Traffic reports lacking

I just moved to Simi Valley and work in Westlake Village. I was told to take Olsen Road to Highway 23, the shortest route. It is. My normal commute time was running 20 minutes. I leave at 7:15 a.m. to be at work by 8. I'd had no problems until March 29. No cars were moving at all at Wood Ranch, so I turned around and took Highway 118 to Highway 23. Needless to say, I was nine minutes late.

I could find no information at all about this event. This was not normal rush-hour backup. This was traffic at a dead stop.

Without any publicized information, I had to assume it was a bad accident. Therefore, traffic was not going to be a problem the next day.

Nonetheless, I left earlier than normal. As I reached the top of the hill after the Wood Ranch entrance where the divided highway breaks so you can turn, I see stopped vehicles.

I was stuck in it good now, and I ended up being 45 minutes late to work and was fired from a very good position I had worked hard to get. I was fired for being late two days in a row.

I am now learning the light was out and the California Department of Transportation or Edison was working in that area.

Am I the only person who was late these two days? Surely, I was the only one fired for it. My boss did not believe me about the mess. More importantly, why was there no information? An event causing such a major delay in a high-volume commuter intersection should have prompted some news somewhere.

Why didn't anybody think this event was newsworthy? I do, especially since I was fired because I had no idea what was happening.

— Karlene Van Leer, Simi Valley

U.S. cannot afford the war

It would seem that, after the 2006 election, it would have been clear to all elected officials that the war needed to end — if, for no other reason than we cannot afford this war.

Let's take the money back from President Bush's war cronies and spend it here to provide jobs and assistance to working men and women who need it.

Let's provide the proper assistance to returning GIs and job training for their life after their service.

Let's actually buy them equipment that works for the job they are currently doing in battle.

Let's set up an oversight committee and find out just where the $1.6 trillion really went. It didn't go to the troops, that's for certain.

The Bush administration could have dumped $1.6 trillion into its corporate friends' laps to do any number of creative humanitarian efforts in the U.S. Bush could have affected poverty, roads and bridges, education, healthcare or assisted millions of children here.

All those right-wing, megamoneyed-interest corporations would have still been paid $1.6 trillion. Bush may have had a decent legacy.

But that would require a moral compass, leadership and a brain on the part of Bush. And it would actually require the companies to do the work they were paid to do. Not like in Iraq where hospitals are paid for and never built.

It has happened here in the U.S. We need not look any further than the horrific situation and aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to see the failing priorities of the current administration. Those who watch passively the atrocities of man and do nothing are as guilty as those who carry out those atrocities.

Maybe we could hold corrupt individuals accountable and put them in prison. Figure it out, lawmakers, or others will be coming for your jobs.

— Tom Gianelli, Thousand Oaks

Is war support political?

For the absolute legion of Bill O'Reilly devotees who read The Star and contribute to its editorial page, I have one very simple question; but it must be answered as O'Reilly would demand that it be: yes or no, no "qualifying," treating you like he treated Rosie O'Donnell on "The View" one day.

Would you be so blindly, unconditionally, loyally and patriotically supporting the war in Iraq, as O'Reilly does, were it being waged by a Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, or any other Democrat?

Yes or no?

I thought not.

— Bob Jackson, Simi Valley

Kids just wanna have fun

Re: Barbara J. Fox's April 27 commentary, "There is nothing to do'? There's plenty to do," a response to Eileen Harris' April 11 commentary, "Giving teens a place here would help avoid tragic crashes":

Most of Fox's statements are old-fashioned and not up to date with what teenagers want to do to pass the time.

Although I am 76 years old and share some of the remarks made about keeping busy by doing chores in and around the house, these views are not typical of the average teens today. Changes in our socioeconomic climate have radically changed family life. Both parents not only must work to stay afloat, but also must consider working part-time as well, leaving little time for anything else. At home alone, what other source of filling time is there for a teenager other than hours of telephone conversations and television?

I recently asked a teenager, the oldest of five children, why her part-time working habits were getting progressively worse the longer she worked. Her reply: "What difference does it make as long as I have money to party?"

When I advised her now is the time in her life she should want to sacrifice having good times so that when she got older she would not have to struggle, she responded: "I don't want to sacrifice, why should I? I want to party and have a good time now!"

I believe this is very typical of today's teenagers.

The Los Angeles area is a mecca for teenage clubs. The city of Ventura has miniature golf, bowling and roller skating. Except for movie theaters, Thousand Oaks and the immediate surrounding areas are void of any of these facilities.

Is walking The Oaks mall enough draw to keep teenagers happy? I don't think so.

— Allen L. Mitchell, Oxnard

Officers also have rights

Re: David Reel's May 7 letter, "On the ball half the time":

As I read Reel's letter, I, too, felt amusement and anger. Amusement at a whining, sniveling letter from someone with "an even deeper, valid distrust for all forms of authority." The quotation says it all (except the valid part).

