Big Three companies not know that many, many thousands of regular families have lost their homes, jobs, sense of security and paychecks, and yet they have the audacity to see if we the taxpayers can bail them out and still spend $30,000 to $40,000 to buy an automobile when food and a roof over their heads are the priorities? They have businesses like many others in the country that have to scale back or close down. Why do these three companies think they are different than any other big or small business in this country that is also facing very hard times?
I, for one, would like to see these three companies turn elsewhere to have someone bail them out, like the oil companies, or they also can scale back or close down. I really don't trust these companies to do the right thing. They haven't in the past. Why should we think they will now?
-- Ryta Fofanoff, Simi Valley

Having lived in the Conejo Valley and Ventura County since 1962, I am quite familiar with the traffic patterns in Thousand Oaks in general and Los Feliz Drive in particular.
I remember the roars of Jungleland's big cats, but the only roars you hear now belong to any one of thousands of vehicles driving much too fast for such a crowded little two-lane street.
There is way too much vehicular traffic on such a small residential street. There's no parking to be found anywhere, and as a result of commercially zoned complexes crowding every square inch of land here, there's an awful lot of pedestrian traffic traversing an area largely devoid of sidewalks.
This has created a huge safety issue, in my opinion, and will only get much worse with the addition of yet more "affordable housing." The tragic result will be somebody getting hit and killed by some driver in a hurry to be somewhere.
Furthermore, I do not believe that mere "verbal assurances" from any member of the City Council presently in office will hold water down the road when new staff of "well-intentioned" politicians decide to invoke eminent domain and force longtime residents not only out of their homes, but out of the community we grew up in.
I have a possible solution: Convert empty retail units into a combined residential/commercial building. This could satisfy state requirements, provide housing, generate revenue for the city, eliminate excessive traffic on side streets, such as Los Feliz Drive, and save lives. What a concept!
Parking for residents and guests would be provided by already existing parking lots.
Buildings would not be empty eyesores, families would have a roof over their heads and commercial facilities to shop at nearby, merely by walking to them. That would ease traffic, cut down on smog, noise, and more accidents and we could all breathe easier.
Perhaps Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger would like to take a moonlight stroll down Los Feliz Drive. I think even he would prefer to be remembered as "The Terminator" instead of "The Terminated" as a result of an errant motorist on a crowded residential road.
-- Bil McCombe, Simi Valley

Re: Clark Brenneise's Dec. 4 letter, "Who's oppressed?"
There is a large and growing number of people who do not believe that government should discriminate against a minority, and by doing so, oppose the Constitution.
The struggle by gays for equal rights has been compared to that of blacks, women and, most closely, laws prohibiting interracial marriage. Our Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, set up government with three branches -- one to make laws, one to enforce laws and one to interpret laws, in particular, the legality of laws vis-a-vis the Constitution. It is the judicial branch of government that has historically had to put the country on the right track, in spite of active and loud opposition by a misguided majority. Examples include segregation, slavery, women's rights and Japanese internment.
Chances are the California courts will strike down Proposition 8 on the same grounds it has ruled on the subject in the past. If not, over time, the more evolved among us will reverse that way of thinking and remove such a prejudicial law.
The whole issue involves the way government will handle same-sex marriages and has little to nothing to do with religious rites! If there are some who see the bigotry and prejudice in opposing gay marriages, and these people choose to identify some proponents of Proposition 8 as bigots or haters, well -- if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck!
Brenneise needs to reread his Bible and concentrate on the parts where everyone is a child of God and only He has the right to judge mankind!
-- Stuart Wing, Moorpark

Re: your Dec. 4 editorial, "Housing mess was predicted":
This editorial misses the mark again when it tries to lay fault for the mortgage meltdown with the Bush administration. The problem for The Star in this case is that it couldn't come up with even one reform law that Congress passed and President George Bush vetoed.
Maybe The Star editorial board doesn't know that Congress is the law-writing and oversight branch of the government, and that Congress has shown no meaningful interest in necessary mortgage and lending reforms. (But they have shown tremendous interest in campaign contributions from banking and lending firms. Can anyone say Fannie and Freddie?)
It has also become fairly well known that members of the administration and others, former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan being one, cautioned Congress about excessive leveraging and related risks. But I guess The Star just wants to inflame more folks about Bush.
Next time, I suggest The Star reference some actual laws Bush refused to sign as its source of mess-making rather than the weak reference made to some conclusions -- albeit illuminating -- from an Associated Press reporter.
It's too bad Congress didn't heed the warnings and become more interested in reform. They might have actually passed some reforms, and then, if Bush had vetoed them, it would have been real news.
Instead, all The Star has is observations from an AP reporter. Try again, Star.
-- Mike Vrchota, Thousand Oaks

The automotive bailout seems to focus on many things, but it leaves out the most important aspect for success: the consumer. If the money is granted and the companies proceed with their plans at the public's expense, who is to say that the consumer will in fact purchase the cars they make?
While the bailout is supposed to stop the bleeding, the real key to the long-term viability is the American public buying new cars. Right now very few people are buying cars. With credit tight and the economy in question, no one wants to take out a loan for a new car or commit themselves to a new large debt.
Instead of giving the auto companies large amounts of cash with no guarantee the public will support the companies, the bailout should be in the hands of the public.
The government should issue coupons to all taxpayers in the form of a certificate that takes, let's say, $5,000 or $10,000 off the price of a car. The public will go buy the car and present the certificate, which will be routed to the Big Three, and the government will redeem the coupon in cash loans. Of course, the price of the car has to be set at a fair level, without all the monkey business that car dealers do when they play "car price games."
This would insure that the public has some input to the process. The public will buy, and the public will determine which company deserves to survive.
Since Congress is giving away our money, we as the public should have input. Of course, this doesn't stop the requirement of the unions to give back some of the benefits, and top management needs to cut and trim excessive costs and perks.
Let the public stimulate the economy and pick the cars that they want and the company they trust. Give us coupons and let us decide the fate of the industry.
-- Robert W. Coshland, Ventura

I am glad to see that the opponents of Proposition 8 are still at work.
I recall that in the 1970s gay people started to come out of the closet and declared themselves openly gay. It was a bit of a shock because until that time homosexuality was an abstraction. As time went on, there were more demonstrations and more people declaring that they were gay and lesbian. The situation now is similar to the one that existed 50 years ago.
In the 1960s, about the only black people on TV were Eddie "Rochester" Anderson, Bill Cosby and a few special appearances by Flip Wilson, Sammy Davis Jr. and Richard Pryor. From that time to this, more and more black people have appeared on TV and in positions of prominence. Now, some black people on TV educate us with the qualities gained from living the "black" experience, but more demonstrate qualities as individuals -- intelligence, prejudice, fear, love, vulnerability -- just like all of us human beings, and I can like or dislike them for those reasons.
Since the 1970s, gay people have been more visible and we have come to know them.
The proponents of Proposition 8 claim that a more expansive definition of marriage will lead to moral collapse and the destruction of civilization. They may be afraid because they don't know gay people as human beings -- as friends, as relatives and as coworkers. Of course, there will be some whose attitudes will not change, but we can create an atmosphere in which it is easier for others to accept gays and lesbians as people.
Here is my challenge for all gay and lesbian people: Demonstrate that you are human beings and that being gay or lesbian is only a minor attribute of who you are, not the defining characteristic. Show that you are someone worth knowing, worth associating with, worth supporting. Acknowledge the prejudice, but don't acquiesce to it. Counteract obnoxious opposition with kindness and love. Be who you are, and be nice.
-- Don Welty, Oxnard

