Kerik’s Withdrawal Hasn’t Ended Debate

The Dec. 11 article regarding Bernard Kerik, “Bush’s Choice for Security Post Pulls Out,” reports that “Kerik’s unexpected withdrawal cast a temporary cloud over President Bush’s second-term Cabinet.” I have one observation and two questions. Observation: I think it preposterous to suggest that a candidate’s withdrawal casts a cloud over the entire Cabinet. Question 1: Did you make a similar editorial comment when three Clinton appointees withdrew for reasons similar to Kerik’s? Question 2: Have you abandoned all pretense of objectivity in your news reporting? Your editorial comment in the second sentence of a headline news article marks a new low.

Arthur Prine

Indian Wells, Calif.

*

If the Bush administration has any integrity for law and order, it will now prosecute former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik for his self-confessed offenses. The IRS needs to investigate his failure to file the employer tax returns for his nanny and for the nanny’s possible failure to pay income and Social Security taxes. The Homeland Security Department needs to investigate his illegal hiring of his household nanny and locate and deport the illegal household nanny. The legal nannies in this country do not need to be systematically undercut by government officials.

Carl Olson

Woodland Hills

*

The Dec. 12 story, “A Cabinet Setback for Bush,” takes Bush to task for not properly vetting his choice for head of the Homeland Security Department. Vetting has never been a strong point of this administration. It never vetted weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or the relationship between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. It never vetted the logistical requirements or the aftereffects of the Iraq invasion or the provisions of the Patriot Act. On and on, there’s nothing new here.

Richard A. Hein

Fullerton