Readers seize Enter Stage Right

Write today!Got a bone to pick with us? Did we get something really wrong? Did we get something right? Need to vent?

Then write a letter to ESR for publication! Names withheld by request and all letters are subject to editing for length, clarity or language. Letters from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome and will be printed. Please state whether you wish your name to appear with the email.

Send your hate-filled vitriol or love-filled praise to

web posted December 1, 2003

Re: Massachusetts marriage ruling is judicial activism in action by W. James Antle III (web posted November 24, 2003)

Enjoyed your column. Not sure, however, that I would read so much into it as you did. Suspect this is an issue in which voters will not reveal their true feelings to pollsters as was the case in Colorado when voters had a referendum on whether local jurisdictions could give special preferences based upon sexual orientation. Polling up to last minute indicated referendum would fail handily. However, referendum passed, only to be overturned by Colorado Supreme Court and then U. S.S.Ct.

David Palmer

Re: Barbra Streisand: The new Janet Reno by Michael Moriarty (web posted November 24, 2003)

I read the article by Michael Moriarty, wondering if it was the actor, and after discovering it was indeed him, was surprised to read that he was "dumped" from "Law & Order". The three "Law & Order" series are my favorite programs on television. I was always under the impression that he left because he was just tired of the role. Imagine that. getting "kicked off" of a top-rated series, simply because of your own conservative viewpoints. That is a stupid move by the NBC network.

I was also impressed by Mr. Moriarty's role in the miniseries "Holocaust". It wasn't until viewing that miniseries, on the NBC network, that I finally knew the truth about what the Nazi's and World War II were really all about, the mass murder and destruction of the Jewish people. Hitler and his ilk started with Europe, and wanted to spread their evil plans across the world. The program caught my interest to the point that I went out and purchased Gerald Green's novel on which the miniseries was based.

It is sad to see that Mr. Moriarty is retired, but it was a lift to read his comments and critique of Barbra Streisand. She is one individual who makes my stomach turn.

Thank you for giving Mr. Moriarty a place to speak his mind on these important issues.


William G. Smith
Lancaster, Pa

Re: Another Florida land grab

Once again the environmentalists are trying to dictate to landowners what they can and cannot do on their property. Its in Brevard County Florida along the Space Coast. On January 2004, the Brevard County Commission will vote as to whether or not the Save Endangered Areas also known as Sea Ordinance does indeed become law.

The purpose of such ordinance being of course pushed by environmental interests would require the taking of any landowner's property of five acres or greater within specified areas and turn it into a preserve at the expense of the landowner without any compensation. If a landowner let us say, wants to build a subdivision the county could take the amount of land described above for preservation. That would require the developer to build homes on smaller lot parcels. It would allow the developer to build a crowded area of single family homes and the rest of the land would have to remain as a preservation. The landowner has no say as this ordinance if approved would make it mandatory. This proposed ordinance would then be in conjunction with ordinances that are in existence and that would severely limit property rights.

Recently, the citizens of Brevard voted against a one percent sales tax hike. Part of those moneys had the sales tax been approved would have had fifty million dollars of tax payer funds for the additional acquisition of land to get them off the tax rolls.

Additionally in Brevard there is an organization known as EELs which has been buying up land for environmental purposes. I ask for your help in sending e-mails to the Brevard County Commission urging them to vote against this measure. You have to get to a point where one states: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH AND NO MORE LAND GRABS! The swing vote in the Commission might be Commissioner Truman Scarborough. Commissioners Pritchard and Colon will be voting against this proposed ordinance

Thank you,

Al Gutierrez
4251 Grovewood Lane
Titusville, Florida

web posted November 24, 2003

Re: Creating a new holiday by Bruce Walker (web posted November 17, 2003)

As much as I admire former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, the idea of yet another holiday to pay tribute to another great American will, in my own humble opinion, be a waste of time.

Why? For the simple reason that the only people who ever benefit from "federal" holidays are federal and state employees, and let us not forget especially federal and state elected and appointed officials. This is nothing more than symbolism of the most hypocritical kind.

We, the people, the folks who work our fingers to the bone, our minds to a frazzle, our bodies to the point of exhaustion (and then some), we will not benefit in the least from this proposed Reagan "holiday"; because the companies we all work for will still remain open, working full shifts and hours. This is true of many so-called "federal" holidays.

Around a year ago, while shopping in a supermarket here in Pennsylvania, I overheard a customer say to the store manager "So, you're going to be open for Thanksgiving?", to which the manager replied "Yes; that's another holiday they (meaning the fools in corporate management) have taken away from us." (Meaning the workers). Another prime example of both thanklessness, and sickening corporate greed. Sadly, this is true of many businesses, both small and large, across our land today.

This kind of nonsense is not what the founders of our nation ever intended for their descendents to endure. Indeed, if those of America's forefathers could see the immoral quagmire which their great-great-great grandchildren have allowed the USA to fall into, they would shed tears of grief to their Creator for the sins of those of their flesh and blood.

If we are going to have holidays to observe in America, then everyone should be entitled to enjoy and benefit from those special days; not just those of the ruling or upper class. That is only fair, and truly American in its concept.

