Letters to the Editor
HungChad
Published Letters: 37 Editor's Choice: 6
-
Admitting A Mistake?
[Read the article: The White House counterattack shoots -- and misses -- again]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This may be as close to admitting a big, big mistake as President Bush will ever come. Question for the President:
Mr. President, you seem to have a very strong desire to connect our involvement in Iraq to the Democratic party. Is this due to a new sense friendly bipartisanship or are you asking that the blame be shared for a huge mistake?
-
Beside Them
[Read the article: Bush's betrayal of history]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]U.S. soldiers "deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them into war continue to stand behind them," Bush admonished.
No Mr. Bush - you stand "behind" someone when you are giving them a push forward to do something that they must do all by themselves. U.S. soldiers deserve to know that their elected officials, whether they voted to send them into Iraq or not, will continue to stand BESIDE them. Hiding behind a mountain of deceit is hardly a place to do this important job.
-
Yes, everyone should send a letter in their own words!!
[Read the article: Bush's impeachable offense]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree with johnm12271 as well - I am so angry that I am having a hard time getting my letter to my representatives just the way I want it, but here is my first stab:
Dear Senator,
When Bush gave the orders to perform warrant-less wiretaps on domestic targets, he clearly made a conscious decision to break the law. The pathetic excuses offered by the administration fall far short of explaining this grotesque abuse of Executive Branch powers. This is not a complicated issue – laws , such as the one enacting the FISA courts, and our Constitution make it abundantly clear that the President is not above the law. If this is no longer true and our elected officials will not fight for our Constitutional rights, then we have lost a lot more than the current battle against terrorism or the “war” in Iraq.
All members of the US Legislature, including yourself, should speak out against this autocratic power grab by the President. This is a watershed moment and no person claiming to have the best interests of this country in mind can remain silent – our Constitution is either the rule of the land or it is not. There is no flexible middle ground on this one. This is one place where George Bush’s black and white world vision must be realized – you are either willing to fight for our Constitutional Rights or you are not.
The current relationship between the President and the Republicans controlling our Legislative Branch reminds me of a great old saying:
If you and your boss always agree, then one of you isn’t necessary.
Unfortunately, President Bush is only supposed to be the "boss" of the Executive Branch. Each branch of the government must vigorously protect the essential principle of “checks and balances.” As far as I am concerned, any politician, regardless of party stripe, failing to speak out against warrant-less domestic spying has forever abdicated any right to speak to the American people regarding the values of this country.
-
Don't go down that road
[Read the article: Excuses, excuses]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The whole "Clinton did it too" thing is a classic diversionary tactic. Whether or not Clinton did the same thing is irrelevant to the current issue. Since when are previous crimes precedents for establishing innocence?
As they consistently do, the Republican enabler/apologists are trying to do several things with these tactics:
1) Put Democrats on the defensive for a Republican crime
2) Establish universal guilt and, by extension, universal innocence
3) Force the Democrats to back down for fear of their own collusion being uncovered
So, exactly how broken is our system of governance? It would be hard to imagine a more obvious example of a President proudly proclaiming that he is above the law. If we can't get both parties to speak out strongly against these activities, perhaps the Republicans are right - we are all guilty.
-
Good Motives
[Read the article: Bush's Brezhnev period]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]“Bush's refusal to accept paradox, that his good motives may have unintended consequences, leads him to reject "hindsight."” (emphasis added)
I thought this was a friendly and diplomatic sentence, although completely unsupported by the accumulated evidence on George Bush. Effective leaders set goals and put policies into place to achieve those goals. Perhaps most importantly, they also make regular assessments on the outcomes of those policies – i.e., is it having the intended consequence? Unfortunately, the President’s stated goals (those “good motives” mentioned above) are almost never consistent with his actual goals. And while many of us repeatedly point out these inconsistencies, we grow more frustrated every day as we realize it doesn’t matter. While Democrats rightfully foam at the mouth, we miss the larger point that Bush consistently achieves his only true goal – to maintain the power he feels he and his ilk were granted by birthright. Or to put it another way, don’t be so sure he isn’t looking back at the results of his policies with complete satisfaction!