Re: Andy Killion's Dec. 4 letter, "Where's a helpful bank?"
I thank Killion for addressing the frustration of access to capital for business owners. I work for a small business that also has plans for expansion in 2009.
First off, I had the privilege of attending the Corporate Leaders Breakfast at California Lutheran University on Dec. 3. The speaker was the dynamic Michael Towbes, philanthropist, developer and owner of Montecito Bank & Trust. Let me say what a great speaker Michael is and that I truly enjoyed listening to him. However, the unemployment predictions for 2009 that he showed were very alarming, up to 10 percent. So, any efforts to combat that growing concern need to be applauded, embraced and nourished.
Michael's speech included the challenge, and perhaps frustration, that bankers face today with the double whammy from Washington -- the demand from Capitol Hill for banks to increase lending, and the promise from regulators that they are scrutinizing loans more closely, making bankers more conservative with lending practices, understandably.
To not bore the audience, Michael did not mention the fact that bankers are cash flow lenders and need to rely primarily on cash flow when granting a loan. This is especially true in the case of loans to businesses.
In addition to looking at historic cash flow for the last three years, the banker needs the additional assurance that the business's current profits and ability to service debt and other obligations will continue in future years. Thus lies the problem for the majority of loan applicants. This is a major challenge during this maelstrom for both the banker and business owner.
At the breakfast, I also had the privilege to sit at the same table as Jim Taylor of Affinity Bank, whom I have known for several years. I must mention his name or he'd never forgive me. Jim mentioned that Affinity Bank is also still in the business of making loans.
-- Frank Lomeli, Oxnard

Re: your Dec. 3 article, "University graduates in U.S. decline":
I carefully read this article looking for its purpose and found it lacking. I am forced to respond with the question, "So what if the U.S. produces fewer university graduates in areas that the job market cannot support?"
This remark may seem inappropriate for a retired college professor, but it comes from educational training and personal experience. Although I was formally trained in cell and molecular biology, I quickly found that there were few jobs for graduates in this area. After the biotechnology industry expanded significantly in Ventura County in the late 1980s, all that changed. Fortunately, I decided to intern for three local biotech companies to define the skills that students would need in this area. I subsequently started a biotechnician training program at the college that has been successful.
In my opinion, too many students assume that they can get a college education and then decide how they want to use it. My recommendation to students has always been to search job descriptions for their chosen area as freshmen, and then decide what skills they need to be employed in that career. Unfortunately, many college and university majors/degrees have little value in the job market. Fortunately, in biotechnology, I have seen many students take good-paying jobs as technicians and then continue their college education part-time. Many ultimately complete as university graduates. Many companies in this area will pay tuition and provide flexible hours if their good employees are taking coursework in an area that will make them better employees.
Personally, I have to say that the best education I ever received -- even more than university graduate coursework -- was working in the biotech industry trying to help solve meaningful problems.
I think that it is our responsibility as teachers, parents, grandparents and friends to help future college students learn how to choose their education based on a strong desire to learn how to solve problems -- and get paid while doing it -- using their educational tools. I always start from the Bureau of Labor Statistics online to search for career potential.
-- William Thieman, Ventura
(The writer is a retired member of the Ventura College biology and biotechnology faculty. -- Editor)

Lack of creativity, not lack of money, is threatening healthcare coverage for more than 160,000 children.
Like most of the state's healthcare safety net, California's Healthy Families program for uninsured children in low-income families is facing the budget ax. The program's bureaucracy, acknowledging a $17.2 million shortfall, recently declared that the only way to stop the hemorrhage is to close enrollment on Dec. 18 and start a waiting list for the 27,000 new enrollees each month.
I'm frustrated these "solutions" give no better alternative than creating a waiting list for the medical, dental and vision needs of children without resources. As an oral surgeon for 30 years, I've treated the lifetime damage from a lack of basic childhood dental care.
There is a better way. Reallocate "First 5" commission money mandated by voters to support children's healthcare and fund Healthy Families instead of subsidizing cartoon shows -- $4 million this year! -- neighborhood parties, Italian immersion classes, digital cameras and craft workshops.
Instead of shutting the doors of Healthy Families to California's kids, make the program financially sustainable by reforming its design to promote good care based on health needs, not political expediency. Instead of "one size fits all" benefits that include acupuncture, biofeedback and inpatient drug rehab or abortion at no charge, Healthy Families should allow parents to choose plans that better fit their needs at a lower cost.
Thinking outside the box is a better alternative than falling through the safety net.
--Sam Aanestad, Grass Valley
(The writer is a Republican state senator representing California's 4th District and a member of the Senate Health Committee. -- Editor)

Evidently there are those amongst us who believe that anyone who doesn't support the military-industrial complex and its stranglehold on this country is unpatriotic -- a communist, a socialist, a fascist radical who should move to another country. Let me remind these types that Dwight Eisenhower was the first one who warned us against this danger, and he, in my opinion, was far from unpatriotic.
If any of those near and dear would like to have an adult dialogue on these issues, I would encourage them to identify themselves instead of sending anonymous rants to which I have no opportunity to reply or defend my position. That is the patriotic thing to do. After all, this country was founded on freedom of expression, which all of us should defend and be allowed to do freely without be told to leave the country.
-- Barclay Totten, Oxnard

I wonder if the auto bailout will have any impact. Let's face it, the U.S. auto industry has been on a decline since the early 1970s by all measures: quality, according to J.D. Power and Associates; efficiency, according to Harbour Reports; transaction pricing, according to J.D. Power Information Network; and lease residuals, according to the Automotive Leasing Guide.
The companies and the United Auto Workers have had plenty of opportunity to fix the problems, but none have come through. Therefore, I would argue that it would be a waste of precious resources to lend them the money. Besides, I haven't seen any indications that the executives of the companies would be personally on the hook if they fail.
-- Ralph J. Coolman, Ventura

Re: J. Clark Kelso's Dec. 3 commentary, "Federal receiver responds to prison hospital concerns" and your Dec. 4 article, "UAW willing to bend for Detroit 3":
One of the items Kelso mentions is that the existing youth facility has two guards for each ward. Why do you suppose that is? It's because the prison guards union says you cannot fire or lay off any guards. They are there for life.
The Detroit article has several mentions about union law. Again, you cannot lay off a union worker. They are hired for life. So when there is not enough work, the company has to pay the union worker not to work. In fact, the article discusses a "jobs bank," which is basically a pool of nonworkers that gets paid almost full wages for nothing! Presently, there are 3,500 workers between the Big Three that don't work and get paid 95 percent of their wages. This has been going on since the mid-1980s.
The article also mentions that the company has to pay in full for all of the medical expenses to a huge fund that's worth billions of dollars. Where the average person has to obtain medical insurance, the union forces the company to pay all the money necessary for medical benefits.
These items are further evidence of how the unions in the United States are crippling businesses around the country.
And to further this problem, organized labor will be pushing through their "card vote" bill, which will easily be passed by the Democratic-controlled Congress and Senate. What is the card vote? Instead of secret ballot, the voter holds up a card so that they can be seen by the union organizers, who, by the way, are not very friendly to nonunion voting people. So guess what happens to you when the organizer finds out who you are? You don't even want to know.
-- Dennis Gaiser, Camarillo

Re: Bob Jackson's Dec. 3 letter, "War in toy store":
Jackson asks, "How's that working out for you?" It's working just fine for me! I'm not an NRA member, but I am a responsible gun owner, as are many Americans.
The immaturity and stupidity of a probable gang member packing a gun while Christmas shopping at a toy store should not prohibit responsible gun owners from owning guns for protection or enjoyment. I have owned a gun since I was 17 years old and have raised children and grandchildren in my home without ever experiencing a problem because my guns are used and stored responsibly. If an intruder enters my home and I feel my life or a family member's life is in danger, I'm going to shoot first and ask questions later.
In contrast, you have every right to take the risk of you or your family being hurt or killed by an intruder and letting the police sort it out later. But do not classify those of us who use our guns responsibly with the morons who pack guns while shopping, going to the car wash and picking kids up from school.
What happened at Toys R Us was tragic, but outlawing gun ownership will not prevent people like the men in this situation from obtaining guns. In fact, I'd bet my last dollar the weapons involved in this situation were not legally registered firearms.
-- Valerie Fogle, Simi Valley

