Yes, we do have vigilance, resolve
To the editor:
In response to your Sept. 11 editorial, "What kind of people do they think we are?": My heartfelt thanks and congratulations. The cowardly 9/11 attacks on U.S. soil were indeed an act of war and we should never forget.
Your question -- "Will Americans throw up their hands now, giving up their vigilance and resolve?" -- is right on target for the times ahead. It must certainly be asked of the contenders in our presidential election. Your answer -- "Wanna bet?" -- was also very good. My money would say no, the majority of Americans will not do that Neville Chamberlain routine.
I am, however, concerned about the penchant of the mass media and certain Web sites for publishing adversity and defeat, saying little or nothing about victories and progress. As a Vietnam veteran, I am reminded of the Tet offensive, during which we broke the back of the North Vietnamese regular forces, but the American people were told a different story by Walter Cronkite, then America's favorite newscaster. He led many to believe we had lost and that the war had reached a stalemate. Objective reporting? Hardly.
I am also concerned that many of our youth, our leaders of tomorrow, can recite nonsense from the usual suspects and repeat verbatim what Rosie O'Donnell has spoken but cannot name our secretary of defense.
These concerns notwithstanding, the spirit and will of the American people will not be subjugated, and we will prevail, but it won't be easy.
AL CIRICILLO
LAS VEGAS
Independent thinking
To the editor:
In his Sept. 7 letter to the editor criticizing Review-Journal columnist Erin Neff, Greg S. Miller at first seemed to be an enlightened and realistic observer of the Las Vegas political scene. He then proceeded, for the next eight column inches, to flog Ms. Neff for attacking Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and questioning the truth of some of her statements. He closed with the charge that Ms. Neff "never lets facts interfere with her intense desire to gnaw at ... conservatives and Republicans" and accused her of lacking "journalistic integrity." What happened to the thoughtful person who opened the letter?
Is it possible Mr. Miller is just another party-committed citizen who masquerades as an independent thinker but votes for the same party's candidate in every presidential election? That type of voter is found in both major parties, and, try as they might, every discussion of politics eventually gets around to deep-seated and emotional baggage in their makeup, and they vote for the candidates of the same old party. The odds are 8-to-5 that Mr. Miller has never voted for a Democrat for senator, governor or president.
Everyone has a right to preconceived notions and the "my party, right or wrong" attitude. But when we discuss politics we should do our listeners a favor and not fake it. Just admit up front, "I am dyed in the wool and going along with my party's line regardless of any other viewpoints or facts. I reserve the right to rationalize." Mr Miller should extend that right to print media columnists who express their opinions (Ms. Neff had all her facts right Sept. 4) and put their names on their work.
And those whose opinions are in opposition to the editorial policy of the publication for which they work should be highly respected. The lamb might lie down with the lion, but the lamb doesn't get much sleep.
And, by the way, the publication that hires and employs that columnist gets much credit for making it be that way. An occasional dose of the other side of the political picture should be palatable for us all.
Don Merz
LAS VEGAS
The real Obama
To the editor:
An August article in The Weekly Standard, "Barack Obama's Lost Years," chronicles the U.S. senator's tenure as an Illinois state legislator. The "lost years" refers to the time between 1996 and 2004, when Mr. Obama was a member of the Illinois state Senate.
In the piece, Stanley Kurtz examines the many articles Mr. Obama wrote for the Hyde Park Herald and the Chicago Defender, and his voting record during that time period. It portrays a Barack Obama sharply at variance with the image of the post-racial, post-ideological, bipartisan, culture-war-shunning politician familiar from current media coverage and purveyed by the Obama campaign.
Fundamentally, he is a big-government redistributionist who wants above all to aid the poor, particularly the minority poor, and is eager to do so through broad-based social welfare legislation.
Mr. Kurtz also examined Mr. Obama's associations with such radical figures as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger and Bill Ayers.
As details of Mr. Obama's early political career emerge, his associations with them look more like intentional partnerships rather than instances of personal misjudgments.
Kenny Worthington
LAS VEGAS
