Crushing freedom for the ‘greater good’
To the editor:
Just an observation on the math in Traci Pearl's letter of Sept. 28, "Seat belt campaign aims to save lives, not scare."
According to Ms. Pearl, 373 people died in Nevada in car crashes last year. One hundred twenty-three were not restrained by a seat belt. That means 250 people, or 67 percent, died while wearing a seat belt.
Personally, I use my seat belt and I think it's foolish not to. But it would seem nowhere near as foolish as I have been led to believe.
The worst part of Ms. Pearl's letter is the money nonsense, which has become the Holy Grail justifying the expansion of state control over every aspect of our lives. This "no man is an island" and we-are-all-connected-to-each-other-so-anything-we-do-imposes-a-cost-on-society philosophy allows those who hunger for power over others to make their case for all kinds of laws to ensure we all do the "right" thing.
Bad choices are no longer just bad. They are evil, costly and criminal, and those who make them must be punished -- for the greater good, of course.
We delude ourselves if we believe we are a free people when the only "right" we have is the right to obey, which is pretty much where we find ourselves these days. And that's not just about seat belts.
KNIGHT ALLEN
LAS VEGAS
Just another RINO
To the editor:
In response to the excellent editorial in the Sept. 19 edition of the Review-Journal, "Let's drill for oil -- where there isn't any," I would like to thank the editors for pointing out that Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., actually voted for this terrible piece of legislation. Since Rep. Porter nearly lost to the inexperienced Democratic challenger Tessa Hafen in 2006, his voting record has been abysmal.
In September 2007, Rep. Porter voted for the Expanding American Homeownership Act of 2007. In October 2007, he voted to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, then in January 2008 he voted to override the president's veto of this bad legislation, which would have expanded taxpayer-funded health care into the middle class.
In December 2007, Rep. Porter voted for the bloated omnibus spending bill that included several pork projects of his. In May 2008, Rep. Porter voted for the bloated farm bill and the House measure to sue OPEC for high oil prices.
I think you're getting my drift. Every one of these pieces of bad legislation grew the federal government ever larger at the taxpayers' expense. When I called Rep. Porter's Washington, D.C., office to express my displeasure, the staff member defended his "reaching across the aisle" so that he could represent all of his constituents.
An article in the Jan. 28 Review-Journal, "Porter now against Bush as much as he is for him," said it all. He's actually proud of the fact that he's no longer a principled Republican. I guess he would rather vote for bad legislation and pander to the Democrats than represent those who put him in office.
Jon Porter hasn't represented me and my family for a long time now, and he will not get my vote this November. If I want someone in office who votes like a Democrat, I'll vote for the Democrat. I won't vote for a RINO.
DIANA ORROCK
LAS VEGAS
Temper, temper
To the editor:
I guess it is a case of "my dog is territorial, your dog is a vicious attack beast." For a long time now, Nevada Sen. Harry Reid and his fellow sociable Democrats have been telling us that Republican Sen. John McCain is unfit for the presidency because of his terrible temper and vicious personal attacks.
Well, to be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing a little of that side of Sen. McCain for a change. This kindly, grandfatherly image of his gets a little boring, as does Sen. Barack Obama's "don't ask me any questions," lecturing college professor image.
The problem with the Democrats is there hasn't been a much more opinionated or quick-tempered president than Harry Truman, and they found that man charming and insightful. Hence the "Give 'em Hell, Harry" cheer.
So what's the deal about a Republican with a feisty personality? His politics, maybe?
KENT RISCHLING
LAS VEGAS
Good news, bad news
To the editor:
How true it is, in these days, that to learn of man's failures, we read the front page of a newspaper. For man's accomplishments, we read the sports pages. In the words of Howard Cossel, that's "telling it like it is."
LINDA KERZETSKI
LAS VEGAS
