Advertisement

Evaluating President’s Course for America

Share

I read with considerable disgust the Jan. 21 editorial, “No Country Left Behind.” Your pathetic characterization of the president as “a small man (in our view), who became president through accident of birth and corruption of democracy” is an affront to every American.

To further suggest that he was “legitimized by reelection” shows your blatant, obvious hatred of the man and the office and a complete lack of respect for the American people who duly elected the president.

It is increasingly clear to me that the strife and divisions in this country are not in any way connected to the policies of the president but to the ravings of news organizations like yours.

Advertisement

Gregory P. Williams

Lakewood

*

It’s nice to see a newspaper editor with enough backbone to print the truth. In the Jan. 21 editorial you note that President Bush is “a small man (in our view), who became president through accident of birth and corruption of democracy.”

If that’s an example of the democracy he wants to spread around the world, Jesus/Allah/Buddha help us all. I am far more afraid of four more years of his administration than I am of any terrorists.

Jennifer Portz

Rancho Palos Verdes

*

Steve Lopez’s Jan. 21 column, “Mothers Mourn as the Elite Party On,” perfectly captured the reasons I too mourned on Thursday when Bush was sworn in for the second time.

While Bush promises freedom for countries abroad, his administration is slowly eroding it here, suppressing the right to free speech and dissent.

While he urges young people to sacrifice for their country, he feels no responsibility to troops already serving us overseas and feels quite comfortable throwing an expensive $40-million party for himself as they have to scramble through trash heaps for armor to keep themselves alive.

Our loyal and brave troops deserve better and so does our country.

Katy Terlinden

Long Beach

*

I think Bush is a good man. I also think he is probably brighter than many people think. Even some of his political opponents talk about how his intelligence is constantly underestimated. And, finally, it is oddly comforting that the leader of the country has specific ideals and objectives, rather than being indecisive and capricious. You know where George W. Bush stands on all the important issues. However, what worried me about his inaugural address was that it reeked of utopianism. Any politician who thinks that it is his mission to make an imperfect world perfect, no matter how pure their motives, is a potentially dangerous leader. Dogmatism, in any form, threatens peace because it can be used to rationalize and justify almost any means to an end. And, because Bush’s goal is an ostensibly appealing ideal -- a world of free people living together in peace -- the dangers are all the more insidious.

Advertisement

In the next four years, we can only hope that he will continue to listen to his heart, but that he will also allow his brain to regulate his heartfelt zeal for peace.

John Johnson

Encino

*

In Bush’s inaugural address, he avoided mentioning Iraq by name. How dishonorable and insulting to our troops serving there. Perhaps he thinks that if he doesn’t mention Iraq, it will go away like the weapons of mass destruction. I guess this is Bush’s version of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

Suzanne Stone

Winnetka

*

At his second-term inauguration, Bush declared it our country’s policy to spread democracy and freedom all over the world. Wasn’t it just a few years ago that the Soviet Union’s policy was to spread its political system, communism, all over the world? And in this country, didn’t we think that was a bad thing?

Paul Bergman

UCLA professor of law

Advertisement