The Culinary Union is out of control. First the suit was filed by EDWARDS supporters. Why would the Edwards camp want to help Hillary?

Why does the Culinary always get special treatment? There are union construction workers working on job sites on Saturday. No voting for them! They don't matter even though they are of all ethnic and racial backgrounds. The janitors of the NSEA don't matter. Nor do the hundreds of people who are working in malls, grocery stores, police officers, firefighters and and others working in recognizable areas that could also have caucus sites in them. Only the culinary union is important. Why because the Union bosses think they can intimidate their newly sworn in Hispanic American citizens to vote whatever way the bosses tell them to vote. I'll bet the party bosses were shocked that their Hispanic and other members are not stupid enough to be bullied and have protested that the bosses endorsed without polling the members.

Watching D. Taylor defend this plan to give these at large caucases a greater vote (1000%) greater and ignoring other workers who cannot caucus on a Saturday is revolting. His theory that it is Ok to defy Nevada law to have 1 delegaate for every 50 registered voters within a precienct by allowing Culinary members to have one delegate for every 50 memebers that vote because "the state and national party approved the plan" is laughable. So what? Laws are overturned all the time that are approved by Legislaturs which are surely a higher authority than the DNC, because they do not comply with the law. This is why we have Courts.

Personnally, I do not care who wins as my candidate has dropped out. However fair is fair. The Culinary Union has no more right to special treatment than any other group. The mantra that Union participation is needed, is great by why doesn't it apply to ALL unions?

The RJ and sometimes the Sun as well, seems to not understand anything that is legal. It is clear that their reporters have no legal understanding whatsoever and neither do their columnists. Of coursre it all starts at the top with their publishers and editors who also do not have the first clue about thee simplest American justice concepts. They do not even know that in this country one is innocent until proven guilty. Thus, when any story involves legal issues, one will see only a cursory review of it in the unaptly named Review Journal. The Journal part however is quite appropriate because the RJ reads as nothing more than the publishers and editors diaries. Stories and fantasies that they believe even if no one else does. The reason that the RJ has no respect as a "newspaper" is that it is full of biased one-sided stories from the personal viewpoints of the staff who all write the company line. Whatever idiotic policy of the day that the publisher and editor come up with is parroted by all the rest of the staff. Since most of the publisher's ideas are sophomoric and based on his personal issues, the RJ (known by many as the RAJ- the rag it is) is full of stories having no merit or validity.

Take for example today's editorial on the Democrats requiring identification at the caucus sites. The Republicans are also requiring identification. How else would the party officials know that you are registered and eligible to vote? They do not have the same up to the minute lists as the government has and they have over a thousand polling places that unlike a real election do not have lists and poll watchers. But none of that is in editorial. It is true that there is an inconsistency in the policy of not requiring identification when voting but there is a difference when the governemnt has such an advantage with security and control than these parties do for their caucases. The RJ would never want the public to have the full story on any issue.

The RJ's motto should be "All the news we dream up today"