It’s Bush who threatens civil rights
Some of the most consistent misconceptions by conservative thinkers (or non-thinkers), like Duane Sherrill, are that liberals hate the military and spend wasteful money on those less fortunate. However, just spouting this nonsense does not make it true.
The Reagan administration, as you may well know, spent an exorbitant amount of money on the military. For example, by the end of 1988 Reagan had asked for approximately $300 billion for defense. That’s a lot, right?
The first Clinton defense budget, which took effect in 1994, was for just over $261 billion. By the end of his administration, the defense had increased back up to almost $300 billion. When adjusted for inflation, it’s actually still less than Reagan’s.
Why would Clinton spend a few billion dollars less? Maybe because the Cold War was over! The need for hundreds of tanks for a ground campaign against the Soviet Union was nonexistent. The need to balance the budget, however, was very real.
Not to mention that in Clinton’s first budget, he cut 115 long-running programs in an effort to cut the deficit. He also put 100,000 more police on the streets. That’s right, he cut entitlement programs to provide better protection for Americans.
And if our fellow Americans had rather have Bush appointees in the Supreme Court, then I worry for all of our rights. Many of Bush’s judicial appointees have had a history of opposing Civil Rights. All the while this administration has already used the Patriot Act to infringe on our rights and continues to hold American citizens in Cuba and other locations indefinitely with no charges and without access to a lawyer.
One of the worst things that could happen to our liberties is letting Bush appoint a Supreme Court Justice.
Jamie Lorance
Field Street
McMinnville