Obama on immigration reform; Jerry Brown vs. Meg Whitman; and saving L.A.’s historical treasures.

Immigration-speak

Re “Right words on immigration,” Editorial, July 3

The Times stretches credulity in asserting that President Obama offered a solution for the immigration system when he suggested that the U.S. “reaffirm its identity as a nation of immigrants.” Interpreting that statement as a solution to any problem is incomprehensible.

It would also be impossible to defend, today, the statement that we are currently a “nation of immigrants.” With all due respect to our historical origins, we are no longer a nation of immigrants but a nation of hardworking Americans. As we have learned, Obama does not consider America exceptional in any way when compared with any other country; it is absurd, therefore, to give any credence to his rhetorical claim that the genius of America will be a “magnet” for all who “yearn for opportunity.”

The speech offered nothing in the way of analysis or solution, and was not, as The Times suggested, “a good beginning, a welcome note of civility in the ugly immigration debate.” Even by Obama standards, it was an empty speech.

Scott Perley
Irvine

The millions of United States citizens who are now having trouble finding employment probably find Obama’s words about amnesty quite wrong. I do. Is this really an appropriate time to contemplate dilution of the labor pool — and a dramatic expansion of the Social Security recipient base?

Although I voted for Obama, I now sorely regret it. He seems every bit as intent on the destruction of the middle class as his predecessor was.

It is obvious to me that many of the aliens in question will, if the president has his way, be placed on a fast track to voting status, since they obviously will be beholden to his faction of the Democratic Party.

I am beginning to think that Arizona has the right idea.

Corey Bennett
Long Beach

Re “An echo of Bush on immigration,” July 4

Obama’s speech was more than just an echo. It sounded like an ultimatum.

Yes, we’d all like to see our immigration problems get straightened out, but first there are a few things Washington needs to fix.

Let’s start with enforcement. Congress has the authority to make immigration laws. Who enforces the laws is not so clear. The president should clarify this area. The 50 states can’t all have their own versions of immigration law enforcement.

Next, Congress has to fix E-Verify. Enforcement agencies must share information with each other. Otherwise, abuses of our tax laws, personal identity fraud and the employment of undocumented workers will continue unabated.

Finally, we do have a language problem. Both George W. Bush and Obama insisted that any new citizens “learn English.” If this is a requirement for citizenship, why are election materials printed in seven different languages here in Los Angeles County?

This issue could end up in the Supreme Court. If so, at least we’ll have some guidelines — and the sooner, the better.

La Rue Brewer
West Covina

The government vs. Arizona

Re “U.S. files suit to block Arizona law,” July 7

My government has filed suit against Arizona and its attempt to deal with the illegal immigration problem after decades of neglect by federal law enforcement, saying that Arizona’s attempt would “force federal officials to cope with a flood of illegal immigrants who pose no danger.”

I disagree. Illegal anything poses a danger to the rule of law on which this nation is founded. Political correctness has triumphed over the integrity of evenly enforcing law for all.

And we are to believe that the Obama administration can and will winnow out the terrorists, narco-traficantes, criminals and psychos and admit the rest, when thus far it has been unable to find its rear end in any field in which it has endeavored?

Robert D. Robinson
Azusa

It’s obvious the federal government hasn’t been doing its job securing the Mexican border. At last a state is taking action … and Obama is suing the state.

Maybe the states should sue the federal government for not protecting our borders.

Get illegal immigrants out of my country.

Tom Kondziella
Diamond Bar

Oil and its consequences

Re “Fighting oil spill, heat and despair,” Column One, July 2

I found it ironic that one of the workers hired by BP for the Gulf Coast cleanup crews said he commutes “100.8 miles each way.”

This illustrates just one of many examples of our country’s dependency on oil — and looking at the really big picture, shows us how many of us are just as responsible for this oil leak as BP and our government.

Comparing the situation with drug use: If our country were not so dependent on oil and did not need its constant “fix,” we would not have rigs out there in the gulf and so close to our shores. God forbid one of the rigs off of our California coast ever has such an accident.

Gerardo Alvarez
Pasadena

Two candidates for governor

Re “Party fears for its frugal candidate,” July 5

Jerry Brown is running a great campaign. It is the equivalent of Muhammad Ali’s “rope-a-dope” strategy against George Foreman in 1974.

This time, it’s the corporate behemoth, Meg Whitman, who is wasting her financial strength, spending tens of millions on ads that get exposed for their lies — while Brown refuses to waste campaign money on media buys this early, since he is already well known among much of the voting population.

Let’s also remember Brown is not sitting still in Zen-like passivity. He is meeting people throughout the state, and has been willing to face and interact with reporters in the media, unlike Whitman. Brown has called for multiple debates, while Whitman cowers in fear. We can expect Brown to charge hard, Ali-like, around Labor Day as Whitman shadowboxes herself into a corner with self-inflicted blows to her credibility.

Jerry Brown is the once and future champion of California.

Mitchell Freedman
Poway

With regard to Brown’s funding gap versus Whitman’s ad blitz: Maybe if Whitman had used her megabucks to restore funding to Los Angeles’ public libraries, maybe if she had reached into her very deep pockets to bring art or music to our public schools, maybe then I would have considered voting for her.

However, the thought of those millions pouring out to her own very personal favorite charity — Gov. Meg Whitman — just doesn’t do it for me, and I think I speak for many concerned voters.

Cabell Smith
Pacific Palisades

Save what can be saved

Re “Edendale: a paradise lost,” Column, July 1

Hector Tobar laments the erosion of a forgotten Edendale, stating, “In another, prouder city, we’d do more to keep alive the history on that hillside and others like it.”

Well, many of us do have that kind of pride, and continue to work with the City Council to save hillside gems that still exist — like the Southwest Museum. This piece of Los Angeles history is being forgotten needlessly. The Autry is stealing the priceless collection and neglects the landmark building.

Won’t Tobar and other Times writers use their pens to insist on saving history that still remains, instead of pining over things already lost?

Charles Fletcher Lummis, a Times city editor, was the founder the Southwest Museum — the first museum in Los Angeles.

Get involved and use the prominent voice you have to help save the history that is still alive and viable. Help save the Southwest Museum.

Michael Possert
Los Angeles