Re: Bob Jackson's Dec. 3 letter, "War in toy store":
It seems Jackson left out some pertinent facts in his letter.
Jackson claimed that staunch National Rifle Association members want every citizen to be armed in public. That's not exactly true. They want every law-abiding citizen who wants to be responsibly armed to be so allowed. The shooters in the toy store, according to what I have read, were rival gang members with extensive criminal records, meaning they broke the law in even touching a gun, much less carrying one. These are the people pro-gun folks want locked up, not carrying guns.
Jackson went on to reference Dr. Phil's question, "How's that working out for you?" As it turns out, the answer is: pretty well. Forty states now have "shall issue" concealed carry laws. Routinely, when those laws have been enacted, confrontational crime in the state has gone down. That's a pretty good result, I would say.
So, yes, having armed law-abiding citizens is associated with reduced confrontational crime and violence, and disarming law-abiding citizens protects the criminals, allowing them to be more brazen and more violent.
Concealed carry not only is following the Constitution, but is safety-producing. Forty states enjoy "shall issue" laws. It's too bad California politicians are more interested in making believe they are protecting the citizens -- while making them more vulnerable to be a victim -- than in actually supporting laws that do protect the citizens. Even the anti-gun Centers for Disease Control could not find any evidence of any gun control law that reduced crime or violence. But "shall issue" concealed carry laws can and do work in 40 states and need to be spread to the other 10.
Make our citizens safer. As the California Rifle and Pistol Association says, "Everyone is safer when the criminals don't know who's armed."
-- James R. May, Simi Valley

Re: Jim Woodard's Dec. 2 commentary, "Give gift of storytelling to children":
I began telling stories to our kids years ago, often weaving them into my life as a kid in a small town in Minnesota. Now, when we visit our two granddaughters, ages 6 and 4, in the Bay Area, they wake up my wife and me by hopping into bed with us, followed by: "Tell us a story." Usually the story revolves around them, but sometimes I find a way to include us.
When I think I have completed a story, I hear this: "Tell us the rest of the story."
After creating many stories such as these, I decided I should write fiction for myself. So that led to my novella called, "Big Shy in the Big Sky."
Now I'm writing another called, so far, "Whistle-Stop." And now I say to myself: "Tell me the rest of the story."
After 130,000 words, I'm curious about how the story will end.
Both of my stories start in a small town in Minnesota, so they might seem autobiographical. But my main characters exceed my own life by far.
Anyway, storytelling keeps my imagination active and helps us stay connected to the rest of our family.
-- Richard Londgren, Thousand Oaks

Re: Bob Jackson's Dec. 3 letter, "War in toy store":
Jackson cites the event at a Toys R Us store to condemn National Rifle Association members.
I'm a realist. The world would be a better place if weapons of any kind were never invented, so I'll answer as Dr. Phil might -- without emotion and misinformation.
It is a crime to carry a concealed weapon without a permit, so the two men in question were criminals. The NRA doesn't want every citizen to be armed in public. It wants law-abiding citizens to have the right to own a firearm if they choose and to carry a firearm with proper training, licensing and justification.
The same day Jackson's letter was printed, there were articles about an auto sales employee shot and killed in Oxnard the day before, a Camarillo woman stabbed to death in July and six people indicted for the killing of a man at a bank in August. Maybe if these three people had had permits to carry a firearm they would be alive today.
I am not going to take up space citing statistics and studies. So, readers who have an open mind and are honestly interested in facts to have an informed opinion should go on their computers and type in "defensive gun usage." It will eliminate emotion and misinformation and give insight to the opposing point of view.
-- Bill Buchanan, Thousand Oaks

Re: Bob Jackson's Dec. 3 letter, "War in toy store":
Jackson's letter properly describes the confrontation at the Palm Desert Toys R Us where two women engaged in a fight that brought out their husbands, who both carried handguns. The husbands shot and killed each other. The letter doesn't state whether either man had a permit to carry. The writer asks the question of National Rifle Association members: How does having these two private individuals armed make that Palm Desert Toys R Us a safer place?"
The answer is that no one will ever know for sure. In a community where potential robbers move on to easier pickings because they are aware that some of the citizenry may be armed, the benefits can only be measured statistically and sometimes by questioning criminals who have been arrested, asking them why they do or don't operate in certain areas. Those who turn to crime are not always too bright, but they are usually smart enough to avoid entering homes where guns can be kept. The incidents are many, but seldom reported, where someone with a permit to be armed was able to stop a crime or violence.
This is not a perfect world. Using percentage data, businesses make decisions regarding the products they choose to sell, the type of advertising they buy. Pharmaceuticals are approved based on the probability that not too many people will have adverse side effects, although some will. We don't remove stoplights because a few people choose to run the red. We don't close the beaches and fire the lifeguards because some people ignore the undercurrent warnings.
The National Rifle Association supports gun ownership where the data shows that increased ownership correlates with a reduction in violence of the community as a whole.
-- William Vietinghoff, Thousand Oaks

Re: Frank Bland's Nov. 28 letter, "Logical-sounding illogic," a response to Richard Larsen's Nov. 25 essay, "The republic must stand":
Let me begin to reply to Bland's letter by stating that I am a Christian and a minister. I believe that Christ is my Savior, and that the Bible is the word of God. That said, however, the legal basis of our society is not the Bible, but the Constitution.
Bland says that Larsen's arguments regarding Proposition 8 are not acceptable because the God of the Bible is "of sufficient evidence to take that God out of the realm of personal belief." Thus, laws based on the Bible are true, and all must observe them.
However, our laws in this country are based on the Constitution. In that document, the Bible is nowhere claimed as the basis of its laws. The God of the Constitution is Providence, Nature's God and The Creator, the one who, according to the Declaration of Independence, created humans (at the time, as we know, not including slaves or women as of equal rights) who are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The oath of allegiance to which new citizens swear is an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Throughout the more than 200 years of our history, we have welcomed people of all religions and of none. What religion a person claims is not relevant to their fitness to become citizens. What is relevant is that citizens identify with this society and are willing to defend it, and seek to play an active part in our society. America is a tapestry woven of a diverse set of threads drawn from all nations and cultures, brought together in the lives of men and women of every possible background, and joined together in what is perhaps the richest society in terms of its culture than any other the world has seen.
But when we claim that "our" part of the culture is more valid than another's, we diminish the greatness of our national society. The men and women who fight in Iraq and Afghanistan in our names are of every religion, and of none. They are of every color, by birth of every state, and of a number of foreign countries. Some are not yet even citizens, and yet they have offered their service toward our society. The greatest gift we can give each other and our society in this 21st century is to dedicate ourselves to this great nation, and respect the rights and desires of all others to do the same. We have learned long ago that creating division harms us as a people.
I was commissioned a Navy chaplain in 1975. My job was to minister to the troops in my command. At times that meant that I could meet their needs; at other times it meant that I connected them with chaplains of other faiths who could. At times it meant that I never saw some of them in any other than a military context. At all times, it meant respecting the individual sailor's or Marine's beliefs and choices, so long as he or she did not violate Navy regulations. That has proved to be a good model for citizenship, as well.
Perhaps a fitting "New Year's Resolution" for each of us is to reread the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States, and try and live according to our citizenship.
-- The Rev. Christine Miller, Camarillo

