99°F
weather icon Windy

Letters to the Editor

Democrats propose bill to change Nevada elections

Here we go again. Democrat Socialist and Nevada Assemblyman Toby Yeager is proposing an Emergency Request Assembly Bill named AB 597. The bill as I read it wants to change Nevada election law to allow non-partisan voters to vote in primary presidential elections. Also, to allow these non-partisan voters to request a special ballot so they can cast a vote for any party.

Democrat socialists, to be fair, never give up. Last election they tried to pull a fast one on Nevada voters to allow for Ranked Choice Voting calling the bill Question 3. They cannot even be honest in naming their bills. Now the Democrat socialists are trying to push through a bill in emergency speed to change our election law. This bill will pile on even more work for county election officials causing them to print even more ballots.

Instead of trying to make our elections less confusing, they are doing the opposite. Government can’t be everything for everybody. People have to take on the responsibility of their own actions. If they wanted to vote in a partisan election, they can change their preference. Instead, our government causes every person who gets a driver’s license, applies for welfare or an Identification card, to be a registered voter. If the applicant was not worried at the time this was happening to them, it is up to them to take the responsibility to make the changes to their own voting preference and not the government.

It would be great if the Democrat socialists would keep to the KISS theory, which is, “Keep it simple stupid.” Nevada should have voter ID, paper ballots, and one-day voting. They cannot build a better mousetrap.

Arnold Breitenbach

Ego issues possibly cause of Trump and Musk brouhaha

Finally, the Democrats and pundits have something to talk about that doesn’t go against 70 to 90% of the people: The big fight between Trump and Musk and what’s been said about the other. Things like the “Big Beautiful Bill” upset Musk because EV incentives and the Epstein tapes’ release will show Trump’s involvement with Epstein.

No question there are some ego issues with these two powerful men as there pretty much has been throughout history with very few exceptions. You have to have a large ego to even run for president or gain a large ego after having great success as an entrepreneur and it’s extremely rare to keep it under control always.

So their relationship may never be what it once was, but signs of peace deals have been popping up. Trump has mellowed in his criticism and Musk has attempted to reach out to Trump. The main issue starts with “the big beautiful bill,” which Trump got taught a lesson in his first term on how difficult it is to deal with all the big egos in the House and Senate — most egos just grow bigger there.

Meanwhile, Musk, coming from the private sector and strongly believing in the free enterprise system, doesn’t understand why you can’t do certain things as easily in government, like when he bought Twitter, he just fired nearly 80% of its employees. You remember when he asked government employees to report what they accomplished in the last week? So many government employees (that really are supposed to work for us) screamed bloody murder. Sometimes most private bosses would look for something that would be quite reasonable if their employees’ work was not obvious.

And lastly, the newly-found joy of politicians, pundits and late-night show hosts, with their twisted minds really believe that the Biden administration with all their big egos as well as the people that were running investigations like the FBI, and all the lawfare they tried to destroy Trump with, while having entire control of everything about Epstein “would not” figured many ways to release the pedophilia of Trump? There are many clowns that get elected and get appointed by the government, but I’m sure they’re are smart enough to expose “the there if there was a there, there.”

David Jaronik

MOST READ
THE LATEST
Free expression — or riot?

What is the line between protected expression and censorship and even criminality?