Liberal policies have negative effect

To the editor:

What exactly have the war protesters been right about? They're merely protesting the act of war hoping that we return to Clintonian-era failed policies, the same failed policies (remember Somalia?) that Osama bin Laden said gave al-Qaida its 9-11 motivation. Inaction is not a policy.

Freedom of speech shouldn't exclude you from frank public discussion or criticism. Case in point: Ray McGovern's speech to a crowd of less than 200. The former intelligence official gave a conspiracy-based speech touting a liberal political agenda. Remember, this is the same man who stated in 2005 that the U.S. invaded Iraq in order to allow Israel to control the Middle East. McGovern's previous service to the government doesn't offer him special protection from labeling him for what he has become: a liberal pawn.

Many in the anti-war crowd, who're really just anti-Bush, would have us believe that confronting terrorists creates more terrorists. In the not too distant past, liberals used the same argument in an attempt to legalize drugs. In the liberal utopia, they would have us believe that by confronting terrorism we're creating more terrorists much like by waging the drug war we're creating more drug addicts. Common sense would dictate that by confronting problems, we resolve them. A liberal agenda is a step backwards. A vote for the left negatively affects our national security, our economy and the future of the Supreme Court. The right had made mistakes, but the alternative is a mistake in itself.

CHAD CRAFT, Jackson