It’s time to shut down the Nevada Test Site

To the editor:

I was enlightened by Keith Rogers' Monday article about proposed new activity at the Nevada Test Site, although his tone made many of the ideas and proposals sound like sure things rather than possibilities being "scoped" out by a public process between now and Oct. 16.

Since the United States has been failing to lead the way toward nuclear disarmament, I'm not excited about any enhanced or prolonged activity at the NTS. New subcritical tests? How does that help us eliminate nuclear weapons?

International law has been damaged by our support for some regimes with well-developed and usable, rogue nuclear programs with deliverable weapons (India, Pakistan and Israel) while making serious threats against other states with far less developed programs and no way to use them (Iran and North Korea).

We used the bomb in war and continued to injure and kill tens of thousands of others during tests with little or no apology.

Who are we to "ensure compliance with treaties" when this administration, like those before it, selectively ignores treaties that are the law of the land? I trust the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization to do their monitoring jobs objectively and effectively, more than our government, which pursues its own self-perceived interest and lets allies off the hook while overstating the threat from others, whipping up fear, preventing prospects for peace from germinating.

No more weapons work at the Nevada Test Site. Or even more, just close it down.

Jim Haber

LAS VEGAS

THE WRITER IS COORDINATOR OF THE NEVADA DESERT EXPERIENCE, WHICH SEEKS TO ORGANIZE INTERFAITH RESISTANCE TO NUCLEAR WAR AND WEAPONS.

Real thugs

To the editor:

In last Saturday's Review-Journal, columnist Jane Ann Morrison said that Rep. Joe Wilson behaved like a "thug" when he yelled out "You lie!" during President Obama's speech on health care. She stated that she attended President Bush's State of the Union address in 2007, and there was no yelling or derisive laughter or calling Mr. Bush a liar.

My question to Ms. Morrison: Where was she with her outrage when Democrats booed, heckled and jeered President Bush during his 2004 and 2005 State of the Union speeches?

I also remember Sen. Harry Reid calling Mr. Bush a liar, plus other nasty comments from both House and Senate Democrats. Where was Ms. Morrison when this was happening?

President Bush was perhaps the most vilified president in the history of this country, compliments of the Democrats.

I think Jane Ann Morrison and the rest of her left-wing cronies should get off the one-way street they live on and do some introspection to see what kind of "thugs" they are.

LARRY BERARDI

LAS VEGAS

Price paid

To the editor:

For those people who just can't understand the gravity, wrongheadedness and contemptible nature of Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst during the president's address to Congress, I suggest this:

Go down to District Court and yell something derogatory at a sitting judge who is addressing the court and see how fast you wind up in jail for contempt of court (within minutes). Now ask yourself: Who is more important, a District Court judge, or the president of the United States? And in which body is proper conduct more appropriate and demanded, a District Court or the Congress of the United States of America?

Joe Wilson could have easily held a news conference after the president's address and called him a liar then. That is acceptable. But no, he wanted to show to the world and to his like-minded confederates his disdain of and lack of respect for a black president.

He achieved his goal, and he paid the price.

Major E. Magwood

LAS VEGAS

Good money

To the editor:

It's good the Senate voted to stop Housing and Urban Development grants from flowing to ACORN, but how about the millions of dollars in tax money the group currently controls? As easy as ACORN employees were giving information to the undercover "pimp" and "prostitute" who were trying to set up a brothel, how many real illegal operations has ACORN helped set up?

If the attorney general has the time to investigate CIA interrogators, hopefully he has time to investigate ACORN.

Mel Kleinschmit las Vegas

Health care

To the editor:

In response to Gerry Hageman's Wednesday letter to the editor:

I am deeply appreciative of his point of view. I have Crohn's disease, so the outcome of the reform debate affects me personally. How the health care system in this country changes is what concerns me the most.

The history of government programs such as Social Security (soon to be broke), Medicare (already spending more than it takes in), Medicaid (cash-strapped states and unfunded mandates), as well as $400 hammers gives me pause as to the efficacy of any federal program, no matter the good intentions. There are too many half-truths and disingenuous politicians out there saying what is necessary to further their careers.

The powers that be seem to prefer that there is no grass-roots movement going on. That is not the reality.

Here are the concerns that are not being addressed adequately:

Show us the math that says adding another entitlement will not affect the economy in a negative manner. We will not take their word for it, so just write out the math.

In concert with the above, I do not want to leave my kids or grandkids a bill that they should not pay for. That means we are taxed enough already directly and indirectly to the tune of 40 percent of our income, just for the middle class.

How much will we allow our kids to keep? How intrusive should we allow the federal government to be in our lives?

The laws of supply and demand will be in force no matter what system is enacted. How will care be managed? Who will be denied what and why?

Who will be the final arbiter?

Those are a few of the questions not fully answered yet.

I do know that I don't want my life made easier at the expense of my children or my grandchildren.

Darrell Welch

NORTH LAS VEGAS

Morality play

To the editor:

I am tired of hearing so many politicians say that we have a "moral obligation" to provide health care for everybody. I really don't appreciate politicians preaching to me about what is right and what is wrong. I already know that.

I find it especially offensive when politicians use this "higher ground" argument to advance their own interests.

May I suggest instead that most people (barring some debilitating factor) have a "moral obligation" to work, obtain their own health insurance, stay fit, live a healthy lifestyle, not use illegal drugs and generally contribute positively to our society?

Let's fix health care where it needs to be fixed, but can we stop with the "moral" imperatives?

Vivian Scott

HENDERSON