LETTERS: Democrats’ lack of truth, sincerity contributes to their downfall

To the editor:

The Democrats seem to be mystified as to how they lost so many seats in the midterm elections, and they are reviewing their playbook. The answer can be summed up in one word: lies.

The first principle that I taught my children was the Golden Rule. The second was don’t ever lie to me. There is nothing that can’t be worked out as long as we begin with the truth and a sincere effort on both sides. We, the American people, have seen neither truth nor sincere effort from either Republicans or Democrats, but I believe Sen. Harry Reid was the catalyst the Democrats have to thank for their losses.

I was a card-carrying Democrat most of my adult life until members of Congress gave a standing ovation to former Mexico President Felipe Calderon for speaking out against Gov. Jan Brewer and Arizona’s efforts to enforce federal law regarding immigration. That was my eye-opener.

I took my head out of the sand and started doing my own homework, and thanks to C-SPAN, you can listen to politicians’ own words without any spin. I was appalled by the behavior of the Democrats during the hearings on Benghazi, Fast and Furious and especially the IRS fiasco.

Now, recorded sessions have just come to light in which Jonathan Gruber, a professor at MIT and an Obamacare architect, admitted the Democrats and the Obama administration lied about the effects of the health care law because the American people were too stupid to make their own health care decisions. This recording has been somewhere for a year; why wasn’t it released before the election, and who released it now?

This would indicate that Democrats deceived the Supreme Court, as well. Are the justices going to take that sitting down? Are we? Let both parties be on notice that we are paying attention, and there is always another election around the corner. Easy come, easy go.

I am but a humble baby boomer, Mr. Gruber. However, I am not stupid.

SUSAN CHOQUETTE

NORTH LAS VEGAS

Call terrorism what it is

To the editor:

Regarding last month’s terror attack in Canada and other recent events, when is the Obama administration going to call these acts what they really are? All these beheadings, the ax attack in New York City, people going over the White House fence and the shooting and killing in Canada are terrorism. These incidents are not “workplace violence.”

The president has told us many times what we cannot do. It’s time he told us what he is going to do about these acts of terrorism. President Obama has systematically taken apart our military, opened our borders and now is allowing people from Ebola-affected areas into our country with no regard for the safety of U.S. citizens. It’s time the administration steps up and takes control of these situations.

LINDA CASSARO

LAS VEGAS

Medication restrictions

To the editor:

We’re trying to make sense of the new restrictions to battle illegal and criminal pain medication activities (“Hydrocodone reclassification compounds some patients’ pain,” Oct. 11 Review-Journal online). Contrary to the rules affecting the bad guys, these rules are deeply hurting the innocent. Those of us who really need pain medication — those with cancer and diagnosed chronic pain — have enough everyday problems mobility-wise and money-wise. Yet we are now subjected to unfair, unnecessary, uncaring and inconsiderate extended restrictions just to refill our prescriptions.

For decades, those diagnosed with long-term chronic pain conditions could receive a three-month refill (with a mail-in pharmacy, two refills were to be paid for and the third was free). Now, we are required to have monthly visits with doctors and specialists, and we receive one refill. That alone requires $400 extra a year, plus paying individually for each refill and the added hardship of getting to the doctor, the pharmacy and the return visit to pick up the refill.

How will targeting the innocent for what criminals are doing resolve the problems? The new rules could create more problems than they will resolve. Those who cannot afford the additional money could be forced to seek alternate solutions to relieve their pain, creating more criminal activity, forcing some into unhealthy diets, maybe causing them to lose their homes. Worse yet, it would greatly harm the mental state of those patients.

Obviously, those who impose these new rules have no problems themselves, nor do their loved ones. We can’t imagine inflicting my mother, sister or daughter to such conditions. Creating new problems in an already problem-filled world seems like a solution that originated at the Mad Hatter’s tea party.

THOMAS and ELIZABETH REDD

LAS VEGAS

‘Last Five Years’ brilliant

To the editor:

Regarding the review of “The Last Five Years,” I’m thinking that Richard Davis must have been having a bad day when he saw this play (“‘Last Five Years’ sings of love’s highs, lows,” Nov. 8 Review-Journal). His review was really snarky. I saw the play Nov. 7, and I’d give it an A-plus.

I was blown away by the professionalism of the actors, their gorgeous voices and the beautiful music that they were privileged to perform. We all jumped to our feet screaming and shouting at the end of the play. It was an absolutely glorious experience at UNLV’s Judy Bayley Theatre. It was so good, in fact, that I went to see it again the next night.

CAROL WAGERS

LAS VEGAS