Factoring Edwards Into Nov. 2 Equation

Re “Kerry Picks Ex-Rival Edwards to Join Ticket, Widen Its Appeal,” July 7: During his run for the Democratic nomination earlier this year, Sen. John Edwards came out as an aggressive protectionist who proclaimed to have observed job outsourcing firsthand in his native Carolinas. Remind anyone of Ross Perot’s alarmist prediction of a “giant sucking sound” of jobs going south? The facts are that, yes, there have been jobs lost. An anti-trade attitude, however, is ultimately self-defeating and dangerous because economic growth depends on competition. The focus needs to be on retooling the workforce so that it can participate in the ever-changing global economy. Most disturbing are the bipolar attitudes taken by Edwards and his would-be boss concerning the world perception of America. They have criticized the Bush administration about issues ranging from Iraq to our refusal to follow the Kyoto Protocol. Don’t they understand that along these same lines NAFTA, the World Trade Organization, etc., are critical for the good of the global economy? Edwards and Sen. John F. Kerry should recognize their hypocrisy concerning America’s world role and stop playing the alarmist’s message of job outsourcing overseas.

Richard L. Brutchey

Downey

President Bush’s supporters have no business questioning Edwards’ foreign policy experience if they continue to tolerate Vice President Dick Cheney’s discredited statements about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and Iraqi connections to 9/11 and Al Qaeda. If Cheney’s experience is truly superior, then why has every claim he made about the Iraq war been contradicted by the facts? Why did he support Ahmad Chalabi, who gave the U.S. faulty intelligence and may have been an Iranian spy? Given Cheney’s track record, if he stated that the U.S. faced an imminent threat to its national security, would anyone believe him? It seems to me that Cheney’s brand of experience has weakened the United States, not strengthened it. Edwards could do no worse, and he and Kerry’s commitment to a sensible internationalist foreign policy would probably improve our badly damaged credibility.

Ravi Mahalingam

Monrovia

Your July 7 editorial, “The Obvious Choice,” leaves me in the difficult position of agreeing with the sentiments expressed and at the same time being disappointed. The Times has a tradition of encouraging civic participation. At a time of war -- both real (Al Qaeda) and opportunistic (Iraq) -- it is more important than ever that Americans participate in the electoral process. It is a democratic, patriotic duty, in my opinion. Your editorial does nothing to encourage this. Its equal-opportunity cynicism and implied disdain for the choice being given to the country this fall will do nothing but discourage an already alienated electorate from voting.

Mike Potentier

Santa Clarita

I was upset to read your editorial calling Cheney lumpish and describing Bush’s “patented smirk.” However, I also was upset about the complimentary physical descriptions of the Democratic candidates. I would like voters to make their decisions based on actions and policies rather than physical attributes. These comments have no place in the news.

Nena Lefitz

Woodland Hills

All I’ve been hearing from the Republicans since Kerry announced Edwards as his VP pick is his lack of foreign policy experience. Also, can we afford for him to get on-the-job experience. Well, it seems to me that four years ago Texas Gov. Bush had no foreign policy experience, and he became the president. He got his experience by waging two wars, one of which was not justified.

Chris Mohr

Moorpark

How about this as a Republican counterpunch to the Kerry-Edwards ticket: Cheney will withdraw from the Bush ticket for “health” reasons, and Bush will announce Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) as his new running mate.

Isaac Hirschbein

La Mesa, Calif.