This article was to me a good example of the press' treatment of political campaigns as horse races.
The blurb on the front page led me to believe the article would be a useful comparison of the candidates' stands on various important issues. There was one small section, "In their own words," that gave a little information, but the largest part of the article was concerned with who is ahead, who is losing, and even "Finding a first lady"!
The other thing the media write about is how no one votes anymore. One reason may be that it is very hard to determine whom to vote for. It's possible we would do better betting on horses.
-- Martha A. Smith, St Petersburg
WMD talk was plentiful
Re: Bush's Deception on Iraq, Jan. 11.
If Bill Maxwell had based his column on a computer search instead of the Democrat talking points, he would have discovered that the notion of Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction did not originate with President Bush.
On Feb. 17, 1998, President Bill Clinton stated: "We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
On Feb. 18, 1998, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright remarked that "the risk that the leaders of Iraq will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security risk we face."
On Sept. 23, 2002, Al Gore said: "We know that (Saddam Hussein) has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
And even a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, stated on Dec. 8, 2002: "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has a developing capacity for the production of WMD."
Obviously, if there was deception going on, members of both parties were affected. As for the statement that the "international community" would have been aware of the removal of weapons prior to the war, that is ludicrous - as if every mile of the Iraq border were being monitored by some all-seeing eye. Wasn't the international community aware of Iraq's mass executions, torture chambers and children's prisons? If it was, the international community did nothing about them.
Despite Maxwell's contention that the Bush administration has us gullible Americans cowering in fear, I for one feel much safer with the removal of one more insane dictator from the world stage - with or without weapons of mass destruction.
-- Mary L. Wright, Brooksville
A worthy target
Re: Bush's deception on Iraq.
Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq have been widely reported for years by a variety of sources both pro-Bush and anti-Bush. I know I have read them. But after the World Trade Center attack and the obvious degree to which Muslim extremism would go against this country, it seems logical to make a serious strike against a worthy target. This target would have the potential to effect an attack against the United States or support radical groups that would execute the attack.
Even if the Bush administration suspected that WMDs were not an immediate threat, it is apparent that Saddam Hussein would work to develop that capacity. It was not logical to wait for him to do this.
Al-Qaida derived its support from many Muslim countries. Most of these countries wanted to appease al-Qaida and attempt to stay in the good graces of America. You can be assured that after the Bush administration invaded Iraq that these countries sat up and took notice and, I believe, seriously questioned their support for al-Qaida. These questions resulted in less support for al-Qaida.
It appears that the many attacks on the Bush administration regarding Iraq stem from policy and ideological differences in many other areas too numerous to mention here. It appears that the Bush administration would have been labeled negligent if it had not invaded Iraq.
-- J.H. Brown, St. Petersburg
The fraudulent war
Re: Bush's deception on Iraq,
Bravo for Bill Maxwell's writing and the St. Petersburg Times for printing such a plain-truth article about George Bush's fraudulent war on Iraq. Maxwell has been outspoken and right all along, but this one really summarizes what a lot of people have not faced up to - that Bush and his cabal were going to war no matter what. It had nothing to do with our safety or imminent threats or WMD or Saddam Hussein's tyranny. I wish the whole country could read this one and start paying attention to the weapons of mass deception coming from Bush and his cronies.
I especially like Maxwell's final words where he sums up the saddest part about the illegal, immoral and unnecessary war on Iraq: ". . . U.S. and coalition troops and civilians, on both sides, will continue to die in a war that was initiated by George W. Bush - who was going to war no matter what." (Emphasis is mine.)
-- Suzanne LaFrance, St. Petersburg
More uplifting items
Re: Bush's deception on Iraq.
-- It is a shame that, with the education and intelligence that Bill Maxwell apparently has, he has to waste so much of his editorial space on his hatred for President Bush. The Jan. 11 article follows the lead of other Bush haters. Accusing the president of lying is unfair and certainly poor journalism.
I have noticed other articles Maxwell writes where he shows hatred for Republicans or tends to play the race card at times.
He would do his race and our country a big favor if he would use his intelligence and journalistic ability for more uplifting reporting. He does that at times, and the articles he writes are very good. Let's have more of the positive stories from now on.
-- Robert E. Hagaman, Homosassa
Only in America?
As the granddaughter of a Southern Baptist minister from Mississippi, I was raised in the church. I learned that Jesus' message was peace and love. My church did not teach me that God chooses America's presidents, as the Jan. 11 letter writer (Bush is blessed) informs us happened in 2000. Does this only happen in America, or does God also choose the heads of state of other countries? If so, I have even more questions to ask him when I get to heaven.
Oh, wait - is heaven reserved only for members of the GOP?
-- Marianne Finnigan, Brooksville
Was Clinton blessed, too?
Re: Religious values have a place in politics, Jan. 4.
I guess if Pat Robertson is right and God chooses our presidents, then God must have liked Bill Clinton so much he put him in office twice. That should give all those Republicans who savaged him pause.
-- Donald Rourke, Tampa
Pray for a surplus
Re: Bush is blessed.
After reading this letter, I don't see any reason for me to cast my vote for any "ungodly" Democrat this November, as God has already blessed and will personally assure President Bush's re-election.
I didn't realize that it was "divine intervention" and not the U.S. Supreme Court that awarded Bush the 2000 election.
If I were a Republican, I'd pray real hard and maybe by "divine intervention" the national deficit will disappear!
-- Robert W. Szucs, New Port Richey
Unfit to judge
Re: A family judge who sues women, editorial, Jan. 11.
I am appalled at Judge Charles Cope's actions regarding his recent misbehavior in California. Cope "admitted to being drunk, to wandering the streets, to meeting the women and even participating in sexual foreplay with one, and to losing his memory about some of the events."
Yet in his lawsuits, he continues a pattern of blaming others for the consequences of his own actions. This man should not be allowed to sit in judgment of others. Are the courts saying that Cope will be fair to the women who appear before him? Or will he continue his pattern of abusive behaviors toward women? How sad that we have someone with such a low maturity level in a position of power over others.
-- Cathie Chapman, Clearwater
Stay vigilant
No action or law can ensure the national security of the people of the United States more than the Bill of Rights.
More than 200 years of argument, from all sides, have failed to take these rights away.
Let us stay vigilant. The government is employed by the citizens, we the people.
-- Steven Kight, Tampa
[Last modified January 18, 2004, 01:01:02]
