The State of Our Union Is Politicized

Tuesday’s State of the Union speech by President Bush should have been titled “The Fate of the Union.” The union’s future does not appear promising if one objectively assesses what was said.

The speech was pure politics, had little substance and lacked the kind of vision that these difficult times demand. The opposition’s rebuttal was no better. Currently, the nation is being ill-served by those elected or appointed to lead, and this includes all three branches of the government.

Lewis Elia

San Clemente

*

I cannot accept the false comfort of Bush’s assurance that “no one can now doubt the word of America.” After all, when he wanted something from us, Bush assured us that his presidency would be distinguished from the one that preceded it by at least three things: (1) greater humility in foreign relations, (2) reduced willingness to commit American troops to action in other lands and (3) no nation building.

Under Bush’s leadership, no one can doubt that the United States will do anything that it wishes within its power -- and that we’ll make up the words to suit us as we go along. I do, though, agree with Bush that the danger is not behind us. As long as he continues in office, the danger is right in front of us for all to see.

Jack Quirk

Northridge

*

Re Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.’s rambling, ironically myopic “State of the ‘Vision Thing,’ ” (Commentary, Jan. 21): He frets that the Iraq war “has succeeded in turning the international wave of sympathy that engulfed the U.S. after 9/11 into worldwide ... distrust and even hatred.” In reality, multinational words of condolence and the accompanying crocodile tears will never serve to restore the lives of thousands of innocent citizens lost on 9/11.

A sovereign nation engaged in war requires respect from its allies and fear from its enemies. Bush has reestablished this condition -- witness Libya’s recent capitulation. He has earned our support, not the constant carping of peace-at-any-price, niggling naysayers like Schlesinger.

Stuart Weiss

Beverly Hills

*

In Wednesday’s Times, the front page highlights the words of President Bush, “People of Iraq are free.... “ But turn to Page A5, “Another Voice of Academia Is Silenced in Iraq,” for the story of Abdul Latif Mayah, the fourth professor killed -- the latest in “a series of academic slayings in post-Hussein Iraq.” Clearly, there’s a disconnect between the president’s claim and the reality: “His assassination is part of a plan in this country, targeting any intellectual in this country, any free voice,” according to Salam Rais, a student.

If fear, assassinations, missiles and bombs mark the occupation with daily civilian deaths, how can the people of Iraq be free?

Lenore Navarro Dowling

Los Angeles

*

When previous presidents (Carter, Reagan) invoked their faith in God, it was with a sense of humility, asking for guidance in making tough decisions. When Bush says that “the cause we serve is right,” he implies that his policies already have God’s approval. His arrogance will surely lead to a fall, and I hope he doesn’t take our country down with him.

Peter Myers

Palos Verdes Peninsula

*

I didn’t think anything could make Howard Dean’s high school football coach-style rant in Iowa look good. Then, 24 hours later, we were put to sleep by Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Tom Daschle with their response to Bush’s speech. If the Democratic leaders don’t understand that we are in a cold civil war, we need new ones, fast. The Project for the New American Century chicken hawks have declared war on the world, but not with their kids carrying the guns.

George II is getting away with the deficit waltz -- cut taxes on the rich, borrow the money back from them, pay them interest and bury our kids in debt. If the Democratic Party can only offer droning wonks and collaborators, it’s time for a football coach. Give ‘em hell, Howard.

Mark Milinich

Venice

*

In the State of the Union speech, Bush spoke of a possible constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Not too long ago, interracial marriage was banned. People argued that it violated a natural order. They were wrong. Bush’s plank is a disingenuous, below-the-belt codification of discrimination. It won’t work, either, because it’s wrong.

Roy Pitluk

Los Angeles

*

Re gay marriage: Americans should remember the time when “activist judges” forced an unpopular issue upon a divided public. It was racial integration.

Richard Kopelle

Rancho Mirage

*

Regarding Bush’s consideration of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, an idea that is not supported by 100% of the country: If you are going to fiddle around with the Constitution, at least create an amendment that the country wants. I propose a constitutional amendment that says all citizens receive health coverage from birth until death. I think 100% of the citizens’ support would be a possibility. (I don’t count the health insurance companies because they are not true citizens of the country in which I think I live.)

Robert Briscoe Evans

Valley Village

*

My observation is that Bush should deal more in veracities rather than platitudes.

Pierce J. Mullaly

Sun City

*

I’ve been a Republican for a long time, but to tell the truth, Bush makes it tough not to switch parties. Why can’t we decide between candidates like John McCain or Colin Powell? What happened to men like Abraham Lincoln? Where are we going?

Bill Halpin

Huntington Beach