Hispanic Caucus wrongly opposes immigration law

According to your article “Napolitano confronted with immigration reform” (Feb. 25), the Congressional Hispanic Caucus does not want the new Homeland Security secretary to strictly enforce U.S. immigration laws.

Do Hispanic activists realize that they or their loved ones could be the next victims of violent criminal aliens or terrorists? Asian and Hispanic open-border advocates should take a hard look at the conditions in many countries in Asia and Latin America. Do they really want the U.S. to become like the countries they or their ancestors have left? They should be reminded of the millions of Asians killed by the Khmer Rouge and the extreme violence in today’s Mexico and many African nations.

If they really care about the well-being of Hispanic and Asian Americans, they should emulate Cesar Chavez and urge President Obama and Congress to enact some sort of immigration enforcement so that we can save the jobs first for all American citizens and legal immigrants already here.

Oakland, Calif.

Specter didn’t make NIH deal

From Kate Kelly, press secretary for Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.)

Your Feb. 25 article, “After stimulus windfall, medical researchers eager for more funds,” suggests that Sen. Specter insisted on the inclusion of $10 billion in funding for the National Institutes of Health in the stimulus “as a condition of his vote.” That assertion is false.

The New York Times got it right in its Feb. 14 edition noting that Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the majority whip, agreed to the $10 billion without any such commitment from Sen. Specter. When Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) later tried to condition the $10 billion on Sen. Specter’s vote, Sen. Specter declined.

Sen. Durbin then fulfilled the commitment to include the NIH funding in the stimulus bill, telling the Times: “I flunked Politics 101. … I gave away $10 billion but never got [Sen. Specter’s] commitment.”

Sen. Specter does not make deals. He voted for the stimulus package on the merits because of the threat that the recession could develop into a full-fledged depression like 1929 — and not in exchange for NIH funding.

Washington


RUSH OFFENSE

(Regarding article, “White House fires back at Rush Limbaugh,” March 2, and related coverage.)


Gibbs’s distortion

From Don Phillips

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs asks, “Do they want to see the president’s economic agenda fail?” Now, it is on the record that Rush never said that he wanted the economy to fail. 

Rush said that he wanted the big-government, socialist programs to fail. Gibbs knows this and chose to mislead the American public.

Rush said that he wanted the country to survive and prosper. Our economy had always prospered on freedom, ingenuity and property rights. He did not want us to turn socialist or French and destroy the system that has enabled us to prosper.

Tucson, Ariz.

 

Media spin

From Ron Pustejovsky

Almost all the media insist on saying something like, “Rush Limbaugh wants to see the president’s economic agenda fail.”

If you really want to capture the correct context of this statement and at the same time gain a little credibility in your reporting, the statement should be something along the lines of, “Rush Limbaugh (as most of America) wants to see the president’s socialist economic agenda fail.”

This is what Mr. Limbaugh said in the first place. Most of us know it, and only the news media insist on misrepresenting this fact, though I’m certain they know it as well. Most of the American public now know how you “spin” the news and cloud the facts, and respect your reporting accordingly.

Plano, Texas

 

Smacks of fascism

From Joe Spehar

When a member of the U.S. government attacks an American citizen personally, regardless of his or her position in society, it smacks of Stalin, Hitler, [North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez], the demented dwarf in Iran, and any of a number of other despots and dictators.

Springerville, Ariz.