I would like to respond to some of the criticisms of the Bush administration and its policies. About Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction, we now know that Saddam wanted the world to believe he had them and had plans to get them once the restraints of the UN were lifted.

He was bribing UN officials (and several officials from other nations) with money from the Food for Oil program to make that happen. Perhaps Bush was duped. But then, so was most of the rest of the world.

As to the handling of the war, the media and Bush detractors couldn’t wait to declare defeat; the war has had its problems, and there has had to be an adjustment of strategies, but that is the nature of war. It is now ours to lose. About the economy: Unemployment is 5.1 percent.

When I took economics in college, we were told that 5 percent was full employment. People scream about our dependence on foreign oil and gas prices, but Bush’s 2001 energy plan was filibustered by Democrats in the Senate.

It called for domestic drilling in the ANWAR region of Alaska and at offshore sites and would have provided funds for alternative fuel sources which eventually would have had a great benefit to the environment. Since Bush’s tax cuts, economic growth actually increased revenue so that, in spite of profligate government spending, two wars and unprecedented natural disasters, the deficit was decreasing.

The problem is the more money the government gets, the more it spends. Everyone wants spending cuts until they hit your program. I won’t say I agree with all that Bush has done, but let’s give credit where credit is due. He already gets enough blame, in my book. If the poor guy was to walk on water, folks would say it was only because he can’t swim.

Wayne Wood
Newton