LETTERS: Neither Washington nor Bundys obey the law


To the editor:

I am trying very hard to sort out my feelings about Cliven Bundy and the federal government. I believe in following the law, but I’m trying to understand why I fall on the side of the rancher.

I was dismayed when our U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder, said state attorneys general did not have to enforce laws they disagree with. And how can President Obama can change his health care law dozens of times without going through the correct procedure to do that? If our leaders have no respect for the law, why should the people?

It was unbelievable to see armed agents dispatched to the middle of the desert to intimidate an American citizen. Over grazing fees for land that is bare subsistence for a few head of cattle? I believe this incident is about more than just cattle, I believe it is the culmination of all that is happening to our great country, and to many of us, this was just the last straw. I very much doubt Sen. Harry Reid could be any more ridiculous.

Shame on whoever ordered those armed agents to the desert. Let a little common sense prevail. Put a lien on his property (after fairly assessing what he owes) and then just leave the man alone.

SHIRLEE YUNKER

LAS VEGAS

It’s about anarchy

To the editor:

For the past few weeks your editorial staff has bombarded your readers with a multitude of articles (mostly anti-government rhetoric) regarding the Gold Butte roundup.

If placed end to end, this paper trail would reach from Las Vegas to Bunkerville.

In the April 16 edition of the Review-Journal, Steve Sebelius accurately sums things up with a single word: anarchy. A breakdown of law and order, and demanding that sworn and commissioned law enforcement officers be disarmed and have their powers abolished, is anarchy. This applies whether the level of government is federal, state, county or local.

Check the definition of the “A” word in the dictionary. My compliments to Mr. Sebelius for telling the real story.

LARRY E. HANNEMAN

LAS VEGAS

Arrogance all around

To the editor:

I was just thinking how the Bundy cattle roundup would have gone if the Bureau of Land Management had used the Metropolitan Police Department to solve any problems that cropped up. Instead, the BLM used their own Gestapo police force.

Why would BLM officials think they could establish fenced-in free speech areas? Why did the BLM leave the collected cattle in the immediate area instead of hauling them away? Why didn’t the BLM just close to the public areas where they were collecting cattle, instead of the whole 1,200 square miles? Who’s responsible for all these errors in judgment?

Now we get to Cliven Bundy and his family. Why do they think they are entitled to feed their cattle on 1,000 square miles of public land? Just because they always have? Mr. Bundy doesn’t pay grazing fees, so why doesn’t he understand he’s receiving public welfare to feed his cattle?

I don’t know who is more arrogant, the BLM or Cliven Bundy.

GARY SLATE

MESQUITE

Ignoring the law

To the editor:

In response to Steve Sebelius’ April 16 column, “Let’s be honest about what Bundy is and is not”:

Mr. Sebelius writes, “About the only thing that’s different is that a bunch of armed would-be insurrectionists have gotten the message that if they show up with tough talk and loaded long guns, there’s a good chance the government will back down. And that’s not a very good message to send.” He is absolutely correct.

However, how exactly is that different than Sen. Harry Reid, as majority leader, and the rest of the lawmakers passing legislation that applies to everyone but them? Sen. Reid says, “We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it.” Does Obamacare ring a bell, senator? Or have you had a change of heart and made yourself, everyone in Congress and their staffs subject to every requirement of Obamacare?

Maybe one of Mr. Sebelius’ future commentaries can cover the subject of fairness for all. And by the way, I am not necessarily agreeing with the actions of Mr. Bundy.

JAMES J. BAUMBERGER

LAS VEGAS

Hypocrite Harry

To the editor:

A hypocrite is someone who pretends to have virtuous principles that he or she does not actually possess, especially someone whose actions belie their stated beliefs.

After reading Steve Sebelius’ April 16 column, I have a nickname for Sen. Harry Reid: Hypocrite Harry. According to Mr. Sebelius, Sen. Reid made the following statement concerning the Cliven Bundy-BLM situation: “Well, it’s not over. We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over.” That’s tough talk against the American people.

Unfortunately, Sen. Reid is not the same tough guy on other issues, such as illegal immigration. Evidently he feels that we should allow people who are not in this country legally to just “walk away from it” when it comes to facing the consequences of their lawbreaking. He recently asked President Barack Obama not to deport illegal immigrants who have been apprehended. Because these people sometimes vote, I think he is worried about his base.

HARRY LONG

HENDERSON

 

Rules for posting comments

Comments posted below are from readers. In no way do they represent the view of Stephens Media LLC or this newspaper. This is a public forum. Read our guidelines for posting. If you believe that a commenter has not followed these guidelines, please click the FLAG icon next to the comment.