Two items. The first is a short letter to the editor in the paper today--twenty four lines almost every one of which is incorrect or misleading. First, 1) George Bush lost the popular vote 2) He was elected by a conservative Supreme Court 3) The voting was "botched" in Florida

The answer to these incorrect and misleading statements:
...1) The popular vote is irrelevant to the election of the President. The President has never been elected by popular vote and constitutionally it has never been intended that the President be elected by popular vote. To change the procedure, it takes a Constitutional amendment unless the Supreme Court tries to rule a portion of the Constitution to be unconstitutional. That would not surprise me but it has not happened yet.
...2) Any court that thinks the murder of unborn babies is legal, who believes that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" translates into a "wall separating church and state," or considers international law to be the same as Constitutional law is not a conservative court. One day prayerfully we may actually get a court that follows the Constitution instead of what they want.
...3) Does the author of the letter know something that no one lese knows? As far as I know, Al Gore accepted the decision that George Bush won in Florida and therefore won the majority vote of the Electoral College which is the vote needed to be elected President.

Paragraph Two: 1) George Bush is a leader 2) President Bush led us into a war we cannot win 3) most of the world is now alienated against us.

The answers to these incorrect and misleading statements:
...1) Okay, so he is right on one item. George Bush is a leader.
...2) So far, we have captured and jailed a tyrant who was involved in one war in the 1980's and started a second war in the early 1990's. We have liberated a group of people who have been held captive, been tortured, and been murdered for a generation. (Of course, some claim that they are not capable of handling democracy. How arrogant on their part!) I don't know his definition of win, but so far we have done pretty well unless we as a nation capitulate to the nay sayers. I also don't know how he has the ability to foretell the future. I sure wish I had that gift.
...3) Most of the world allowed Hitler to take territory after territory in the late 1930's and to kill millions of people. Most of the world should not make U.S. foreign policy. We should. If we are successful, they will get over it. If we are not successful, they will get over it. (If not, too bad. They don't make our policy nor should they.) However, the people of Iraq will probably continue to suffer at the hands of tyranny and terror. If we leave, do you actually believe the terrorists will also stop?

Paragraph Three: 1) President Bush appointed John Bolton without Senate approval 2) John Bolton equals anti-diplomacy

The problems with these statements:
...1) President Bush did indeed appoint Mr. Bolton without Senate approval. What he did was perfectly constitutional. He did send the appointment to the Senate and the Senate refused to vote on it because a minority prevented a vote. It was the Senate who refused to vote on the nomination. In the meantime, the U.S. needed an ambassador to the United Nations.
...2) The President of the U.S. is the one who is responsible for appointing ambassadors not the letter writer. If he thinks he can do better, he ought to run for the Presidency. Obviously, the President does not believe he is anti-diplomacy (unless that is what he wanted) and a majority of the Senate was never given the opportunity by the obstructing minority to voice their opinion of the nomination by voting on it.

Paragraph Four: 1) He sent men to die in a stupid war 2) He is against stem-cell research which could and probably save.

The problems with these statements:
...1) Because he thinks the conflict is stupid does not make it stupid. People die in wars; that is the nature of war. As leader of the country, George Bush has to make difficult decisions on a daily basis. Everyone who has fought in the war selected to serve in the military or in some other capacity. One of the purposes of a military is to possibly fight in a war. It is their choice.
...2) Again, the letter writer thinks he has some ability to foretell the future that most of us don't possess. He does qualify his statement with could ( which also means that it might not) and probably (probably also means that we don't know for sure unless he has more ability to forecast the future than the rest of us.) He conveniently ignores the reasons why President Bush is not willing to rush headlong into this research. My guess is that the letter writer has no problem with the continuing murder of unborn babies. However, that is just a guess based upon the rest of his letter.

I am thankful for George Bush's democracy as we pull back from the libertine policies of the Supreme Court and the Clinton administration. Ask me if I would ever vote for Hilary Clinton--"We are the President."
>>>>>
There was a story about the closing of military bases. Before moving to Illinois, I lived in Tucson, Arizona. Tucson has an air force base. Every time, it was the same thing. Don't close our base, close bases any where but here.

Just once I would like to see or read of the leaders of a community saying something like this. "The government wants to close our military facility. We are honored that we were chosen. We know that closing unnecessary bases will save money and be of benefit to the nation. We are sorry to lose the service personnel but we understand. We have an educated, energetic, well trained workforce and plan to grow and prosper as a community. We wish the best to the country, the military, and its service personnel." Wouldn't that be something!