Letters to the editor
There he goes again
There he goes again. Jim Dorsey started out this string of exchanges by trashing Butch Mazzuca and Kaye Ferry. Talk about personal insults – things like “demagogue,” ” pollyannish,” “chauvinist,” “personal agenda,” “boring” and “perhaps you don’t know anything else. Or perhaps you merely have contempt for those in your audience.”
Now he gets some criticism, and whines about it. Taking his cue from Hillary Clinton, he sees a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (Eagle County Division). You’re right, Jim, we meet every other Tuesday for lunch at the Brush Creek Saloon in Eagle to plot the overthrow of everything that is right and just. We are not only one person. We are legion. We are everywhere.
At least Dorsey took a position in his Third Epistle to the Ignorant: Bill Clinton’s virtue was vindicated. Dorsey points out that in his impeachment, Clinton was acquitted. So was O.J. Simpson. But both were guilty as hell. Both stand convicted in the court of public opinion.
Dorsey then got into a convoluted attack on another of Butch Mazzuca’s columns about the war in Iraq. Dorsey said that the war was wrong because a bad end does not justify the means. The defect in Dorsey’s logic is that we have to accept his premise that the aims of the Bush administration were bad. That is not an established fact.
The final verdict is not in yet on President Bush’s order to proceed with the invasion of Iraq. Were there really weapons of mass destruction, and the will to use them? Or was his decision a good faith mistake, based on faulty intelligence? Or was there a cynical manipulation of public opinion, to obtain some sordid goal?
I don’t pretend to know for sure which of these alternatives is closer to what happened. I suspect it’s somewhere between the first two choices. I won’t blame Bush if he erred in good faith on the side of caution in the interests of the United States. That’s part of his job description. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, until there is compelling evidence of bad faith.
By bad faith I mean things like what Bill Clinton did – lob a bunch of expensive missiles into Iraq and the Sudan to distract attention from the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
Hillary Clinton’s offense is that she was a willing accomplice with Bill in a lot of his skullduggery. In some instances, like the Travel Office firings, and the missing law office billing records that had been subpoenaed, it appears that she was a prime instigator. She has never explained her silence about evidence that her husband is a sexual predator. Does anyone believe that even without Bill around, Hillary as president would run a clean and respectable White House?
Found a mistake
In the continuing fiasco in Liberia, especially in light of the possible presence of our troops, I think your paper should be read before put to press.
The other day in an AP writer’s article – and I know you have to proof those for press too – a misplaced modifier was present, reading “(President Bush visited Liberia.) He was considering an offer by the Liberian president to step down.”
My oh my, Liberia is now ordering Bush to step down? America truly has fallen in prestige if Liberia is ordering us around.
Please read your own paper, Mr. Rogers. I have lived in the valley for the past two summers, and find the paper woefully poor in relation to editing and reportin – albiet it is difficult to find stories here – your standards should rise a notch regarding this.
I hope things improve – sometimes the best papers are the small and efficent ones – and hope to stop blanching when reading.