The American Spectator

Reader Mail

p> TIME OF TROUBLES br> Re: David Hogberg's Bush in Trouble : /p> p>As one of those disgruntled Republicans, this spring after 40 GOP years -- I changed my registration from Republican to independent. The Bush administration has tried to out-promise the Democrats and is guilty of both poor administration and poor policy in immigration. I can forgive him Iraq, but not so many other mis-steps. These policy changes suggested by Hogberg won't get me to vote for Bush. I won't vote for Kerry, but can Kerry really be that much worse than George W. Bush? I am not convinced. I suspect that if enough of us old Republicans refuse to endorse Bush on election day 2004, we will either have clout again in the Republican Party or all is lost anyway. Faced with a bad electoral choice in his retirement, Thomas Jefferson wrote a friend, "I intend to be sick that day." br> -- Jim McM /p> p> David Hogberg set a good test for Bush but left unsaid the clear corollary: If Bush does not do at least this much, Conservatives must vote for someone else or refuse to give their consent altogether. br> -- Mike Rizzo /p> p> Amazing. If the poll is using flawed and suspect date, why the definitive headline of "Bush In Trouble?" We all know, of course, it's for those too stupid or lazy (liberals, naturally) to go beyond a headline. The never-ending desire of you writers (and that's all you are...writers!) to create the news vs. simply report it is numbing. Your deception is a load despite deception being your primary job duty.

topics:
Trade, Hillary Clinton, Business, Abortion, Books, Law, Iraq, Immigration, Oil