Consider the Source of Advice to Bush

Re “Great Man Theory Hits End of the Line,” Commentary, June 29: Arianna Huffington’s credibility for giving advice diminishes as I recall listening to her campaigning for her millionaire husband when he bombed out running for the Senate. Her comment about President Bush’s “anemic agenda” sputtering falls flat when his record is compared with Bill Clinton’s sad performance after his first six months in the White House.

Perhaps, if the president were articulate and a wordsmith like Arianna, he could be a syndicated columnist. But until then, Bush will have to be satisfied with being the leader of the free world.

W. H. Smith

Palm Desert

After Newt Gingrich helped bring the Republicans to power in Congress in 1994, pundits opined that Clinton had become irrelevant to the process of governing. We quickly saw how misguided that line of thinking was. Now, with the sudden ascension of the Democrats in the Senate, it looks like Bush is fast becoming inconsequential. As has been reported recently, the Bush energy policy has been short-circuited, his plan to drill for oil in national parks and monuments has been capped, his faith-based initiative doesn’t have a prayer with many of his core constituents, he failed to impress his counterparts during his European jaunt, his school voucher plan has flunked, his drive for unfettered access to U.S. roads by Mexican trucks got the red light and even Sen. Jesse Helms has joined in putting Bush’s appointments schedule on hold.

Short of the Republicans regaining control of the Senate, it appears that Bush’s term in office lasted about six months.

Dave Wyman

Los Angeles

Bush’s faith-based initiative is an insult to the generosity and intelligence of the American people. Why is it necessary for the government to take our money and decide what charities are worthy? Private charities raise over $100 billion every year to help the poor.

Contrast this to big government’s war on poverty, in which over 70% of the money Americans “donate” to the welfare program goes to bureaucratic salaries and overhead, leaving less than 30 cents of every dollar for the poor. In a Libertarian society, government would be smaller and we would keep more of our own money to save, spend or donate. The economy would flourish and labor would be in demand, resulting in more jobs and lower prices for goods and services.

Garth Lane

Simi Valley