Thirteen years ago in the cozy Southern California neighborhood of Agoura Hills, Jimmy Farris lost his life in a backyard brawl during a teenage confrontation over marijuana.
Brandon Hein took part in the fight, and so did several other boys, including Jason Holland, who admitted to stabbing young Farris during the struggle.
I attended a screening of "Reckless Indifference" at California Lutheran University that provided documented evidence from all sides. I was heartbroken and shocked to find out that this sentence had really been given to Brandon Hein. It was a prejudicial situation from the start because the teenage victim in this backyard brawl was the son of a Los Angeles Police Department officer. Add to that a vicious and aggressive prosecution by the District Attorney's Office in Los Angeles, and the result was the sentencing of life in prison for all three boys.
A majority of parents, independent thinkers and experts have spent more than a decade trying to gain release for Brandon. It is clear that Brandon's only crime was drinking and getting involved in a fight that resulted in tragic consequences. How can participation in a backyard brawl be grounds for life imprisonment? Who is immune? What teenage boy has not been vulnerable to those circumstances in some variation? I have yet to meet a perfect teenager who has not made a choice at some time that might have exposed themselves or someone else to unfortunate circumstances or potential tragedy.
Because life cannot be returned to the young man Jimmy Farris, what right do we have to take away Brandon Hein's freedom for the rest of his life? In an attempt to balance the loss of Jimmy Farris, we have turned the table and sentenced a young man with the same litmus as a Charles Manson-type murderer. Where is the justice? Who is safer because this young man is locked up?
The frightening thing is that this verdict could truly happen to anyone in the wrong place at the wrong time. I dare say had the Farris boy been on the other side of this incident, his parents would have moved mountains to keep him from going to prison, let alone for life.
We have lost sight of the value and rights of this individual Brandon Hein. We have traded those critically important standards -- to secure what? To punish whom and why? After thousands of years of civilization, we have still not learned why the necessary component of mercy is the only thing that separates us from a crippled, harsh and ill-equipped Neanderthal society. America has lost something -- something serious. I fear she has lost her heart.
This young man is rotting away in maximum security. Someone had better explain to this mother why. I am horrified at this sentencing. Has our legal and judicial system thrown away all sense of measure and mercy, and what cost will we pay in the end? The loss here is a whole life locked away for good. How can this be? What crime so great did Brandon Hein commit? What did he do to deserve life imprisonment without parole?
There are times in this experience we call life that all answers and explanations fail the situations or circumstances. It is often the name of the crime upon which a life shatters, not the nameless and personal act itself.
I ask all who read this to take some time to explore Brandon's story on www.brandonhein.com. Please contact the governor and ask him to extend executive clemency and commutation of sentence. It takes real courage to right this wrong.
We're trusting you, governor.
-- Karen Baxter,
Malibu

I am a small business owner in Ventura and, as such, have been dealing with all of the news of the day. My wife and I left the corporate life in 2005 to "jump into the sea" of small business. I was a financial adviser with Morgan Stanley for quite some time, so I am no stranger to business cycles and market fluctuations.
The last three years have been exciting, and our little company has managed to survive. I jokingly told a friend that if there ever was a time to quit, it would be now. Some of the largest institutions we know are closing down or warning of the threat of closing. No humility in joining the club, I supposed.
To the contrary of public opinion, we have decided to expand rather than retreat during this maelstrom. The only problem with our strategy is that our bank is retreating.
As a Dean Witter-trained stockbroker, I was taught long ago to buy low and sell high. Unfortunately, my bank is following the herd of banks we are reading about today. They would rather sit on their capital and wait rather than invest with determined, good customers.
I am not upset that our government is throwing money at our country's woes. I just wish some of those funds would wiggle through to me and other people like me. We employ eight people who, in turn, support spouses and children. They pay rent and pay their bills. I want to employ five more people after our expansion. These are microscopic plans in the shadow of GM's and Ford's plans, but they are equally important.
One of my mentors used to say to me, "Invest when the cannons are blasting and sell when the trumpets are flairing." I agree, and I wish my bank had known my mentor.
-- Andy Killion, Ventura

The current state of our nation is in decline. As I see it, the main problem faced by our country is that we have outsourced ourselves into oblivion. I am aware that the solution is not as simple as the problem itself, but a solution is needed.
What I personally would propose is a moratorium on outsourcing. We cannot just shut the doors and take it all back, as big business would not stand for that. Also, it might be seen as politically incorrect. If just one-third of the outsourced products and businesses would come home to our own country, it would be the start of a true economic redevelopment of our own country.
There was a time when "Made in America" meant something special. People in Ohio and Michigan and Indiana made better shoes, cars and tools. Now, we are lucky if young Americans can figure out what a screwdriver is used for.
Sure, people will have to be willing to work maybe for a little less money or pay a little more for goods, but any money is better than zero, which is where we are headed. If America does not come home, soon we will be on bread lines longer than the ones in the great Depression.
Why are we all just sitting around on our behinds watching the ship go down? It is time for a good old-fashioned grassroots campaign to take our country back. Get out and hold up a sign! There should be people screaming in the streets, "We want our jobs back! We want our money back! Stop sending it all to China and India!"
This country was founded on the backs of hard-working people from all over the world. We can do the jobs, and we can do them better. All we need here is chance.
-- Brian Batchley, Ventura

On Dec. 2, I parked in Lot C of the Government Center in Ventura. When I got out of my vehicle, some important and not-so-important papers fell out of my jacket pocket. By the good graces of another human being, when I returned to my vehicle, my papers were neatly tucked under the wiper blade.
This rather simple act of kindness saved me a lot of trouble and distress -- a random act of kindness, something we should all practice.
It is with my deepest gratitude that I say thank you to whomever took the time to make my day. This serves as a reminder to me and, hopefully, others that no matter how bad things get, it only takes a short moment to help someone and brighten their day. Thank you so much.
-- Bruce Doenges, Ventura

Regarding the Ventura City Council's and City Manager Rick Cole's desire to become more "proactive" with their Code Enforcement Program to grow the city payroll and increase revenue:
One of the targets they have been eyeing to create more revenue is what they refer to as "illegal garage conversions." These "illegal garage conversions" need to be defined as garages built in recent years.
The older neighborhoods have many little studios that in many cases, were never used as garages and were never meant to be garages.
Back in the 1920s and 1930s, and even in the 1940s, the homes were built for flexible usage. Not everyone even owned a car.
What are strictly garages nowadays were then built with bathrooms and were used as workshops, artist studios, home offices, "Grandma's" room or student housing. City employees and even a City Council member have lived in some of these garage/cottages.
To target Ventura's largest source of affordable housing after using it themselves is the height of hypocrisy.
For many of the elderly, these studios enable them to exist without public assistance. For the rest of the population on low income, including artists and retail workers, it allows them to live in Ventura. Sometimes, the pensioners move into their studios and rent out their houses to make ends meet. It is, in many cases, a self-supporting partnership of the young and the old. They're all just trying to get by without public assistance. Leave them alone.
I guess it's easier to raise money on the backs of the vulnerable and the elderly than it is to collect the fees due from the developers -- those fees that the City Council just voted to defer, along with extensions of their building permits. Now Ventura is helping to finance abandoned developments while looking to the elderly for revenue generation.
I agree that developers are more intimidating than the elderly. Maybe we should call in the AARP or the ACLU to stand up for them -- or maybe we all should be standing up for them at 6 p.m. Dec. 8 in City Hall Council Chambers.
-- Donna Carver, Ventura

On or about Nov. 20, the Moorpark Public Works Department changed the street signs for Hearon Drive to Campus Canyon Drive. This action was based on the decision by the City Council to make this name change at its Oct. 15 meeting.
This topic of the City Council meeting begins with the City Council and city staff admitting that they didn't know why Hearon Drive came to be named Hearon. Then the action turns to a sad display of arrogance, ignorance and stupidity.
The arrogance is that the City Council or city staff didn't make any credible effort to find out why this street was named Hearon.
The stupidity is when the city staff contacted the county fire protection district about the name change and then ignored their advice about the problem of streets having similar names. We now have three streets within a half mile of each other with the name "campus" as part of the street name. This is setting up a situation for confusion by emergency responders and anyone else trying to find their way around this end of Moorpark.
The ignorance is that the City Council did not conduct any research on the matter, nor did they contact Moorpark College. They contacted the homeowners association management company. Why? The company is relatively new and does not reside in Moorpark -- more stupidity.
If anyone on the council had bothered to Google the names Hearon and Moorpark, the first page of hits to be displayed has the history Web page of Moorpark College, which clearly explains who Dr. Ray Hearon is and the significance of his contribution to this community and why a street should be named after him: He was the longest serving president of Moorpark College to this day.
-- Hank & Cindy Bouma, Moorpark

Did President-Elect Barack Obama nominate Bill Richardson as secretary of Commerce for Mexico or what? Press 1 for English!
-- Bill Gourlay, Westlake Village

