Illegal immigrants come in all colors, even white | NevadaAppeal.com

Illegal immigrants come in all colors, even white

This is in response to Eve Mason’s tirade against illegal immigrants. I happen to be the daughter-in-law of two of those immigrants. My father-in-law arrived here legally in 1922 from Scotland. He was here three years, and he sent for his wife. For some unknown reason, Nan came across the Canadian border without a passport. My father-in-law decided not to proceed with citizenship, in respect to my mother-in-law. They were here “illegally” from 1925 to 1964. They lived in constant fear of being deported. They worked, raised five wonderful children, and contributed to the United States.

When they became “grandfathered” citizens in 1964, they were proud.

I drive a school bus in Dayton. I have Hispanic and Asian children, and I don’t care if they are here legally or not. Their parents work, feed them, clothe them, and they are good kids. Just because someone is of color doesn’t automatically make them illegals, or here for a free ride. Just because they don’t speak English doesn’t make them illegals.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m proud to share what I have with those coming from other countries.

Mrs. Mason states she is not prejudiced, and proceeds to tell us of her friends of “color.” Mrs. Mason singled out Asians and Hispanics (Mexicans) in her letter. What about the Canadians? You left them out.

I see racism here. Not all illegals are here for the welfare. There are a lot of naturalized that are getting more than illegals.

Recommended Stories For You

Not racist? It sure seemed that way to me.

LINDA BEVERIDGE

Dayton

Was their life before cell phones?

Isn’t it about time that some restrictions be put on cell phone use while driving? Emergencies excepted, of course.

More and more, I observe the people who routinely roll through stop signs, speed through red lights, make unsafe lane changes (in vehicles that apparently are not equipped with turn signals), pull out in front of you, etc., all have one thing in common – a cell phone is glued to their ear. Since when did driving require only 50 percent or less of the operator’s attention? In these days of heavy traffic, road construction everywhere and people seemingly in a hurry to get to heaven knows where, drivers need to give all their attention to just one thing – driving! The life saved by doing so just might be their own or someone near and dear to them. How hard is it to drive a few miles without having to talk on a phone? People did it for decades before cell phones (BCP), and the world didn’t come to an end.

While doing the above could be a recipe for disaster, the following is simply an annoyance which could be corrected by good manners and consideration for others. I refer to those folks who carry on long, loud personal conversations in public places such as restaurants, casinos and even the grocery store. I don’t think anyone else is interested in their dinner plans or Aunt Matilda’s recent surgery or any other part of their personal life.

While dining out, I’ve seen many people who are on their cell phones for the entire meal while their companion(s) sit there looking off into space. How inconsiderate can you be? And no, they aren’t business calls.

Although it probably seems I’m anti-cell phone, I’m far from it. In the right circumstances, they are invaluable. No doubt, lives have been saved because someone had a cell phone.

If drivers would just use common sense, they would realize driving needs 100 percent concentration all the time to avoid putting themselves and/or others in jeopardy. As for the rest of the people I referred to, please show a little consideration for those around you. Is that really too much to ask?

MARILYN STURGES

Carson City

Bush must put money where mouth is and fire Rove now

President Bush, waving our flag high, stated that anyone who leaked important national security information would be ousted immediately. Yet again, when one of his own is the culprit, his statements and standards change.

President Bush must fire Karl Rove NOW. Karl Rove has threatened our nation’s security. He should be in Guantanamo Bay – and the truth about Bush’s Iraq policy, created before 9/11, should be investigated thoroughly, and the information made public.

Karl Rove represents the president and our great nation of America, and it is unacceptable to have a traitor within our midst.

CAROL COLIP

Fallon