Letters for November 1, 2012
For clarity, readers might want to know that these first two letters were prompted by a previous letter to the editor sent by Mr. Johnson and published in this space on Oct. 25. The Johnson letter quoted Mr. Pacelle as saying this: “We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.”
Re “Don’t trust HSUS” (Letters to the Editor, Oct. 25):
Thank you for printing my opinion regarding the Humane Society of the United States, and I really don’t mind that you cut several areas. I’m sure you have a beast or two of your own to feed. However, Wayne Pacelle’s quote should’ve remained intact. Without casting blame, I offer it again in all its glory: “One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.” Please print it in its entirety, as it goes a long way toward exposing the true agenda of the HSUS.
Robert Orlin Franklin Johnson
Quote out of context
Re “Don’t trust HSUS” (Letters to the Editor, Oct. 25):
A letter writer recently took several false statements from the internet and treated them like gospel, even dredging up a very old quote attributed to me from 20 years ago. Since this nonsense tends to spread like wildfire, I want to set the record straight: In the early 1990s, I appeared at an agricultural forum and answered a question about whether there should be an attempt to preserve all breeds of exotic livestock. I was specifically queried about so-called “heirloom breeds” (older breed variations that are often not used any longer for a commercial purpose and whose continued survival as a breed may be in jeopardy) and their value to agriculture. At the time, I did not consider the fate of such breeds an ethically significant dilemma. (My views have become more nuanced through the years.)
I replied by saying that I did not believe we had a moral obligation to the animals to preserve such breeds. In short, I said we did not need an endangered species act for rare livestock breeds. Represent-atives of extreme anti-animal organizations have taken this passing comment about rare breeds of livestock and morphed it into a comment about all domesticated animals—devoid of its essential and undeniably clear context—to somehow claim that the HSUS is against pet-keeping. The policy positions of the HSUS, of course, are not a secret. We celebrate pets every day, sponsor the largest campaign to promote shelter pet adoption, work with responsible dog breeders, and have a Dogs in the Workplace program at our offices. Anyone can go to humanesociety.org and read about our work.
President and CEO The Humane Society of the United States
Re “The fraud of voter fraud” (Feature story, Oct. 25):
Unfortunately, Dennis Myers is wrong. Just in the past few weeks, we’ve had the following occur: The son of a Democratic Congressional candidate had to resign from his dad’s campaign after being videoed looking into how to commit 100 acts of voter fraud. A second Democratic Congressional candidate in Maryland had to withdraw after it was discovered that she had been voting both in Maryland and Florida. A member of the Executive Committee of the NAACP in Mississippi was recently convicted on 10 counts of voter fraud (by a Democrat no less) and in Hialeha, Fla., another Democrat was convicted on 34 counts of voter fraud. These are just a few of the reported incidents, and Democratic senators in the Midwest have been quoted as admitting that voter fraud is far more prevalent than the media would like to let on.
The phrase “Vote Early, Vote Often” originated with Democratic politics and is symbolic of fraud that has taken place numerous times. Many scholars now agree that the 1960 presidential election was stolen by Democrats who stuffed the ballot box in favor of JFK instead of Nixon. There undoubtedly have been many more incidents. When the corrupt and criminal organization ACORN is indicted for voter fraud in over 26 percent of our United States, any intelligent individual would recognize that there is a serious concerted effort to subvert our electoral process. Far from being what they tried to claim as being lazy and just wanting to be paid for names on lists, think of this: How many people, especially poll workers, could name the entire rosters of the Dallas Cowboys or San Francisco 49ers? How many still have the same names as some on the rosters? Would you be able to recognize those committing the fraud? I doubt it, which is why we need to utilize technology to ensure our process is not subverted.
By the way, to combat the ridiculous claim that it is just “too hard and expensive” for people to obtain a valid ID, think of this: India will provide Biometric IDs to over 400 million of its poorest citizens (who are far poorer than ours) at an average cost of only a $1.40 per person (Economist Jan 2012) So far, they have founded and eliminated well over 3.3 million phony welfare cases at the same time. We can do the same, and our nation deserves the effort.
Re “Real challenge” (News pic, Oct. 11)
I agree that they [Jehovah’s Witnesses at UNR] are incompatible. The reason, the level of science we know now was non-existent at the time of the Bible. Major steps in evolution understanding has taken place, and Darwin definitely was a future thinker. Since [DNA was discovered], his concepts and ideas, and yes, his theory of evolution has never waivered. Creation is religious, not scientific.
Vote NO on RNO-1
Please vote NO on RNO-1, which asks whether we should continue the current system of electing city councilpersons. In my personal opinion, this question was deceitfully worded to head-off a much- needed election reform by our state Legislature. Here’s the deceit: the question wording makes no mention of the proposed reform, in which each council member (except for the Mayor), will be voted on only by voters who live within that Ward. That’s true district representation. Experts agree that such a system makes elected officials much more accountable. That’s why true district representation is already the rule for all state legislators and County Commissioners. Right now, the only time when Reno Council members run in their ward is in the primary. In the general election, the top two primary vote-getters run citywide. This makes campaigns more costly because Reno is simply too large to be covered by a candidate walking door-to-door. Citywide candidates need more money for advertising like radio and TV, in order to cover areas where they cannot walk. As a result, too-many candidates presently cater to special-interests in return for large contributions for advertising. The present system badly needs reform. Don’t be duped: Vote NO on RNO-1.
I am a former Washoe County Commissioner; but my comments here express only my personal opinions as a private citizen and voter.