Thursday, January 22, 2004
Copyright © Las Vegas Mercury

Letters

Who was the real 'imminent threat'?

In your Editor's Note, ["The Real 'Imminent Threat,'" Jan. 15], you accuse George W. Bush of outrageous acts and cynical lies. You are the one committing outrageous acts and cynical lies. You cite former (fired) Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill as saying the president set in motion plans to oust Saddam Hussein just days after taking office. You completely ignored the information that these plans were contingency plans left over from President Clinton's pathetic term. Even O'Neill is distancing himself from these accusations. Even though these plans were of the Clinton era, Clinton ignored the terrorist threat by not doing anything to stop Osama bin Laden other than sending cruise missiles to bomb an empty training camp (they had been warned) and aspirin factory. Clinton turned down the turnover of bin Laden on three occasions.

--George Savage

Geoff Schumacher is indeed right on the money in regards to President George W. Bush's handling of the war on Iraq and the misguided attempts to cover up the true reasons for the taking down of Saddam Hussein and his wicked empire.

However, if you want to expose Bush as the real imminent threat that he is to our openly social environment, why not go into detail about his plans (with his buddies Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld and Tom DeLay) to further continue the downfall of our economy, the raising of gasoline prices, the unaffordable raid of our heavily trusted Social Security system, the plummeting of Medicare, the shielding of our rights to free speech, the Gestapo-esque intrusions of our privacy (courtesy of the PATRIOT Act) and the endless assaults on every American's full-fledged right to abortion, gay marriage and viewing porn. I wonder if Bush will then install John Waters' infamous "Walking Backwards Day" (from his last real movie Desperate Living) as an official law after he disintegrates all of that mentioned above and makes every foreigner (from every foreign country) the new enemy of our great nation.

As far as everything else goes, this country will definitely not survive four more years of this current political administration, for it will as badly fall apart as did the formerly communist Russia (which now heavily relies on both the Mafia and porn to financially survive as a nation) if Bush has his way and is given full access to completely reverse the country back to the Stone Age, which is why I'll definitely vote Democrat 10 months from now, something which I'm sure the right-winged likes of James Gillen and Chris Hansen (both of whom I always enjoy reading, even though I completely disagree with their views) will have something to openly comment back upon.

Well, it's time to return to listening to the new Incubus song "Megalomaniac" (which is unknowingly dedicated to the ever-loving and caring George W. Bush).

--Steven Millan

Thanks for your Editor's Note, "The Real 'Imminent Threat.'" One might also add "a clear and present danger" to Bush's sobriquet.

--William Wilgus,

Silver Springs, Fla.

Pro-gun Dems right on target

Bravo to Steve Sebelius for his article on the Second Amendment ["Second Amendment Liberal," Jan. 15]. His words, "the Second Amendment wasn't written to help sportsmen, but revolutionaries," while somewhat fanciful and paranoid-sounding to many folk, reflect the very idea those "old, dead, white guys" knew to be a necessity in remaining free.

What Steve may not be aware of is that his words reflect the same principles as "B1" Bob Dornan, who stated "...the Second Amendment is not for killing little ducks and leaving Huey and Dewey and Louie without an aunt and uncle. It is for hunting politicians, like [in] Grozny, [and in] 1776, when they take your independence away."

I hope this little fact doesn't dissuade him from his beliefs.

--Dennis Hayward,

New Bern, N.C.

Thanks for the great article on the Democratic Outdoor Caucus ["Gun 'n' Democrats," Jan. 15]. I am getting a lot of kidding from buddies about being such a ham, but some serious folks have called and said it was great publicity for the caucus and an excellent article for Democrats. I agree.

I told you how much I like the Mercury and its approach to news, but I am amazed at the number of folks who read it and who have called to tell me they saw the article. You all do a great job. I hope we get to work together in the future.

--John J. Cahill

Smartest thing I've seen come out of the Democratic Party in a long time: Let's keep guns available to law-abiding citizens. I'm currently a Republican (primarily over this issue), although most of my friends are Democrats.

--Terry Hendriksen

As was touched upon in your recent article, "Guns 'n' Democrats," Democrats are going to have a tough time convincing voters that their party isn't anti-gun (being anti-gun is a point in the Democrats' favor with some voters) as long as most anti-gun legislation is led by Democrats. The Democrat efforts to renew the 1994 assault weapon ban this year are a perfect example; Al Gore's professed support for licensing and registration was an important example in 2000, and may have played a role in five states he was expected to take (any one of which would have been enough to win him the presidency).

In my opinion, guns are just one example of the true core problem plaguing the Democrat Party. A lot of people who used to be or would be Democrats are turned off by the impression that the party has been hijacked by liberal extremists and elitists who have caused the party to become out of touch with and even contemptuous of regular folks. The Democratic Party used to be seen as the party of the working man. Nowadays, it seems whenever there's someone attacking something important to him (the industry that provides his job, the traditional family, hunting, self-defense, military service, church, feminine daughters, masculine sons, pickup trucks, hearty meals, etc.) that person is from the liberal fringe found among the Democrats.

Whether you call it the Wal-Mart crowd, NASCAR dads, or flyover country, this is a very large percentage of the American population that the Democrat Party has just stopped representing.

--Chris Alexander,

Kingwood, Texas

Thanks for your article, but I won't bet on the premise; elect a Democrat and you're sure to lose your gun rights sooner or later. Pro-gun Democrats have too small a voice in the party. The ONLY way I will ever vote for a Democrat is if the national party starts actively pushing Second Amendment rights and abandons its socialist anti-self-defense/anti-gun agenda.

--E. Bruce Volensky,

Pike Road, Ala.