After giving the best 30 years of my life to law enforcement (and four years before that defending this country in the armed forces), I feel in a position to comment. Yes, the Cindy Conolly case was tragic, but it has been deemed an accident. Now these officers stand accused in a sex scandal. I know Chief John Crombach, and if these officers are found guilty, they will be held accountable. But the Constitution gives us all certain guarantees. Among those guarantees is a right to a fair and impartial trial — you know, innocent until proven guilty.

Did Reel miss Civics 101? And I ask Reel, what has he done in his lifetime to better society? I'm guessing he has never put his hind end on the line for anything or anyone.

What scares me is that people like Reel actually vote in this country.

By the way, thank a veteran for your rights.

— Joe Lombardi, Oxnard

Green washing' a new industry

Re: Peter Bellin's April 23 letter, "Lesser of many evils," a response to my April 18 letter, "Silver lining is a pollutant":

While attempting to be humorous by pointing out that the Law of Unintended Circumstances comes into play with many proposals by environmentalists and global-warming alarmists, I must not have communicated effectively. My intent was to make the simple point that many solutions advanced by seemingly well-meaning people only make the problem worse.

As Sharon Begley writes in the April 21 issue of Newsweek: "We can't afford to make any more mistakes in how to save the planet.' Start by ditching corn ethanol." So who is going to be the gatekeeper? So far, the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Trade Commission have been ineffective.

Bellin bolstered my premise by pointing out that grocery stores and water bottlers profit from the use of plastic bags and bottles. That reminded me of an important point: If there is money to be made, enterprising people will jump on the bandwagon. To make a buck, they are not going to wait until the full ramifications are understood.

Log on to http://www.ecologo.org. The Environmental Choice organization tests products against criteria it call the "six sins of green washing" before permitting the use of its EcoLogo. To green wash is "the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service." Very few products get to use the logo.

How ridiculous can all this become? The April 21 edition of The Star reported that a judge in Oakland has ordered the city to review whether single-use paper bags could be more damaging then single-use plastic bags. According to the article, "Opponents of the ban argue that demand for paper bags would soar under a plastic bag prohibition."

Honest. You can't make this stuff up.

— Dick Schneider, Oak View

S. Paula schools discuss cuts

The Santa Paula Union High School District invites the community to discuss impending education budget cuts tonight at 6:30 at the high school cafeterial, 404 N. Sixth St.

Termination of bus service for high school students and other cuts will be addressed with the community. The district is considering substantial cuts for its 2008-09 fiscal year budget.

The meeting will give the community, especially parents who have students bused to the high school, the opportunity to dialogue with school officials. Parents can offer suggestions, opinions and other concerns. A Spanish translator will be provided.

If you have any questions, contact me at 805-525-0988, ext. 21.

— Karen Ruiz, Santa Paula

(The writer is the executive assistant to the superintendent and board of trustees of the Santa Paula Union High School District. — Editor)

Kids just wanna have fun

Re: Barbara J. Fox's April 27 commentary, "There is nothing to do'? There's plenty to do," a response to Eileen Harris' April 11 commentary, "Giving teens a place here would help avoid tragic crashes":

Most of Fox's statements are old-fashioned and not up to date with what teenagers want to do to pass the time.

Although I am 76 years old and share some of the remarks made about keeping busy by doing chores in and around the house, these views are not typical of the average teens today. Changes in our socioeconomic climate have radically changed family life. Both parents not only must work to stay afloat, but also must consider working part-time as well, leaving little time for anything else. At home alone, what other source of filling time is there for a teenager other than hours of telephone conversations and television?

I recently asked a teenager, the oldest of five children, why her part-time working habits were getting progressively worse the longer she worked. Her reply: "What difference does it make as long as I have money to party?"

When I advised her now is the time in her life she should want to sacrifice having good times so that when she got older she would not have to struggle, she responded: "I don't want to sacrifice, why should I? I want to party and have a good time now!"

I believe this is very typical of today's teenagers.

The Los Angeles area is a mecca for teenage clubs. The city of Ventura has miniature golf, bowling and roller skating. Except for movie theaters, Thousand Oaks and the immediate surrounding areas are void of any of these facilities.

Is walking The Oaks mall enough draw to keep teenagers happy? I don't think so.

— Allen L. Mitchell, Oxnard

Illegals should not get legal status

Re: John M. Crisp's May 1 commentary, "Who are these 12 million illegals living in the U.S.?"

I simply had to pick up a pen to educator Crisp's article promoting a free pass for a very nice illegal. I do wish people would stop pontificating, especially the educated teachers among us. There is no excuse for breaking into or through either house or border, then taking up residence. I was a war baby during World War II immigrating to the U.S. in 1964. Although my father was here, I had to wait four years for my quota to come up. Life on a quota pretty much stops. Immigration and legalization becoming a citizen is a process that is difficult, demanding and takes large chunks out of your life.

It is not fair for those people who live within the law to give equal status to the lawbreakers, regardless if it is — or seems to be — OK for whatever the reason du jour. Even if they speak English and are nice.

— Charles Mcllett, Oxnard