The Columbus Dispatch Endorses George W. Bush; Wolves Set Loose On John Kerry

RE: The Columbus Dispatch's Endorsement of George W. Bush

To: The Editor

The reasons you gave for endorsing George W. Bush instead of John Kerry reflect an obvious cave-in of the editorial staff to the ownership of this newspaper. Throughout your coverage of the Iraqi war you have been fair, courageous, and on many occasions, way ahead of other papers in this country. You have called George W. Bush to task for waffling on his reasons for going to war. You have also criticized him for taking liberties with our liberties by supporting John Ashcroft's freedom-threatening Patriot Act. You have also called into question his fiscal irresponsibility. Or have I remembered incorrectly?

Supporters of George W. Bush tend to support his decision to go to war. And supporters of George W. Bush tend to be willing to disregard the facts: there were no weapons of mass destruction and there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attack by Al-Queda. A president's disregard for what he knows to be true, particularly when it leads to the deaths of thousands, is reason enough not to re-elect him. President Lyndon Johnson, with all of his faults, at least had the courage to face up to the fact that he had lied to the American people and acted by stepping down from the office. Would that our current president, as well as Tony Blair, possesed that kind of honesty and integrity.

I suspect that your paper's endorsement of President Bush might possibly have caused some members of your editorial staff a bit of pain and discomfort. As a former producer-director of television news, I seem to be able to recall that there are moments when expediency seems to be the better part of valor. My regrets.

Dr. Clayton K. Lowe
Emeritus Associate Professor, College of the Arts Administration,
The Ohio State University