Free speech — as long as you follow the law
To the editor:
I'm writing in response to the editorial ("Name game," Sunday) that claims conservative activist Chuck Muth and his illegally named political action committee need not follow federal election laws merely because Mr. Muth -- and apparently the editorial board of the Review-Journal -- don't like them. Luckily, Review-Journal reporters and editors are not the arbiters of which laws are "trivial" and need not be followed, and which laws are important and must be upheld.
In this country the law is the law, like it or not. Mr. Muth and his PAC must follow the law, as the Democrats must.
Furthermore, the editorial makes the Democrats' point for them when it quotes Rob Kelner, chairman of the election law group at the Washington, D.C., firm of Covington and Burling. Mr. Kelner calls the law Mr. Muth broke "Byzantine" and downplays its importance. What the editorial forgets to mention is that Mr. Kelner is also an attorney for the Republican National Committee, hardly an unbiased source.
It is as hard for readers to judge the veracity and quality of Mr. Kelner's comments without knowing who pays his bills as it is to judge the veracity and quality of Mr. Muth's blog not knowing who pays his bills, isn't it?
Of course, I would defend both the Review-Journal and Chuck Muth's First Amendment right to say what they please -- as long as they follow the law while they do it.
ED GARCIA
LAS VEGAS
By the numbers
To the editor:
We have no way of knowing who submitted any portion of the health care bills now being discussed in Congress. The people who have voted on this bill won't even admit what portion they submitted.
Military officers have lineal numbers promulgated in a register. These numbers are listed according to their seniority. If all members of Congress were assigned a number accordingly, we (the public) could see who originated a bill.
Example: If 200 members of Congress submitted a portion of a bill, an individual member's number would appear at the end of the section they submitted. That way we would know exactly how our representatives feel about new bills.
Who will lobby for this bill? Number, please.
Richard C. Carlson
HENDERSON
A crisis
To the editor:
In Sunday's Review-Journal, Publisher Sherman Frederick opined that the president "should have begun his address to Congress by highlighting the virtues of the American health care system -- the best in the world" (column, "Obama blows chance to lead").
In Saturday's Review-Journal, reporter Carri Geer Thevenot detailed the story of an individual who died from the swine flu. Distressing is the tale of how he died.
On Aug. 14, he complained of a sore throat and not feeling well. On Aug. 16, he went to an urgent care and was diagnosed with pneumonia and given an antibiotic. On Aug. 20, he felt worse, returned to urgent care and was given a cough syrup.
On Aug. 22, he returned to urgent care with a fever of 102 degrees and was sent home with oxygen tanks and a different antibiotic. On Aug. 23, he returned to urgent care, again with a fever of 102 degrees, and was sent home with a nebulizer. On Aug. 24, he went to the emergency room and was admitted to Valley Hospital.
On Aug. 25, he was put on a ventilator, his wife was told he might not make it, and that he was negative for swine flu. "A few days later" his wife was told he had tested positive to a different swine flu test, and on Aug. 31 he passed away.
The best health care system in the world blew the chance to get a diagnosis of the swine flu -- perhaps they have not heard we have a pending pandemic? Unreported are the costs this family incurred for this failed diagnosis.
I assume Mr. Frederick does not believe we have a health care crisis. Does he read his own newspaper?
Ted Henderson
LAS VEGAS
Federal control
To the editor:
Regarding President Obama's lesson plans and all the worry about nationalizing the public school system and the like ("Alarm bells," Tuesday letter to the editor), perhaps the writer is not aware of the fact that the public school system already was nationalized by our last president, George W. Bush. The mechanism was called No Child Left Behind.
Mami Gloriso
LAS VEGAS
Still free, but ...
To the editor:
In response to Joel Rector's Tuesday letter to the editor:
I can only encourage Mr. Rector to read the famous speech Patrick Henry delivered on March 23, 1775. All he has to do is substitute a few words to make this speech apply to today as much as it did then.
Mr. Rector is correct in saying that we have not lost any of the freedoms he refers to. That is to say we have not lost them ... yet.
If corrective action is not taken before the chains of tyranny are forged, the loss of these freedoms will be a foregone conclusion.
David L. Armstrong
SURPRISE, ARIZ.