I am shocked and appalled that our district has chosen to elect Tony Strickland as our state senator.
Let's call a spade a spade. When it comes to the environment, Strickland is a fraud. The environment is the most pressing issue facing our planet today -- something that Californians have had the ability to take the lead on and show the world that we understand the fragility of the situation we are currently faced with -- and it has been left up to a man who has chosen only twice out of more than 100 votes since 1999 to vote for the environment.
What's worse than Strickland's nonsupport of any substantive environmental policy is his bold-faced capitalization of this issue in order to get elected. The Star framed it as such: Strickland "has decided to present himself to voters this year wearing the mantle of a newfound vocation: 'Alternative Energy Executive.'" -- To do so, he formed a new wave energy company with four political friends, but he didn't even put up the $5,000 the others had pledged to start the company.
Worse still is Strickland's inability -- until a very recent pre-election change of tune -- to see that global warming is a real, manmade phenomenon.
I don't understand how our fellow citizens are complacent with this kind of obvious pandering and non-understanding of the issues at hand when the stakes are so high if we let our environment go to the wayside. Strickland has never done a thing to help the problem we are in, whereas Hannah-Beth Jackson had a proven record of voting for all environmental policy decisions Strickland fought against.
Nine-hundred votes made the difference -- 900 votes and we could have elected a leader who doesn't need to manufacture an environmental record to hide the true record.
-- Alex Jones, Moorpark

Re: George F. Will's Nov. 30 essay, "New New Deal has faults":
The Star's ponderous pundit produces an article perplexing in its painful opacity and pitiful lack of perspicuity.
Having paid lip service to the economist John Maynard Keynes, Will obsesses over President Herbert Hoover, who, of course, preceded Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal of 1933 and Keynes's "general theory" of 1936. Ignoring the rash of bank failures in the early 1930s, before the FDIC was created, and the beggar-my-neighbor policies that crippled world trade, he seems bothered that FDR did not cure the Depression immediately.
And he adduces writers who believe that FDR and Keynes were wrong. FDR was responsible for prolonging the Depression? Star readers should understand that this is a minority view. The general view is that FDR got the medicine right, as it then existed, but did not administer enough of it for long enough.
Will seems to say that Barack Obama's economic recovery plan has elements of the New Deal; the New Deal was not perfect; therefore Obama's plan won't be perfect; therefore he shouldn't attempt it. In short, he worries there are monsters under the bed, and he pulls the covers over his head.
Cheer up, George, my boy. Daddy's here. This week's Economist believes that "a lot of policy has been far too timid." It praises Obama as one "who seems to understand the need for action on a bigger scale." It agrees with him that the economy is, indeed, "trapped in a vicious cycle" and does, indeed, need a "big jolt," to "ease the flow of credit and cushion the drop in private demand." So what if some people could possibly get overpaid in the short run? We'd get out of this depression and take the entire world with us.
Let readers take heart. Happy days are here again! The grown-ups will be in charge on Jan. 20.
-- Raymond Freeman, Thousand Oaks

Readers of The Star's Opinion page must remember to take a "buyer beware" attitude toward the letters to the editor. There's a lot of misinformation being presented as "fact".
One letter recently asserted that union autoworkers earn an average of $73 per hour in wages and benefits. This is simply not true. That number is the result of deceptive math put out by industry management and shamelessly spread around by conservative "foundations" and talk-radio hosts.
They divided the total corporate costs for wages and benefits -- including all retirees and surviving spouses -- by the current number of workers. On top of that, they factored in all their employee-related administrative costs and jiggered the medical costs with "estimated" values.
When you remove the overhead and retirees from the equation, the total compensation of active workers is $41 per hour. Their base salary is only $28 per hour.
Sure, Detroit is burdened by pension costs. So are many other industries. But that's entirely different from saying that their current workers earn three times the average wage.
Everyone has a right to an opinion, but no one has a "right" to be misinformed. Stories like this are released and repeated for one reason: to generate resentment toward union workers and sympathy for corporate management. With government loans on the table and pro-union legislation on the horizon, I'm not surprised this is happening now.
-- John Johnson, Ventura

Re: Richard Larsen's Nov. 25 essay, "The republic must stand":
Larsen implies that the passage of Proposition 8 is discrimination by "heartless" voters who must be restrained by the courts. The courts, he says, are going to reverse this discrimination and administer the compassion that's lacking in the general populace.
Look, I'm just some guy, but it seems obvious that all laws discriminate. Every law is about drawing a line somewhere. And when we do that, there are always minorities who are left outside of those lines.
The debate, therefore, is not about discrimination; it's about agreeing where best to draw the lines. We're probably all content that nudists are not allowed to practice their nudity in public -- as natural as that may seem to nudists -- but I doubt that we think of ourselves as heartless because we approve of modesty laws. It's easy when we agree on the lines, not so easy when we don't.
Where does that leave us with the definition of marriage? Is including same-sex partners in that definition akin to the historic civil rights struggle of African-Americans? African-Americans don't seem to think so. They voted 70 percent in favor of Proposition 8.
If we draw the line defining marriage as one-man-one-woman, minorities are automatically left out. Yet, if we amend the line to include same-sex partners, minorities will still be left out: multiple-partner relationships, adult-child relationships, human-animal relationships, etc., will be left out. What will we say to them at that point when they cry discrimination, hatredand bigotry against the form of love they wish to express? We'll say that we don't hate them, but we are not going to include them in the legal definition of marriage.
And how does Larsen think that drawing a line to exclude those minorities will be different from the line we are currently drawing with the passage of Proposition 8? He'll say that they are not morally equivalent. Bingo! The issue is moral equivalence. Rights follow. And this can be debated in a civil fashion without the inflammatory rhetoric of hatred, bigotry and heartlessness.
-- Steve Stiles, Ventura

Re: your Dec. 1 article, "Dean tries to save college's deep water running class":
Is it time to take the word "community" out of the Ventura County Community College District name?
The decision to drop deep water running from the 2009 course offerings without notice to the instructor, and without exploring the option of retaining it as a community education program, is distressing. Designating it as community education would allow the program to continue as community service on a fee basis, thus fulfilling the mission of providing resident taxpayers with access to college facilities.
To unilaterally remove this program from the college catalog of offerings without notice, and the disregard of potential options available to retain it, demonstrates a "rush to judgment" and a lack of concern for the negative effect on our community.
We are all suffering budget problems, but do we throw the baby out with the bath water? Or, do we investigate the simple option of changing the designation from college course to community education on a fee basis?
Before we remove the word "community" from VCCCD, let's explore this option before canceling a successful and necessary program.
-- Edward T. Buckle, Ventura

Re: Christy Weir's Nov. 26 letter, "Power of buying local":
The Ventura mayor suggested we all buy only from Ventura merchants. I wish I were a Ventura merchant and everybody pledged only to buy from me. I'd probably be as nice as the next merchant, generally speaking, but I would be in business, and like many local gasoline stations that also saw a chance to really clean up, I would hike my prices immediately to whatever such a captive audience would bear. After all, they buy from me or they don't buy. What a gold mine!
It's a nice-sounding but dumb idea, even though I do think Weir has been a pretty good mayor.
Many of us go down the road of Councilman Jim Monahan, who said he thinks people will support Wal-Mart, as I do in the now-upcoming election, and allow good old American competition to prevail. If the same item costs substantially less in Oxnard, or Camarillo, then let the Ventura merchants compete or, sad to say, close their doors.
It's a tough economic world out there right now, and while merchants' struggles to compete are hurtful to watch, we are all guarding our money and looking for the best deals.
I gotta go now. I'm off to Oxnard to shop at Wal-Mart.
-- Ross R. Olney, Ventura

