April 19, 2015 --

The latest New York Times attack (lead editorial, April 12) on critics of the president asserts that the March 9, 2015 open letter to Iran's leaders, signed by 47 Republican senators, stated that President Obama "had no authority to conclude negotiations over Iran's nuclear weapons program."

My copy of that letter states, inter alia, "...while the president negotiates international agreements, Congress plays the significant role of ratifying them." The letter then provided the number of senators required to ratify a treaty and and requirements for approving "[a] so-called congressional-executive agreement." The letter then noted: "Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement." The letter went on to state: "The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time."

Where does the letter declare that President Obama lacks authority "to conclude negotiations over Iran's nuclear weapons program?" LPR finds no such assertion in its text.

The Times' April 12 editorial comments: "Try to imagine the outrage from Republicans if a similar group of Democrats had written to the Kremlin in 1986 telling Mikhail Gorbachev that President Ronald Reagan did not have authority to negotiate a nuclear arms deal at the Reykjavik summing meeting that winter."

Didn't the Reykjavik summit lead to agreement on a treaty that was then ratified by the U.S. Senate? Indeed it did. Clearly, the Times put forth an analogy that does not stand up to minimal scrutiny.

Is there no limit to the lengths to which The New York Times will go to distort reality? Or is it that The New York Times is intent on what Orwell, in "1984" called "reality control?" In that novel, George Orwell writes that the Party could say that past events never happened.

The Times seems to be going Orwell one better -- to assert that non-occurring events did happen. Reality control is effectuated by "doublethink," described by Orwell, in part, "to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies...." Does The New York Times believe its distortions, or does it count on the passive acceptance of its editorial machinations not only by the left, but by the Republican establishment, as well?

Earlier this month, five leftist groups reportedly sent a letter to Senate Democrats opposing congressional review of a nuclear arms agreement with Iran. I challenge The New York Times to declare that it would support a Republican president who negotiated an agreement with a foreign power without obtaining Senate approval. Indeed, I challenge The New York Times to assert that it would support law-making authority for a Republican president who declared that he had given up waiting for action by Congress, notwithstanding the paper's support of such power for President Obama.

In the absence of opposition to leftist moves in support of Orwellian government, the way is open to the utter transformation of the United States to a nation whose rulers proclaim: Liberty is Bigotry; Dissent is Disrespect; Democracy is Gridlock. The silence of conservatives hastens the arrival at the White House of Big Brother -- or, indeed, Big Sister -- perhaps as soon as 2020, if not earlier.