Sorry, made a spelling mistake in the link. It should be www.fairnevadaelections.com

Voters may want to check out some reasons for not voting for Sue Lowden, at the following website:

http://www.fairnevadaelectins.com

In 2005, I was hospitalized in Henderson for an infection related to a problem with Kidney stones. I was in intensive care for two days. The infectious disease doctors brought me back from the serious infection. However, during that time, I came into contact with Dr. Sanjay Vohra who persuaded me to have a chemical stress test on my heart. I agreed to that. After the test, he said that I had some "blockage" and he recommended an angiogram. Dr. Vohra came back again and again with high pressure techniques similar to a used car salesman. He sent two other doctors to persuade me to have the angiogram. I refused. Altogether he visited me about 5 times to persuade me to have the angiogram, never once telling me about the risks involved. I learned later that the procedure has about a 1 percent fatality rate.

A few weeks after leaving the hospital, I went to see Dr. McMahan, a cardiologist who was highly recommended. I told him about the high pressure techniques of Dr. Vohra and in a scoffing way, he said, "That's the Dr. Vohra I know." He also said "Let me guess, he wanted you to have an angiogram." And I replied that that this was correct. Dr. MacMahan then suggested that I take a low dose aspirin each day, which I have done for the 4 years since. I have had no heart symptoms.

After the appointment with Dr. McMahan, I wrote a letter of complaint to the hospital administrator about Dr. Vohra's high pressure sales pitch. The administrator wrote back and said that there would be a hearing but that they could no divulge the results of the hearing. Dr. Vohra is still on the staff of the hospital (St. Rose).

At that time, I looked on the website of the Medial Examiners board and found that there was a complaint about Dr. Vohra with the complaint being that he had not informed a patient of the risks of some procedure. Dr. Vohra presented a defense which satisfied the board. Apparently he was able to convince the board that he had informed the patient of certain risks.

I know that in my case, after visiting me several times trying to sign on for the angiogram, Dr. Vohra never once mentioned any risks related to the procedure.

A few weeks ago, four years after my hospitalization, I had an extensive series of heart tests, simply as a precaution because of my age (64). The findings were that there is no blockage and my heart is in good condition. They said come back in 5 years.

I have heard recently from another family who had someone hospitalized at St. Rose, that the high pressure sales pitch for heart related tests is still going on there.

If anyone who reads this is pressured for an angiogram by Dr. Sanjay Vohra, I strongly suggest that a second opinion be sought.

It is hard to imagine that Chuck the Mouth is taken seriously by anyone but apparently a few do take him seriously. I hear that he sometimes advises Sue Lowden in her moments of irrationality.

Sue Lowden does not have the qualities necessary to be a responsible Senator. She disrupted the election at the state convention in much the same manner as expected from a South American dictator. Halting an election because she didn't like the outcome is not acceptable behavior. For a detailed account of her unacceptable actions, see my website at:

http://www.nevadahomeowners.org/sue_lowd...

The Ron Paul delegates were far more gracious than the party regulars deserve. In April the party leadership prevented, using illegitimate tactics, the election of a delegation consisting of predominately Ron Paul delegates. At the national convention, those running the convention had the Ron Paul delegates followed every day and also subjected them to mild harassment. So I think it was quite gracious of Carl Bunce and Chris Dyer to offer their votes for John McCain. If McCain is elected I wonder what his people will do at the next convention, maybe tap the telephones of any opposition?

Give Us Back Our Convention!

On April 26th in Reno, the Republican State Convention was abruptly and improperly recessed indefinitely on the orders of Sue Lowden, state party chairperson. After a day of parliamentary wrangling, the delegates defeated all the plans of the party leadership to dictate the selection of delegates to the national convention. The crucial vote was approximately 750 to 450 in favor of a plan where the delegates would be selected by the convention rather than the party leadership.

After that critical vote, an election process was put in place where 9 of the delegates would be elected by congressional district, with 3 from each district. Another 22 delegates would be elected by at large voting with that to take place after the election by congressional district. As the election proceeded, it became clear that result desired by the party leadership, which was the election of delegates favorable to John McCain, would fail. The party leadership and the John McCain campaign began searching for a way to stop what to them would be a disaster. The first attempt was to reduce the number of delegates in the hall and so force an end to the convention due to lack of a quorum. That effort failed, probably due to poor communications with the delegates. It was apparently an effort that they were not willing to announce publicly. At about 6:00 p.m., the convention chairman, contrary to the rules of the convention, announced an indefinite recess without any discussion or vote on the matter. This recess hit the convention like a bomb, with strong objections from those who wished the convention to continue.

The original word from Sue Lowden was that the convention would reconvene at a later time. However, the party leaders are apparently discussing plans to handle the remaining elections by mail, rather than to reconvene the convention. At this writing, almost two weeks after the convention, there is no word from the party chairman as to when, if ever, the convention will be reconvened.

As a delegate to the convention, I call on the party leadership to reconvene the convention at the earliest practical time and to adhere strictly to election procedures that were adopted by the convention.

By long tradition and parliamentary rules, a political convention belongs to the delegates and not to the presiding officer of the convention or to the party leadership. Any deviation from this practice will be a bad precedent and will serve to undermine the best traditions of American government.

R. Holloway