As an independent voter, I am concerned about the selections Barack Obama is making for various posts in his administration, which informed sources are calling the "best and the brightest."
Anyone remember the "best and the brightest" from the Kennedy-Johnson era -- Robert McNamara, Dean Rusk, McGeorge Bundy, Walt Rostow, etc? They also were Ivy League, privileged, brilliant and well-intentioned elitist who knew what was best for everyone. What a mess they made!
David Halberstam's book, "The Best and The Brightest" revealed their many failings.
Frankly, I would like to see some ordinary folks involved as advisers to Obama, some common-sense types who come from less privileged backgrounds. I think he is going to need these types of advisers for balance as he faces the list of huge problems in the coming years. I want him to succeed.
-- Cliff Hodge, Westlake Village

I have a question for all those staunch NRA members who are convinced that allowing every citizen to be armed, in public, will increase safety for everyone. I'll ask it as Dr. Phil might: In light of the events at the Palm Desert Toys R Us, the day after Thanksgiving, "How's that working out for you?"
Witness accounts reveal that two women began an argument that escalated into a physical fight. At this point, their husbands arrived on the scene. One hoisted his shirt to reveal his handgun, whereby the other, in the best "paper, scissors, rock" tradition, brought out his own, whereupon the two proceeded to chase each other down an aisle, firing until each was dead.
Good thing the two were "packing." After all, the women might have been scratched, or even cut, had their men not intervened.
What could possibly be safer than a running gun battle through the aisles of a crowded Toys R Us on what is, possibly, the busiest shopping day of the year?
But at least one tragic result of this "macho" intervention is that while neither of the women suffered further physical injury, they now get to join each others as widows.
Now, tell us again, gun people, just how having these two private individuals armed made that Palm Desert Toys R Us a safer place on what proved to be a true "Black Friday" for at least two families.
-- Bob Jackson, Simi Valley

Re: your Nov. 30 editorial, "The hoax's on you":
So, as I believed all along, Gov. Sarah Palin really does know where Africa is and that it's a continent. I wonder if this Eitan Gorlin character and his partner know as much about where their self-respect is. Thanks to The Star for exposing this pair of fools.
-- Roy W. Hogue, Newbury Park

Re: your Nov. 20 article, "Thousand Oaks reluctantly agrees to take housing step":
Elected officials of Thousand Oaks -- including Mayor Jacqui Irwin and Councilmember Claudia Bill-de la Peña -- unanimously voted for the zoning and approval for nearly 2,000 new housing units within the city. They claimed state mandates dictate what, where, and the size and number of the structures be built within a given city.
To quote Irwin, "The state is shoving these numbers down our throat and not allowing us control. And the states comes in and says, 'Well we don't really care about all of your local initiatives. You will take this housing.'"
My question is: Whatever became of the "slow growth ordinance" that this wondrous city became infamous for 30-plus years ago?
The construction of new homes and businesses shall be ludicrous, especially within this economic downturn. Drive throughout the city. The number of for-sale, bank-owned and foreclosure signs outnumber those homes withstanding.
Shame on the elected officials who are supposed to uphold the well-being and good for and of this city. I am ashamed to say that votes were cast for you both. Not so within the next election year.
This city needs not new housing developments of any magnitude. Stop the added congestion. Cease the destruction of precious land. Preserve the open space that we are so blessed with -- that makes Thousand Oaks the wondrous city that it shall be.
-- Natasha L. Jones, Thousand Oaks

Re: Richard Larsen's Nov. 25 essay, "The republic must stand":
Larsen is correct. We are a republic, not a democracy. Elected representatives are less likely to impose drastic changes than emotionally aroused voters could in a pure democracy. Also, minority rights are better protected by republican principles. An example of democracy gone awry is where two wolves and a lamb vote on tonight's dinner.
But in the three states where same-sex marriage was legalized, it was imposed by narrow judicial decisions, not elected representatives. Our courts have increasingly usurped the constitutional authority of legislators to the point where one might say we are neither a democracy nor a republic but are governed by the judiciary. And the courts haven't always championed justice for all. Think of the Dred Scott and Plessy vs. Ferguson decisions, which denied black citizens basic rights; and the one legalizing the World War II internment of U.S. citizens of Japanese origin.
So when one-judge majorities order drastic changes to the basic societal concept of marriage, and elected representatives won't respond to the will of the people, then direct democratic action becomes appropriate. Thus we had Proposition 13 in 1978 and now Proposition 8.
Larsen and others seem to believe that all opposition to same-sex marriage is based upon narrow religious beliefs. But it's perfectly reasonable for agnostics, atheists or nonbelievers by any name to oppose same-sex marriage on the grounds that traditional marriage is an important foundation for an organized, healthy society.
The argument goes that since interracial marriage was once also illegal in many states, some day we will look back on traditional marriage as a quaint concept. Well, many things were illegal years ago: child molestation, plural and sibling marriage, incest, bestiality, etc. Does that mean all these practices will be accepted some day?
-- John Relle, Thousand Oaks

Re: Richard Larsen's Nov. 25 essay, "The republic must stand":
Larsen brings to words the dirty little secret that those in power in the state of California do not want the people to know. The secret is that the unwashed and uneducated people who voted yes on Proposition 8 are to be ignored and oppressed by the educated and powerful elite. The oppressed group of people are the black, Hispanic, Catholic, Protestant and Mormon people of faith.
According to Larsen and the elite, the unruly voices must be silenced. If those in this oppressed group dare speak out, they are spat upon, called vile names, have property defaced or destroyed, have their businesses boycotted and their vote nullified. Legislators will defy the constitution to ensure they are kept in check. This group knows what it means to be oppressed in the 21st century.
Where are the cries for "hate crime" protection for this group? Where are the investigative reporters looking into the efforts by Sacramento legislators to deny their vote? By Larsen's reasoning, voter disenfranchisement of blacks and Hispanics is taken to a new level where even when they vote, those votes must be disallowed because they are just the ignorant masses.
When will the media, including The Star, start filling pages and air time with the whole story -- the story from the side of the voiceless, silent majority that just wants to protect its constitutional right to self-determination? From those who want to protect their rights from the Orwellian elite who control the masses by redefining the very meaning of the words we speak?
Larsen and those who think like him totally ignore the fact that their draconian methods are defiling church-owned marriage, the most sacred covenant in all faiths, by judicial fiat. Where is the cry for separation of the state from imposing its version of religion on the church? Who will give voice to the truly oppressed?
-- Clark Brenneise, Moorpark

Re: Richard Larsen's Nov. 25 essay, "The republic must stand":
Larsen cites the Federalist Papers to explain a position in favor of homosexual marriage using the premise that it is a right. The premise is flawed, just as rights for a polygamist and his lifestyle should never be considered. Laws are instituted for the public good, and rights continue to be denied accordingly. It is neither discriminatory nor in conflict with equal protection laws.
The factious group cited in the Papers could not be the proponents of traditional marriage, but would instead be the homosexual marriage promoters masquerading it as a right. Any other view would be insulting to the Papers' authors.
In 1977, California representatives placed language in an existing law to remove any doubt about the meaning of traditional marriage. In 1996, the Marriage Defense Act was instituted into law by U.S. representatives to preserve traditional marriage. In 2008, four activist judges changed California law and subverted the will of the people. One remedy for such betrayal by the government is with a popular vote through the recall or initiative process -- a republican principle.
The Papers' authors had warned of representatives "of sinister designs, may by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests of the people." A popular vote is sometimes necessary to prevent a subversion of the people's will.
Also, people of faith aren't forcing religious belief on anyone, only defending the moral principles already in place for the public good. Moral principles are already enshrined in the constitutions and laws of our country. Right reason and natural law are enough to prove the intrinsic wrong of a homosexual marriage, and calling millions of people bigots and now heartless only fuels the hatred spewing from the homosexual marriage faction.
-- Jerry McKay, Newbury Park

It was so close, but yet not to be. We are again stuck with that opportunist, Tony Strickland. The voters have lost a real opportunity for meaningful leadership by not electing a far superior state Senate candidate, Hannah-Beth Jackson.
When we have elected officials who continue to block budget compromises and refuse to negotiate helpful changes, only the people lose out. Strickland is a joke -- and talk about an opportunist! When was he ever a pro-environmentalist? His "company" promoting ocean wave power was just a cheaply funded sham intent on trying to get a few more votes from the central coastal areas. If he truly wants to see more environmental changes, then he should help pass more controls on polluters.
We will look forward to helping Jackson beat Strickland the next time. We know she will continue to serve the voters in meaningful ways until that time comes. She is a great candidate, a terrific community advocate and, most importantly, a kind and gentle person.
-- Sally & Ken Hibbitts, Westlake Village

