Letters to the editor
For someone who likes taking “shots” at George Bush and his administration, there surely is a steady supply of ammunition.
Poor old Colin Powell is busy trying to tear down the walls that the president erected between us and our historic allies and along comes our Department of Defense to build the walls even higher.
The logic of the directive to bar certain countries from bidding on the reconstruction efforts is very questionable and any political wisdom is totally absent. Surely Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and the president himself must have known that it would further alienate our former allies.
As far as what it might accomplish, as a taxpayer, I have no more admiration for Halliburton and Bechtel than I do for some French or Russian company. (I actually prefer Canadian companies, which were also barred from competing.)
I would most like to see my tax dollars go to any quality company that submits the lowest bid. I mean, it’s not like the officers of Halliburton and Bechtel have suffered because of the war. It’s not like they, or many of their “kids,” are in Iraq with our armed forces. So why do they get rewarded with preferential treatment?
Actually it’s also beginning to look as though Halliburton is not as interested in good work and honesty as they are in making big profits. Sorry about that, Mr. Cheney.
David Le Vine
I’m pleased to see our national debate regarding the pros and neocons continue, and if anything, becoming more intense as the electoral process unfolds and heads toward resolution.
Liberals have done nothing to help their own cause beyond their agenda to obstruct the Rove-Cheney-Bush team’s.
It’s easy to see the uphill battle they’ve got in recapturing the White House, or even one or both houses of Congress.
I do think voters, however, are finally seeing the danger in giving the entire government over to the ideologues of one party, whether liberal or conservative.
Awhile back, I predicted that those members of the Republican Party who represent their party’s true ideology, fiscal conservatism and smaller but responsible federal government, would rise up and begin to question the motives, means and goals of this administration.
I said the best the Democrats could hope for was to piggyback on this internal dissension in an effort to thwart a strong and unchecked move toward an American government whose power is beginning to feel increasingly uncomfortable to its own citizens.
Politics makes strange bedfellows, so it should be no surprise to see conservative Republicans linking arms with Democrats in creating some kind of coalition of opposition to what is being increasingly seen as a stand against this administration’s policy favoring corporate rights over individual freedoms.
Thank God for the Senate. Forget that our international credibility lies in tatters.
I now have another prediction. Soon after the ex-members of this administration have quietly joined the various conservative think tanks and corporate boards which will welcome them along with their connections and influence, their self-dealings and political kickbacks will be uncovered, the likes of which will make Watergate look like business as usual.
Anybody remember the Teapot Dome Scandal?
So where are we today? I agree with those of late who have called for all of us to keep a civil tongue in our heads even as we continue to share what pleases and displeases us about the present political climate.
Maybe this is real progress. I’m willing to listen to why what this administration stands for has really been in all our interest, rather than just the “special’ interests.”