Why reward cheaters with bailout money?

All this bailout nonsense is killing me. You have banks that gave loans without requiring documentation, you have golden parachutes falling from the sky on the roofs of multimillion dollar estates, and you have Bank of America and other financial institutions openly marketing to illegal immigrants living off my tax dollars in the form of education and medical expenses. Please note that I don't care what the illegal immigrant's nationality is. Quotas were established because there is only so much the economy can absorb at one time. Legal is legal and illegal is illegal.

My family emigrated from Europe, learned English and became Americans. So I ask again, what do I get? I've been reading about how the illegal immigrants have been heading home since the financial crisis hit. How many of them are abandoning homes and mortgages that were approved, even though the bank gave a loan without documentation. Let these banking institutions and their investors fold. They were fine with breaking the rules when it was profitable, weren't they? The auto industry, please. They've had the technology to be competitive for years, but have chosen to not use it because it would cost more and dip into their profits. They get my money too? Furthermore, let's not forget the United Auto Workers union. The "Big Three" pay two to three times as much for labor and still produce an inferior product.

Maybe if cheaters fail, a new generation of honesty can emerge.

Bryan Boos

Murrieta

Temecula police -- to serve and protect?

In reference to Phil Strickland's Nov. 18 column ("2nd look at police station") stating that Temecula Police Chief Jerry Williams is a "man who respects individual rights … ": I am concerned that Williams's respect of individual rights may not resonate down the ladder. As someone who recently received a speeding ticket in Temecula while on my motorcycle, I encountered comments from the officer that should concern us all.

You may recall that recent accusations of intolerance and bias from Temecula police toward motorcyclists have been aired. I took issue with a police officer making a personal judgement about me as he ordered me to leave a private parking lot after citing me. A sergeant investigating my complaint basically told me I had no right to express myself if it included sarcasm. When I reminded him that police work for the public, that we pay their salaries, the sergeant said they pay themselves from some special fund.

When citizens no longer have a right of free speech with a police officer and the police hold the view that they are not public servants, it is the beginning of a police state where abuse and intolerance run rampant.

I applaud the vast majority of police officers who serve us bravely and honorably. But it is time for the few who have lost their way to review the First Amendment. Perhaps we can all live in that better place between the "letter of the law" and common sense and goodwill toward one another.

Ron Bradshaw

Murrieta

Violent demonstrations can't be condoned

As a peaceable Californian resident, I am horrified by the hate-filled demonstrations of the opponents to Proposition 8. Their offensive actions against the churches of the Latter-day Saints, Catholics and evangelicals have reached the malicious vehemence of religious persecution. These faith-based organizations have done nothing to deserve the vicious backlash of the proponents for homosexuality in marriage. We, the community of faith, have only exercised our First Amendment rights: our right to speak, our right to peaceably assemble and our duty to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Prop. 8 redressed the government's grave injustice against the majority's will to pass Prop. 22 in 2000 and the religious community's sacred definition of marriage: a sanctified rite validated by the presence of God joining one man and one woman for life. To define marriage in any other way is a mockery of the term "separation of church and state"; such a government action would scornfully deny religious truth and the people of faith would thereby be publicly stripped of their rights to dissent, protest and refute any rationalized lies. Any encouragement or condoning of the violent demonstrations by the proponents for homosexuality in marriage by elected officials is a blatant abuse of power and must not be tolerated. The majority has spoken for the true definition of marriage -- the definition provided by God's word -- and the U.S. Constitution, being historically dependent on and inspired by the Holy Bible, cannot be perverted to defy God's laws.

Jaime Pinckard

Murrieta