Re: Thomas D. Elias' Nov. 28 commentary, "Governor gives Obama climate-change torch":
Notice how, for liberals like Elias, the operative phrase is now "climate change" instead of "global warming?" That's because for every study showing the Earth is warming, there is a counter-study stating that, in fact, the Earth is cooling. So by using the term "climate-change," you can't lose. The Earth's climate is always changing. That's no surprise.
But the question should be, "Is climate change being caused by human activity?"
Some 15,000 or so years ago at the end of the last major ice age, what is now New York City and much of the rest of the northern hemisphere was covered in ice. Then, magically, the Earth started warming up and the ice retreated. But how did that happen? Our cavemen ancestors were not driving around in SUVs that were depositing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Could it be that changes in the intensity of solar radiation and other natural factors could have far more effect on the Earth's climate than human activity?
The real issue for liberals is: How can we use "climate change" to extract more taxes and give the government more control over the people?
If liberals would just come out and admit that's the real reason they're so fixated on "climate change," I would have more respect for them.
-- Bob Klepner, Newbury Park

Re: your Nov. 30 Opinion page:
Well, you know you made an impact when Proposition 8 merits its own section on the Opinion page three weeks after the election. I say that's progress.
But real progress will come only if the Supreme Court gets it right this time. Maybe they'll finally understand that the traditional family is the fundamental unit of society. And, just maybe, they'll see that it's the only hope for this crazy, mixed-up state of ours.
Stay tuned. There's more to come.
-- Joe Hernandez, Thousand Oaks

The only thing worse than our state's financial mess is the list of the pitiful solutions that our worthless lawmakers have come up with to fix it.
As I sat in my car at a busy Ventura intersection, I found a perfect solution. More than half the drivers that went by while I was waiting for the light to change had a cell phone buried in their ear! Isn't it still illegal to drive while holding a phone to your ear?
A well-positioned cop on that corner could cite driver after driver for illegal phone usage. With all of the busy intersections in the state, and $20 a pop, every busy day -- do the math! No more deficit! And guess what? No tax or registration increases! You're welcome, governor!
-- Michael Thames, Ojai

Japan Rail is retiring its zero series bullet trains. They are 44 years old. Amtrak should buy these old bullet trains. It would be a significant upgrade, as the rolling stock that Amtrak uses is older than 44 years. Another significant upgrade is that the toilets all work on the bullet trains, something that is significantly lacking on Amtrak trains.
-- Charles E. Voigtsberger, Ventura

Re: Dale Sweitzer's Nov. 25 commentary, "Blame the unions":
Sweitzer seem to be of the opinion that the American automakers' meltdown is the fault of the auto union members -- the ones who do the real work, assembling the vehicles. But they don't determine what kinds they build. No, that's left up to the CEOs. They decided to build those Hummers, Escalades, giant SUVs, etc.
The auto industry meltdown is less than 5 percent of the economic disaster we are now in. I guess Sweitzer also blames the unions for all the problems of AIG, Bear-Stearns, Lehman Bros., Washington Mutual, Citigroup, etc. But I don't think many of them have unions. What they do have in common is way overpaid, incompetent CEOs.
The autoworkers in Detroit make an average of $28 per hour, plus benefits. That is nearly the same as the Japanese plants in the south. The difference is the promised pensions for the former U.S. autoworkers who retired 10, 20 or 30 years ago. I guess Sweitzer would like to throw those old workers out on the street. Who cares about promises and agreements that were given?
The best way for us to help bring back the middle class is by studying history starting after World War II. Because of unions, back then a father could buy a house and support his family while Mom could stay home and raise the kids. During the last 30 years, with the slow demise of unions and benefits, most moms had to go to work just to survive, and the middle class kept shrinking, especially in the last eight years, but most of all, in the last few months.
Vastly inept, overly compensated CEOs and their boards all seem to think that multimillion-dollar incomes, corporate jets and golden parachutes are still part of their entitlement, even if they bankrupt the business. Now the time has come to bring back unions and let shareholders have a say in how these CEOs and boards do their jobs. Maybe we should send these corporate heads down to the assembly line for a few days and they might learn how to actually do a job.
Bringing back unions would revitalize and help restore our middle class. It's time for change. During the last 30 years, the pendulum has gone way too far to the right. It's now time for it to go back to the left and help the common man.
-- John L. Thawley, Santa Paula

Re: Bill O'Reilly's Nov. 29 commentary, "As the economy tanks, Dad's advice comes in handy":
O'Reilly is now full of praise for his father's saving ways, but does the columnist give even the slightest hint that the overwhelming preponderance of his commentaries has been in the support of exuberant spending?
-- Duane Waln, Camarillo

Re: Betty Murray's Nov. 26 letter, "It's all semantics":
I totally agree with Murray. More than 2,000 years ago, the union between a man and a woman was called a holy matrimony in all the civilized world. Since the discovery of America, and when the United States became a nation, the holy matrimony between a man and a woman has been called a marriage. The union of two same-sex individuals should not be called marriage, because it will be offensive to all the married couples.
If no one comes with a better word I suggest "union" instead of "marriage." If union is not acceptable to gay couples , we should have a contest to find a good appropriate name other than marriage.
-- Armando Cardenas, Camarillo

I find it so hard to believe that religious institutions, which want to make the world a better place, gave so much money to make sure Proposition 8 passed. I thought that religion was supposed to foster happiness and understanding. If homosexuals are happy, why ruin their happiness? I read that one institution contributed more than $40 million to ensure Proposition 8 would pass.
If these religious institutions, of which many are to blame, want to make the world a better place, I would think that they have better things to do with their money. Can you imagine if they gave $40 million for Thanksgiving meals and clothing for the homeless? The homeless in Los Angeles and Ventura County would have a glorious holiday. Instead, these entities have decided that their money is better spent telling people who they can and can't be with, rather than giving money where it is needed. That's religion? If it is, count me and my checkbook out.
-- Robert M. Weinstock, Calabasas

A couple of weeks ago, when the Food Share bins showed up at my local grocery store, I said to myself, "What can I do?" While I was doing my weekly shopping, I bought four cans of chili with beans, two cans of refried beans and two boxes of macaroni and cheese, all on sale, at a total cost of $10. When I put my donations in the bin, I saw that someone had donated baby cereal.
The next week when I went to the store, baby food was on sale at 10 jars for $7, so I bought 10. I don't feel this has that much of an impact on my total food budget.
This Saturday, I will see what is on sale. I'm sure I can afford another $5 to $10.
Everyone, watch what is on sale. I'm sure a lot of you can afford $3 to $5 per week to help.
I wish they had these bins out year-round, because I know that this is an ongoing problem and I think more people would be willing to buy $3 to $5 in extra groceries rather than write a check to the charity.
-- Kerrie L. Cortez, Ventura

Re: your Nov. 28 article, "County to get $2.5 million for terror fight":
Obviously, Jay Allen, Homeland Security official, does not live around Ventura County. Otherwise, he would not have made the remark that he couldn't give specifics as to why the Oxnard area was chosen to receive $2.5 million to protect it from possible terrorist attacks.
Anyone living in or around Oxnard would have to be blind and deaf not to know that they were living in or near an area with the most violent crimes and among the highest number of homicides occurring each year in the United States.
Including the entire Highway 101 corridor from Ventura to Thousand Oaks as a funded protected area seems to be overkill -- no pun intended. A better use of the federal grant money would be to hire armed escorts for those persons needing to travel on that stretch of the 101 from Rice Road to the Santa Clara River that passes through Oxnard.
I am sure that all persons living in Ventura County are grateful for this federal money to help protect our fellow citizens living in Oxnard from local terrorists. But $2.5 million is just not enough. While local law enforcement has reduced the number of killings in recent years, they have never been able to stop the violence in Oxnard, and they probably couldn't even if they were granted ten times that amount of money. Rather than grant federal funds, the government should invite federal troops into Oxnard to stamp out the gang activity and allow its citizens to once again live in peace, comfort and safety.
-- Robert Wilson, Camarillo

