Trading Blows as Campaign Enters Final Round

Re “Kerry’s Reference to Mary Cheney Hits a Nerve,” Oct. 15: Vice President Dick and Lynne Cheney ... “protest too much.” Why would they express such outrage at the mere mention of their daughter Mary’s sexuality if they felt truly that there was nothing shameful in her being a lesbian? It isn’t John Kerry who is backing a constitutional amendment that would bar gays from being able to marry -- it is President Bush and the GOP. The last I heard, the Cheneys were still card-carrying members of this party that considers gays less than morally equal with other Americans, and therefore not deserving of equal rights under the law. Perhaps the Cheneys’ righteous indignation is justified. And perhaps (wouldn’t Freud have a field day) it is misplaced.

Ronald Rubin

Topanga

*

What kind of “integrity, integrity, integrity” was Kerry using when he so unnecessarily outed Cheney’s daughter?

Pauline Regev

Santa Monica

*

My heart goes out to Mary Cheney. It must be hurtful to have her parents so publicly expressing their discomfort with who she is. What is it like to have parents who feel you have made a choice to live in sin?

Melissa Stoller

Los Angeles

*

Re “The Man Who Was Unchanged,” Commentary, Oct. 14: Max Boot asserts that “Bush gets it: He was transformed by 9/11” and Kerry and the Democrats were not. This is a charge I have heard repeatedly from conservative commentators. But look at the record. Bush came into office with two big goals for his administration: cut taxes for the rich and overthrow Saddam Hussein. After 9/11, he proceeded with both of these plans. He cut taxes for the rich, despite needing that money for homeland security and the war on terror. He invaded Iraq, despite the fact it had nothing to do with 9/11. So who was truly changed by that day?

G. Murray Thomas

Long Beach

*

Re “U.S. Rejects U.N. Plan for Women,” Oct. 14: While Bush is busy congratulating himself that the first Afghan to vote in the recent election was a woman, representatives from his administration refuse to endorse a plan to ensure every woman’s right to education, healthcare and “sexual rights.” Eighty-five other nations endorsed this plan. What is wrong with this picture?

Lynn Cohen

Los Angeles

*

Michael Ramirez’s Oct. 14 depiction of Kerry standing in the ruins of the World Trade Center calling it a “nuisance” was offensive. Not only does Ramirez denigrate Kerry by twisting his words, he denigrates all those souls who died there and their families by using our nation’s tragedy to cruelly portray an honorable person as insensitive and lacking in common human empathy. Shame on Ramirez and shame on The Times.

Stacy Swenck

Temecula

*

Re “Nobody Wants a Draft, but What if We Need One?” Commentary, Oct. 13: Neither presidential candidate wants a draft, as Michael O’Hanlon’s excellent article points out. However, with the Democratic Party trying to frame the war in Iraq as another Vietnam and Kerry’s record of trashing the Vietnam veterans, what rational young man or woman would want to serve under him? Kerry could have a real problem maintaining an all-volunteer Army and thus would be the one most likely to need a draft.

Howard Christensen

Manhattan Beach

*

For a party that claims tolerance as its bedrock core value, the Democratic Party is very intolerant of anyone whose opinion differs from its own. Recently, overzealous Kerry supporters have driven through our neighborhoods stealing Bush/Cheney yard signs. I will be happy when Bush is reelected and we can once again get past the duplicity and hypocrisy that permeate the Democratic Party.

Pete Pellegrino

Altadena

*

When will either the Democratic or the Republican party give us a choice of a good, honest, caring man as a candidate for president? Probably never. Also, whatever happened to the “loyal opposition” after an election?

Irving M. Leemon

Northridge