Re "GOP Convention's Looney Tunes," Commentary, Sept. 7: Thank you, Robert Scheer, for again turning a spotlight on GOP propaganda that passes for news. It would be hard to overstate the risk to democracy that the group currently in power represents. Voters must look past the false patriotism and jingoism and consider what an experienced, intelligent man like John Kerry would mean to us as a nation.
Scheer's article lays out all the reasons we need to toss these miscreants out of office. What a pity that 1,000 of our young people have given their lives for this manufactured war.
Joyce A. White
Democrats shouldn't be shocked by polls showing President Bush surging ahead. The increasing barbarity of Muslim terrorism is rendering core Democratic foreign policy positions irrelevant.
For instance, the Democratic mantra remains that no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, nor any link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. But most Americans are rightly relieved Hussein's gone, WMD or not, even if they don't like the management of the war. They know Hussein didn't need Al Qaeda to be dangerous, and his removal set an example to other Arab leaders. Democrats are losing because they think their big fight is with small-minded, gun-toting and (gasp) God-fearing Republicans. Republicans know America's real fight is a war to the death with Arab Muslim terrorism.
I totally agree with Michael Ramirez's Sept. 7 cartoon implying that Kerry should stop hiding behind his "war hero" status and allow his "liberal" Senate record to come under scrutiny. While we're at it, let's also make President Bush drop his "successful commander in chief" facade and face the consequences of his disastrous four years in office.
Kudos to Ramirez. In a single cartoon (Sept. 7) he captured the very essence of Kerry and his campaign. What a classic example of a picture being worth a thousand words!
Georgianna L. Troin
Rancho Palos Verdes
Re "Contrasting Campaign Rhetoric With Facts," Sept. 6: I applaud the paper's fact-checking of the candidate's statements. However, you seem to have missed the point in at least one issue. The reason that it is disingenuous for Bush/Cheney to claim that Kerry failed to support the troops by voting against the $87 billion is that Bush threatened to veto an alternative Democratic-supported measure (the one which Kerry voted for) had it passed. Would a Bush veto have meant that he did not support soldiers in the field? The answer is an obvious no. This is simply a matter of disagreement on policy implementation, not a matter of patriotism.