Bush’s Aggressiveness Repels Some White Male Voters

“For 2004, Bush Has Strength in the White Male Numbers” (Dec. 28), with its analysis that President Bush has overwhelming appeal to white male voters because of his aggressive approach to world affairs, scares me. I am a white male voter, 83 years old, a World War II veteran (four years as a pilot in the Army Air Corps/Air Force), and I view Bush as a threat to world peace.

After 9/11 he gained nearly universal domestic and international support for the war on terror and Osama bin Laden. He squandered the international support, however, when he switched his focus from Bin Laden to his obsession with bringing down Saddam Hussein.

He created an image of Hussein being an imminent threat to the United States, and with his arrogant “we will do it my way or no way” attitude, he unilaterally led us into an unnecessary war against Iraq. The result has been a total mess. He now claims that the capture of Hussein justifies the hundreds of deaths, thousands of casualties, mounting debts and misery he created.

Instead of making the United States more secure, I believe Bush has created new generations of anti-Americans throughout the Muslim world. Who can predict how many new wars he is willing to rush into to turn other countries into the form of democracy he envisions?

Bob Flannes

Laguna Beach

*

Being a 48-year-old white male, I find the fact that most white men support Bush is the strongest argument to elect a female president.

Ray McKown

Los Angeles

*

On the front page, you have this article, which gives the illusion that Bush has the presidency pretty much sewn up. However, way back on A32, there’s an even more important article about how Bush has reneged (lied, if you will) on a promise by cutting a program that has seen great success in helping small and medium-sized manufacturing companies be competitive.

In a jobless “recovery,” will those same white males backing Bush be as ardent when their jobs, down the road, are eliminated because the companies they work for can’t be competitive with the likes of Bush’s pals: the noncompetitive Halliburton, Enron, etc., and their subsidiaries?

Talk about being “Bushwhacked”! Whom has Bush not insulted? Oh, that’s right: big business and monopolies.

Roger Askin

Los Angeles

*

Picking a fight with a weaker, questionable enemy because we can’t defeat or even find the stronger, real one is not manly. Taunting an opposing army from the safety of the White House should not be confused with actual courage. And in answer to the Republican pollster who asked what Democratic candidate I’d want with me in a foxhole instead of Bush, give me someone who has actually been in one: John Kerry or Wesley Clark.

Kurt Page

Laguna Niguel

*

As a lifelong Democrat, I am amazed at the bitter comedy that engulfs the Democratic candidates fighting for the honor of becoming the candidate who will run against Bush in 2004. Instead of attacking the Republicans, they are attacking each other with rancor. Were I a Republican, I would enjoy the pleasure of seeing the Democrats committing hara-kiri.

Milton Kunin

West L.A.