Fairness Doctrine not the answer
To the editor:
In response to Tim Rutten's column on Tuesday regarding the Fairness Doctrine:
In an amazing display of logical leaping, Mr. Rutten started off by defending free speech, then equated MoveOn.org with Rush Limbaugh, and finally suggested that the FCC should be in charge of deciding what's "fair" on talk radio.
He did admit that Limbaugh had a "baroque" (ornate, flamboyant) explanation of his remarks about "phony soldiers," but said you'd have to listen to Rush to understand it. Exactly: You certainly won't hear the whole story from the news media when it's much easier to pull remarks out of context to create a controversy that suits political ends.
Mr. Rutten suggested that "most Americans" believe the Fairness Doctrine would lead to "both sides" of issues being broadcast. I'd bet that "most Americans" could not point to Reno on a map.
He finished with a lament that too much of talk radio is conservative, and the Democrats are just out to fix things. I was listening to the radio the other day, and heard the host say that hanging a noose on a black professor's door was hateful, racist and mean-spirited. Should the radio station be forced to pay the Aryan Nation to come on and provide us a "balanced" view of the other side? Of course not, but under the Fairness Doctrine we'll have faceless bureaucrats deciding what's fair and what's not.
If you like the way the BLM manages your lands, you'll love the way the FCC manages talk radio. And if the government can get around, "Congress shall make no law," this time, the other media won't be far behind.
Rich Donnelly
NORTH LAS VEGAS
Teachers union
To the editor:
Your excellent editorial, "The gamers vs. the teachers union," hit the nail right on the head in explaining why we taxpayers are being forced to cough up more dough, while the children are being short-changed when seeking a worthwhile education.
An addendum here might serve to clarify the mystery of the monopoly called "public education" and probably the best-kept, dirty little secret.
Imagine a dedicated and patriotic teacher exposing young minds to basic civics and to the most perfect document ever devised by man -- the U.S. Constitution. In order for this brave soul to keep her job, she must belong to one of the world's largest unions, the National Education Association -- without any say whatsoever in how her forced dues are used by the bosses in control. Yet the word "freedom" is one of their favorite public relations terms. What about freedom of choice?
A cogent example of how unethical and unsavory these people are is the power they showed during the 1976 presidential campaign. They promised Jimmy Carter millions in campaign donations with the understanding that once elected he would reward them with the NEA's longtime dream -- the federal Department of Education.
What is particularly startling is that this monstrous bureaucracy was forced upon taxpayers in violation of the 10th Amendment.
Forget the annual $70 billion stollen from hard-working Americans to feed this plunderous outfit and the dictators at the NEA.
These slicksters have been holding our children hostage for too long -- no wonder parents are home-schooling more and more, or turning to private schools to get a bigger bang for their buck and to seek proper morals and discipline.
Vince Bogdan
PAHRUMP
Spending addiction
To the editor:
A letter you published Thursday by Mehran Soudbakhsh attempts to justify a higher tax on casinos by pointing to Detroit. Anyone who would use Michigan as a poster child for increasing taxes apparently prefers economic stagnation to growth.
My state became addicted to higher spending when tax revenue flowed easily. Unable to kick the addiction when the well ran dry, my state has spent most of the past seven years suffering one budget crisis after another.
Do you really want your state government to control ever-increasing amounts of tax money? Better to leave it in the hands of business executives who will contribute to your state's growth by investing in property and tourism.
Once the politicians grab it, you can be sure it will be wasted on boondoggles and special interests. Then, when the economy softens, your elected officials will be left with a spending addiction and not enough money to satisfy it.
STEVE SUTTON
FARMINGTON HILLS, MICH..
