There have got to be better columnists

I very much support editorials that reflect various political views. However, I also believe that readers deserve commentaries from seasoned journalists who write for credible newspapers and media companies.

Michelle Malkin definitely does not meet the above criteria. Additionally, I find her venomous rantings not only insulting, but laughable.

In the future, please do your readers a favor by selecting more qualified contributing columnists who have the intelligence to make their views known without all the sarcastic bile that consistently spews from Michelle Malkin's pen.

Karla Luff-Lopez

Temecula

A glimpse of liberal money management

Letter writer Don Swift did us all a favor by revealing how casually liberals advocate stealing other people's money ("Excellent reasons for vote comes to mind," Feb. 22).

Arguing that government can trump private property rights, Mr. Swift asserts, "surely those few dollars (the property owners would have made by the sale of their property) are well worth forfeiting" to protect the health of residents.

One wonders if Mr. Swift would be willing to forfeit his money to make the property owners whole.

Jerry Pomeroy

Sun City

Making a case for a flat tax

After filing our 2008 returns, I wondered how much tax is paid based on an annual income of $80,000 for a single, married and married with two-children taxpayer. Presume each taxpayer owns a home and has $20,000 of itemized deductions. The results astonished me.

The single taxpayer pays $10,750, the married taxpayer $7,150 and the family of four (children age 17 or younger) pays $4,100. Why is it that people who choose not to have children are penalized?

In 1913, the 16th Amendment made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. The 1913 tax code had fewer than 50 laws; now we have thousands. A recent Forbes magazine states, "The code gets more complicated, expanding by 1,000 words a day, with 500 changes last year alone."

Our government computes yearly the income necessary to stay above the poverty line. Presume those numbers are $25,000, $35,000 and $45,000 for the above three taxpayers. Let those amounts be tax-free and tax the income above the exemptions on a graduated scale. In other words, a flat tax.

Obviously, politicians and lobbyists would not welcome those changes.

Gary Gallert

Murrieta

Feel free to turn the dial

Paul Jacobs complains about "right-wing media" dominating the airwaves ("It's really the right-wing media bias," Feb. 22). Probably, he does not hear any left-wing programs because it has no subscribers to the left-wing agenda. He should start a left-wing radio program and see if anybody will listen to it and support it.

The Constitution's First Amendment gives the right to free speech so left-wing media can have the same number of radio programs. If you don't like what happens on a program, you can turn off your radio or change the station. It goes for the TV station's programs, also.

Would he like changes such as those Hugo Chavez is making in Venezuela?

America still is a free country. God bless the U.S.A.

Sandor Muller

Temecula

Attitudes about education must change

Even for Murrieta, it was surprising to see the editorial proposing that a smaller class size is not better for education ("Smaller class sizes hard to justify," Feb. 22). As a law student who formerly attended Murrieta Valley High School, it has always been clear that when it comes to education, Murrieta strives to place its students in a realm of mediocrity.

When I attended Murrieta Valley High School, it was normal to have class in a trailer with well over 30 students. The teacher would spend one-third of the time trying to quiet the class, and the rest in a futile attempt to engage students. I spent the first two years of college acquiring the tools that the majority of the other students had already been given in high school.

Do the patrons of Murrieta schools deserve an attitude from the surrounding community that finds education at this level acceptable?

That fact is, education is expensive. However, a good education is worth it. When we compete for a job, it's not only with a person from our city, our state or even country. We compete with students from India, Europe and China.

To give students a chance, attitudes must change.

Matthew Storey

San Diego

Get to the bottom of president's eligibility

Because Barack Obama has refused, time and time again, to prove that he is qualified to serve as president of the United States of America, why has the media simply turned blind eyes and deaf ears to the issue?

I would feel so much better knowing that the president has been thoroughly vetted and proven to be a natural-born American citizen.

Penny Magnotto

Perris

Why don't evolutionists relish debate?

Gerald Summers would like everyone to believe that all credible scientists believe in Darwin's theory of evolution (Letters, Feb. 25). Nice try. Even if it were true, science is not determined by consensus.

But there are thousands of credible scientists who openly challenge evolution theory every day, and no doubt there are thousands more who would do so if their jobs or grants were not at risk. Those who do speak out risk paying a big price.

Darwinism is not about science, it's about accountability. The possibility that life might have been created scares evolutionists to death because they don't want to be accountable to anyone. If Darwin's theory was "the most widely accepted and powerful discovery," as Mr. Summers believes, evolutionists would relish the opportunity to debate the issue, but that would involve getting out of their box.

That will never happen because they are only trying to convince themselves.

Rick Kellogg

Wildomar