MAILBAG - March 18, 2007

Blame for Walter Reed rests with local repsIt would be ironic, were it not so horrible a tragedy, to read the opinions of Reps. John Campbell and Dana Rohrabacher on the shameful mess at Walter Reed and veterans hospitals, (That’s Debatable, March 8). They are, to a large extent, responsible.

Over the past six years, this great nation of ours has been hijacked by a faction of the Republican Party that has abandoned its core ethos of fiscal responsibility and constitutional fealty, without as much as a whimper from its rank and file. I do not wish to be drawn into what at this time would be a moot debate about whether the war in Iraq was wise or necessary. It is now abundantly clear to all but the delusionals and the spin doctors that we went to war without a clear strategy to win, with inadequate and ill-equipped force levels, and without a plan or resources to fund the war. The incompetence (of the Bush administration) with which the war has been waged borders on the criminal.

In the midst of this prolonged war, cutting taxes, especially for the wealthy, has been an overriding and maniacal obsession with the present administration and the Republicans in Congress, even if it means trillions of dollars in deficits and short-changing our brave returning heroes. Are Congressmen Campbell and Rohrabacher unaware that the budget for veterans has not kept pace with surging casualties? Did they carry out their constitutional-oversight responsibility over a reckless and inept executive branch?

The blame for the mess at Walter Reed and the veterans hospitals lies primarily with those who opted to fund massive tax cuts while denying adequate resources to care for the tidal wave of physically and mentally wounded from the battlefield.

I appeal to all Republicans in Newport and Huntington who think of themselves as Americans first — and there are thousands of you out there — to pressure the two congressmen to jointly propose a 10%, across-the-board surcharge on all income taxes to finance this war and its resultant casualties. We owe it to our brave soldiers who, to date, are the only ones sacrificing for America.

JAMSHED H. DASTUR

Newport Beach

Shuttling is better than changing flight pathsIn response to Donald Nyre’s comments about John Wayne Airport traffic (“Other cities should hear JWA,” Sounding Off, March 15), it sounds like a pipe dream to me. I don’t know anything about takeoff and landing protocol, but I doubt that anyone who does would support this plan. It seems to me that having aircraft make unnecessary turns during takeoff and landing is not only dangerous, but inefficient. What say the pros?

I still think an airline-dedicated bullet train or maglev train from John Wayne to Long Beach to LAX to Bob Hope to Lancaster (with a possible spur line from Ontario) is the best solution. All flights over of 500 miles would be to and from Lancaster. Trains would only stop at the existing airports (or close by) and security would be conducted at the train terminal or on the train.

Once at Lancaster, the train would let passengers off in a secure area, making airplane boarding fast and efficient. This plan would have minimum effect on the existing airport infrastructure (parking, hotels, etc.) but would take the bulk of the air traffic away from urban areas. The local airports would still serve short-haul commercial flights (and general aviation), where the added time of the Lancaster trip would not be worthwhile.

A major international airport remote from the major population area is workable. Think of Malpensa airport near Milan, Italy.

R.W. JOHNSON

Costa Mesa

Idea to change flight paths seems soundAs a resident of the Bluffs since 1971 and living directly under the flight path of John Wayne Airport, I felt a deep resonance with Donald Nyre’s Sounding Off commentary about sharing. We Newport Beach residents have been altogether too selfish in reserving all the collateral benefits of air travel out of the airport. The joys of John Wayne Airport should be regarded as a shared gift to such people as Irvine Councilman Larry Agran, and Leonard Kranser and company who have been robbed and denied us of what we enjoy so much right here. Since all those folks in South County doubtless benefit from what JWA has to offer, I feel it is only fair to share flight paths, traffic, jet fuel pollution, and other assorted features of air transportation with those poor, neglected folks in the south. We must be generous, caring and sharing, assigning these gifts first to Agran and Kranser who have made themselves so visible in critiquing airport questions.

DAVID H. WALLACE

Newport Beach

Immigration statistics will be valuableCosta Mesa’s February decline in immigration violation detentions may be a natural statistical variation or it may reflect a growing effectiveness of the local enforcement action, (“Number of immigration detainers drops,” March 2). If enforcement activity is consistent, monthly statistics over the coming year will reveal important information.

It is unfortunate that we lack the political and moral will at the state and federal levels to deal with the growing national crisis of illegal immigration. I applaud the city of Costa Mesa for taking responsible action and encourage its leaders to continue this effort — but only in a way that ensures the appropriate protection of civil liberties and personal respect due everyone under the laws of the United States.

DOUGLAS M. WEST

Newport Beach

Publisher shouldn’t reject democracyI read Tom Johnson’s peevish column with astonishment, (“Four ‘great’ minds think alike,” Fair Game, March 2). It’s sad when politicians reject democracy and equally so when newspaper publishers do. The council decision that Johnson derides was a democratic one. But clearly Johnson despises “those who live on the hill across the street,” whereas some may say their wishes are as valid, if not more so, as the wishes of others. But let us consider the city as a whole. I wouldn’t call the Pilot’s recent poll scientific, but let us assume for Johnson’s benefit that it is. It showed an overwhelming preference for the park. On a straight choice it’s a whopping 16 to 1 (48% to 3%)! Almost everybody wants a park in some form (96%). Only half want a city hall combined with that park. These results, if accepted, leave little basis for the idea that a park is the exclusive desire of local residents.

TOM MOULSON

Corona del Mar

Columnist is correct about one-issue mayorI want to commend Steve Smith for his excellent commentary regarding Mayor Allan Mansoor and the Costa Mesa City Council, (“Political flub, leadership flaw,” March 14). It stated, well and concisely, the dilemma we face with Mansoor, Eric Bever and Wendy Leece versus Katrina Foley and Linda Dixon. Smith is very correct in stating that outside of the issue of immigration, there really isn’t much Mansoor has to offer voters. But there were enough voters who were swayed by his stance on illegal immigration.

KARIN AHLF

Costa Mesa