Debate
In this country we have always engaged in vigorous political debate. However, to be meaningful it has to rise above the level of grade school poppycock. Last week's letter ("True Believer," CV Sun, Sept. 17) is a case in point.
To write we have cut pay and benefits of service men and women, that Republicans believe Jesus hates homosexuals, or that George Bush has been convicted of cocaine use, reveals an ignorant imagination.
To believe that corporations are free of regulation and secretly control the universe would be surprising news to the thousands of businesses who struggle every day with mountains of federal and state bureaucracies, and to the tens of millions of hard working Americans who work for and own shares in the companies that produce the goods and services all of us depend on.
To make foreign policy so simplistic as to argue that China, Vietnam, and Cuba should all be viewed as one suggests history and geography were missing in the educational process.
To study whether our planet is warming, to what degree, and if it is a continuation of a cyclical process that has been going on for millions of years is a far cry from claiming trapped green house gasses will lead to such and such a condition in so many years based on crude computer models that are continually being changed. That's why it's called a "theory."
The Middle East was a central piece in the Cold War. What we sought was stability; our support for Iraq in its war with Iran was to ensure that equilibrium. No one in our government ever thought Hussein was anything but a thug and 9/11 changed everything. Unless you believe Islamic terrorism is a police matter, our policy had to change.
To debate our action in Iraq is fair game - I'm for it - but to claim it's all about money, oil, empire, Cheney, Papa Bush, etc., etc. is tiresome prattle. I'd like a debate, where's the adult version?
Bert England III
La Cañada Flintridge
