Bush has distorted the word 'trust'
George Bush has a distorted understanding of the meaning of the word trust.
Whatever Bill Clinton did about his draft status because he opposed the Vietnam war did not affect the economy, the loss of jobs, our taxes or the bread and butter on our tables. I opposed that war and would have given my life to keep my sons out of it.
On the other hand, George Bush cannot be trusted to tell the truth about what he and his cronies have done and are still doing in their self interest.
George Bush, like Richard Nixon, has violated the office of the presidency. I believe George Bush when he says he will do anything to get re-elected. He would sell his own mother into slavery if it would cinch his re-election.
Look what he and Ronald Reagan did with the hostages. They played with peoples' lives so they could look good and Jimmy Carter would look bad upon leaving office. They're like parasites feeding on the people of this country.
George Bush and his cronies have absolutely no idea what it takes to survive in today's world.
When Bush said that John Sununu was a class act, I knew that Bush sanctioned the rip-off of taxpayers. Everyone Bush has appointed has been a rip-off.
He pushed for having a hot-dog (Justice Thomas) on the Supreme Court. He insisted on a liar to be the head of the CIA (to help cover up his own Iran-contra and Iraqgate scandals). Bush should be impeached for the way he has misused the highest office in this country.
As some one who has voted since Harry Truman's time, I say George Bush cannot be trusted. He and James Baker have sold this country out from under us. They should go and take their glassy-eyed pit bull Dan with them.
Regarding Jean Kittel's Oct. 16 letter to the Forum, I wonder does she read, hear or listen to what is written and said about the presidential election? If she does, she is not hearing or reading the same thing I am.
How can she say President Bush had nothing to do with the worst economy in 50 years? He is supposed to know what is going on. Between Reagan and Bush the country has accumulated hundreds of billions of dollars in debt over the last 12 years.
Our country is in the worst economy of recent memory. If President Bush does not know this and refuses to accept the blame for it, who needs him?
I want a president who will take responsibility. Bush is supposed to be our leader, but he is a master at putting the blame on Congress and anywhere else he can.
Ms. Kittel also talks about Governor Clinton's lack of moral character. How about checking Bush's lies? Bush is the champion when it comes to lies and cover-ups, and it's about to blow up in his face.
How about the Iran-contras arms deal? Bush lied continually about the sale of arms to Saddam and then Saddam used those arms to kill our people. Bush also lied about the Willie Horton ads in the last election. And Bush has a son involved in the savings and loan scandal that the American people are still paying for.
The recent deluge of innuendo, half-truths and outright lies from the fanatical fringe of the Republican Party and its followers defies logic.
When you consider the "read my lips," "I was out of the loop," "Clarence Thomas was the most qualified candidate for the Supreme Court" quotes from George Bush to the American people, you have to admit he has lied and cannot be trusted.
I believe freedom is important and worth fighting for. I don't believe all wars are just, and I reserve my right of freedom to disagree with bad policies by elected officials. It doesn't diminish my love of freedom or country.
Mr. Clinton and Mr. Gore have earned their right to be judged fairly on what they do, not on someone's prediction of what they think they will do.
Mr. Bush, as president, has a record to be judged. It is one of recession, job loss, high taxes, lower income for working men and women, spiraling medical costs and 35 vetoes of legislation passed by the majority of House and Senate.
A record of coddling and supporting tyrants and terrorists such as Saddam Hussein. Some of your hard-earned taxed dollars went to Iraq to build the war machine we had to fight. Without help from the Bush administration, we could have avoided our casualties and saved billions of tax dollars.
By the way, I am a veteran, liberal on some issues, conservative on others and proud of both. Yes, I do support Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Barbara Mikulski and Mike Hickey.
Harry J. Spedden
Private security force in Guilford
Though I am not a resident of the area in question, it was with great pleasure that I read your Oct. 16 article on the private security force being employed by the Guilford community in Baltimore.
I was concerned, however, by the piece's strong negative slant. Most of the quotes came from individuals who opposed the concept of communities providing for their own well-being.
The piece strikingly illuminated a basic problem: A person who has succeeded within a bureaucratic or political system is most interested in maintaining the system which has benefited him or her and will oppose anything that may threaten its stability.
Once part of the system, people tend to strongly oppose even changes which may benefit the general public, if the changes threaten the establishment in any way.
Thus, Mayor Schmoke is concerned that an attempt by a local community to protect itself might undermine public support for an increase in the city tax. Yet he does not seem to care about the lives that may be lost while communities wait for the city to upgrade its police force.
Similarly, despite individuals in Guilford citing increased peace of mind and evidence that neighborhood crime has decreased as a result of the patrols, the police spokesperson who seems opposed to patrols outside direct police control says that "it doesn't do much."
This almost universal phenomenon was first identified by the economist C. Northcote Parkinson some decades ago. He noticed that members of the establishment will almost always promote measures that help the system of which they are now part, even if the measures hurt the general population.
He also pointed out that most establishment figures effectively fool themselves into believing that their positions are for the good of society, despite any evidence to the contrary. They really do believe the often specious and self-serving arguments used to justify their positions.
Needless to say, The Baltimore Sun, which is very much part of the establishment, also takes positions supporting the status quo -- like opposing term limitations and comprehensive school choice. This is despite the occasional publication of columns and letters with opposing points of view.
In any case, I hope that The Baltimore Sun will soon take a fresh look at the grass roots project initiated by the Guilford community.
It would be nice if the private security force concept could be objectively re-evaluated after another month or so. An analysis of costs and results would help other communities decide if this might be a model worth emulating.
A. V. Aiyengar