Re: Denny Weinberg's Nov. 28 letter, "Customers boost for Lassen's":
I would like to remind Weinberg and everyone else that the protests in front of Lassen's are not in violation of Lassen's rights, nor do they object to Peter Lassen's right to vote the way he wishes. They are merely informing potential customers of the financial support Lassen gave to the Proposition 8 campaign and allowing customers to make their own choices based on that information.
Lassen can continue his support of Proposition 8 as long as he likes. Nobody is challenging his constitutional right to do so.
I approached Lassen's, where I have been a customer for many years, and saw the protesters and stopped to question them. When I learned that Lassen's had supported Proposition 8 financially, I was disappointed and alarmed. I am a straight, married mother and wife and also very liberal. Many of Lassen's customers are also very liberal because it is we "liberals" who long ago began talking about "going green," protecting our environment, eating healthy, advocating the advantage of organic foods, and being vegetarians for moral as well as health reasons. That is the substance of our patronage of Lassen's stores.
So it was shocking to learn that Lassen had elected to support Proposition 8 and deny equal rights under the law to those whose lifestyles are somewhat different than the "usual."
Proposition 8 requires a constitutional amendment to deny certain rights to a specific group of people. Stop and think how hideously serious and horrible that sounds and is.
Regardless of whether you support or abhor a gay lifestyle, you can completely ignore it without removing and denying constitutional rights. It does not have to be a part of your life. However, we are supposed to be moving forward, evolving, opening up and becoming a more tolerant, accepting and enlightened society. So when we see a store like Lassen's supports an amendment to the constitution denying same-sex marriage rights, it is only natural that we, their customers, would be upset.
I turned around that day and left the premises without entering Lassen's. I will not be back there again.
-- Jan Schulman, Oxnard

In the beginning, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples had a constitutional right to marry. Some people disagreed and, with the primary leadership of two different churches, set out to amend the constitution to strip away those rights. During the campaign, a lot of unsubstantiated claims were made and mean-spirited things were said about the morals of same-sex couples wanting to commit to a relationship through marriage. Proposition 8 passed, and now, understandably, angry things are being said to those who pushed for its passage by those whose rights were stripped away.
Although both churches claim that God communicates directly to the leader of each church, they have a history of getting it wrong -- to name a few, the brutal inquisition lasting hundreds of years, allowing pedophile priests to remain in positions for years and exposing young children to their crimes and excluding blacks from attaining the priesthood and therefore being excluded from the Celestial Kingdom except as a servant until 1978. Can you wrap your brain around the concept of God's segregated heaven? Did the door leading into that Celestial Kingdom have a sign instructing, "Whites only"?
Even with their history of being wrong, I suppose you can accept whatever these churches say about same-sex marriages on blind faith, or you can check for yourself by looking at a model where those rights exist. The state of Massachusetts allows same-sex marriages without negative impact, and the divorce rate is the lowest in the country. In fact, my wife and I recently visited the state, and our 43-year marriage was strengthened by the trip.
-- Bob Stroh, Fillmore

Our economy has faltered. Banks and other financial institutions are failing. People are losing their homes, their jobs and their retirement investments.
The federal government implemented a bailout plan designed to rescue the financial institutions. They had to modify it because either it wasn't working or it wasn't working fast enough.
I think there is a way to speed up the recovery and help the average working citizen. The federal government ought to issue grants to fix our infrastructure.
Many of our highway bridges are deficient, some dangerously so. Fix them.
We know more power plants and distribution networks will be required soon. Build them.
Amtrak does not have enough rolling stock to put the route east from New Orleans back into service. Buy some.
Passenger and freight trains must go both ways on one track. Lay new tracks so there is a separate track for each direction.
While we are at it, let's electrify our railroads. We will have to do that soon to fight air pollution and global warming anyway.
Federal grants could fix these and a host of other problems. The work would provide jobs for people and also produce something the nation needs. If you agree, contact your elected officials and tell them so.
-- Crawford L. Sachs, Oxnard

Re: your Nov. 28 article, "County to get $2.5 million for terror fight":
The $2.5 million national security grant to the Oxnard area must certainly be vital to our national security. Although The Star wrote an interesting article, it seems a little skeptical of the reason or purpose. Let's analyze the situation.
We have a large Navy base and the only deep-water harbor between Los Angeles and San Francisco, as everybody reminds us. Officials also mentioned the Reagan Library and the Oxnard Airport. For some reason, nobody mentioned the Oxnard bus station or the train station. What about The Oaks mall in Thousand Oaks, the Camarillo Premium Outlets and the movie theater complexes in the county?
Why would a handful of foreign terrorists target Port Hueneme over the huge Navy base in San Diego? Maybe it's the Mazda cars stacked up in the port area, the cattle brought in from the Channel Islands, or the bananas brought in from Latin America.
If foreign terrorists targeted the Pentagon, the World Trade Center and possibly the White House, why would they be interested in the Reagan Library or the Oxnard Airport? What about airports in Los Angeles, Ontario, San Jose, Oakland, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego and Orange County? Even Santa Barbara's airport seems busier and more important.
The moral to the story is: Don't expect common sense or good financial management to come out of Washington, D.C., even in a deep recession or a depression. It's too bad there isn't some money allocated to protect colleges and universities from domestic terrorism, such as what occurred at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University.
But if Congress plans to dole out $4 trillion to prop up bankrupt insurance companies, stock brokerages, mortgage companies, banks, and maybe auto manufacturers while sustaining wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and maybe Iran or Venezuela -- what's another $2.5 million? Chicken feed.
-- Tom Novinson, Ventura

Re: your Nov. 26 articles, "Initiative banning big-box grocers on ballot" and "Ventura council weighs what it can cut":
On the same day we read in The Star that the Ventura City Council decided to put the Wal-Mart issue to a citizen vote, on the very next page we read that Ventura has a very severe budget crisis. Well, a Wal-Mart would bring in a lot of tax dollars -- money that is now going to Oxnard.
So the Stop Wal-Mart folks have 8,000 signatures gathered by paid signature gatherers who will say anything to get people to sign. Last I heard, Ventura has more than 100,000 residents. With all due respect, what gives the Stop Wal-Mart people the right to tell the rest of us where we can shop? People like Wal-Mart -- otherwise, they would not shop or work there. And people who don't like Wal-Mart don't have to shop or work there.
I don't think the Stop Wal-Mart people are that numerous. They are just vocal and show up at City Council meetings, and of course, hire paid signature gatherers.
I think the Ventura City Council needs to do their job and quit caving to this special interest. Get a backbone and put the Wal-Mart in. Put it by the car dealers if people are concerned about traffic on Victoria Avenue, but put it in. We need the revenue for our police and fire departments.
-- Alison Carlson, Ventura

On Aug. 26, Karey Marsh was killed by an intoxicated driver while apparently jogging in a bike line, not on a sidewalk and not on the road shoulder. If she had not been jogging in what is essentially a traffic lane, the car might have missed her, and she would still be alive today.
Several times a week I see:
-- Joggers, male and female, running in bike or even traffic lanes alongside perfectly good 6-foot-wide sidewalks.
-- Joggers -- pedestrians -- running the wrong way with traffic, not against traffic, as required by law.
-- Joggers wearing music headsets, which prevent them from hearing the warning sounds of traffic.
-- Nighttime or early-morning joggers wearing dark, nonreflective clothing, which makes them virtually invisible to drivers until it is too late.
-- Any combination of the above.
Every time I see a jogger taking a dumb risk, I fear for his or her safety. The message to joggers is clear: Be smart, be cautious and live.
-- Bradford Boyes, Ventura