Is Bush's secrecy necessary or simply excessive?
Regarding the Feb. 6 opinion piece "Someone, blow the whistle on Bush's excessive secrecy": The writer's attempt to tear down the Bush administration for keeping sensitive information from an irresponsible media is unjustified. If given the chance, the liberal media would leak information to our enemies without hesitation. Washington leaks like a sieve when it comes to sensitive information about national security matters.
This is just another attempt to howl about the media's right to know everything a president does so they can create news and place a cloud of doubt on the current administration. Their motive is to use sensitive information to "spin" the news against the Republican Party - particularly President Bush and his administration.
During World War II we had a responsible press with some integrity. Seeking to further their own selfish motives, the media today lack integrity and the ability to hold back sensitive information. The media's right to know, a leaking Congress, and the spin put on the news leave little room for the president and his cabinet to function without constant fear of news leaks. The press could have more freedom if they could prove they can handle sensitive information.
John Hill Fort Worth,
In response to "Someone, blow the whistle on Bush's excessive secrecy": It is important to consider that some security issues are better left up to those responsible for the protection of the citizens of our great nation. I must trust my president.
Many seem to want to ask the president: "Why didn't you protect us from the attacks of Sept. 11?" What do you think he is trying to do now? War is a necessary evil, and the administration must keep some things secret in order to wage a war on terror.
Regarding "Someone, blow the whistle on Bush's excessive secrecy": There's good reason for the Bush administration's propensity for secrecy. Many former CEOs and members of past administrations involved in scandals have much to hide - most particularly arms sales and oil deals with evildoers, albeit before most of them were "evil."
But the current administration's policies are so far-reaching it appears they honestly believe they are overseeing a fiefdom, not a democracy. The administration as a whole might as well have a blurb over their heads that reads, "Why? Because I told you so!" And we humble servants, I mean constituents, are supposed to say, "Oh, well, I guess you know best."
The Bush administration has changed the rules. And most of the press has gone along, perhaps because many know that if they don't they'll have a hard time getting access.
Regarding "Someone, blow the whistle on Bush's excessive secrecy": Great job by Pat Holt! Keep that pressure up. Maybe it will help in revealing what happened during Iran-contra. There are those of us who have not forgotten Bush's immediate suppression of those presidential papers when he assumed office.
Regarding your Jan. 22 article "Maine's pill plan faces court test": How gratifying to read that the state of Maine is applying the same means to lower prices for prescriptions that are used by pharmaceutical corporations to coerce citizens into paying outrageous prices. Neither the government nor the corporations will regulate prescription prices, so it seems that it's up to the states.
The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Due to the volume of mail we receive, we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number.
Mail letters to 'Readers Write,' and opinion articles to Opinion Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, or fax to 617-450-2317, or e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org.