William G. Smith
Lancaster, PA

web posted November 17, 2003

Re: Time to kiss and make up by Steven Martinovich (web posted November 10, 2003)

What errant nonsense to claim as did your columnist that Canada is trying to export its values and the US isn't! Read George Bush's speech about Democracy last week, and the current justification for the US involvement in Iraq is precisely the notion of building democracy. Your columnists need to keep better informed if you want to advise the Canadian government as to what it should be doing.

Dolores Janiewski
Center Fellow, International Center for Advanced Studies
New York University

Steve Martinovich responds:

What I argued was that Canada wanted to export its values but it is unable to. I think, if recent history is looked over again, that the notion that "Canadian values" have had an effect around the world is not supported by any evidence. At no time did I argue that the U.S. wasn't trying to export its values. I merely believe that when Canadian interests mesh with American interests, the automatic Canadian view shouldn't be to upbraid the Americans from the position of false moral superiority.

web posted November 10, 2003

Re: Seat belt laws

I was reading the comments of Mr. William J. Holdorf of Chicago, concerning the "seat-belt laws" of various states, and agree with his arguments. I use seat-belts, but feel that it is a personal choice.

Isn't it funny how state and federal lawmakers and/or courts like to champion "a woman's right to choose" when it comes to the issue of abortion; an act which kills a living baby growing within his or her mothers' womb; but oh, heaven forbid, we must make certain drivers on America's highways are buckled up, and if they will not do it voluntarily, we will hit them in the wallet/pocketbook. "We want to save peoples lives!"


What really should make many Americans angry with either their elected, appointed, or even police officials is the nonsense of Sunday beer/wine/liquor sales across the country.

With all the tragedies of drunk or drugged operators of motor vehicles causing fatal accidents on highways all across the USA, the very fact that those who sell alcoholic beverages are permitted to do so 7 days a week is inexcusable.

This all points to the sheer hypocrisy of our political, judicial, and even police officials across the country. Allowing alcohol to flow freely every single day, while shoving seat-belt laws down the throats of those very American citizens whose hard earned tax dollars pay all those salaries; well, it is just sheer stupidity. It is a prime example of that biblical statement about how "....the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil".

Out of the three groups mentioned above, America's police officers are the only ones who aren't being paid what they are worth. The other two groups (politicians and court personnel) earn far more money than what they should be making, when you consider either one or the other constantly pulls some foolishness which jeopardizes the freedoms which "we, the people" hold dear to our hearts.

I have great respect for our nations' police officers, but mention politicians or court officials (judges or justices, state or federal) and it makes me want to lose more than just my lunch.

We need to tell our officials at all government levels that it is time to stop this arrogant, hypocritical nonsense, and do so now!

William G. Smith
Lancaster, Pa.

web posted October 27, 2003

Re: Seat belt laws

Seat belt laws represent unabated tyranny on the march as each year law enforcement is expanded. Such laws infringe on a person’s rights as guaranteed in the Fourth, Fifth, and the Ninth Amendments, and the Civil Rights section of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Seat belt laws are an unwarranted intrusion by government into the personal lives of citizens; they deny through prior restraint the right to determine a person’s own safety standard for his/her own body, the ultimate private property. Not using a seat belt is a victimless, state-created crime that does not hurt or threaten anyone.

While seat belt use might save some people, there is ample proof that other people have been more seriously injured and even killed because of seat belt use. Also, some people have been saved because a seat belt was not used. In the latter case, the insidious nature of seat belt laws mandates that the victim is subject to a fine and possible arrest and jail for not dying in the accident using a so-called safety device chosen arbitrarily by politicians.

The government has no constitutional authority to knowingly maim and kill some people just because the government hopes to save others merely by chance. The government has no right to take chances with a person’s body: play Russian roulette with a person’s life.

Also, the millions of tax dollars spent annually in support of seat belt laws has never prevented even one traffic accident, the real cause of traffic fatalities—not non-seat belt use. Also, because some people feel safer wearing seat belts, studies have shown that they tend to drive more recklessly. This is known as "risk compensation," which is covered in more detail in the 1995 book, "Risk" by Dr. John Adams, University College London, England. Also, there are other professionals who have published well documented research which clearly discredits the so-called benefit of seat belt laws, but key members of the national news media refuse to inform the public of such truth.

We do not need to spend millions of dollars for more seat belt law enforcement, for more forced seat belt use, for more traffic accidents. Tax dollars spent for traffic safety should focus on achieving more responsibly educated drivers, and more safer-built roads and vehicles in order to prevent accidents. Preventing accidents will not only save lives but will save the cost of property damage and, most importantly, save our freedom.

There certainly is nothing wrong with voluntary seat belt use, as it is with all other personal safety and health care decisions in life; however, there is a great deal wrong with all seat belt laws. Such laws must be repealed in order to restore true liberty in the U.S.

Anyone who wants more facts why seat belt laws are wrong for America should visit,, and

William J. Holdorf
Chicago, IL



Site Map

Email ESR

Conservative Site of the Day




2003, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.

You've seen the banner, now order the gear!
Visit ESR's anti-gun control gear web site for T-shirts, mugs and mousepads!