YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

Dishing the Dirt on Bush Reelection Campaign

August 09, 2003

I am not a Bush ranger or even a tenderfoot, but Mark Fineman's "Well-Heeled 'Rangers' Oil Bush Reelection Machine" (Aug. 4), on President Bush's fund-raising efforts, had me questioning Fineman's agenda more than the agenda of the donors. I found it interesting to learn that Bush might rake in over $200 million despite an individual contribution limit of $2,000, but how newsworthy is it to report that many of the contributors from Georgia are executives at Georgia's biggest companies? Duh!

And I had to laugh at the attempt to link as a quid pro quo one $2,000 contribution to the Bush administration's decision on where to hold next year's G8 summit. Bush and his record-setting war chest must have really wanted that particular $2,000 -- or maybe there are 199,000 more "quid pro quos."

Mark R. McGuire

San Clemente


It now seems obvious why our president, the ultimate political animal, is busily collecting millions from the well-heeled for his primary campaign, in which he is unopposed: Taking a page from the Gov. Gray Davis playbook, he will seek to discredit any and all centrist Democrats who might stand a chance of winning the election, thus ensuring that the eventual Democratic nominee is someone whose political persona places him or her outside the mainstream.

Marvin J. Wolf

Mar Vista


Just check out these Aug. 4 headlines: "Iran Closes In on Ability to Build a Nuclear Bomb"; "Afghans on Edge of Chaos"; "U.S. Limits Payments to Kin of Slain Iraqi Civilians" -- and more, including concerns about Liberia and Pakistan, continuing terrorist attacks, loss of American liberties and exhausted troops being asked to do more than humanly possible. And what is this administration's response? To give itself more money. Reelection? Bush didn't even win the last one!

Remember when America stood for integrity and real principles? Well, it will once more, come 2004.

Bonnie Compton Hanson

Santa Ana


Re "U.S. Arrives at Crossroads of Foreign Policy," Aug. 3: I agree with all of the analyses pertaining to the Bush administration's reasons for its foreign policy. However, I do not believe that the policy is now changing because, according to Moises Naim, editor of Foreign Policy magazine, "The main foreign policy player is not the Pentagon or the State Department, it's Karl Rove in the White House."

There has been no change. I believe all policies of this administration are now, and have always been, reviewed and cleared by Rove to determine the effect these policies will have on the reelection of President Bush. Any policy changes are due to the perceived effect on the electorate as determined by polls.

Martin Finkel

Playa del Rey

Los Angeles Times Articles