Editor:

In response to “New Leadership for America,” a letter that appeared in the previous edition of this paper. Mr. Arnold Macias’ key points lacked the evidence needed for a strong attack on President George W. Bush.

Naturally, it is assumed that a letter with the title “New Leadership for America,” would be more positive. Unfortunately, Barack Obama was only mentioned in two sentences, while the remainder of the letter criticized the current president. While Bush has made mistakes as president, he will soon be out of office, meaning “Bush bashers” will have to find a new hobby.

Concerning the failures of George Bush, Mr. Macias makes blanket statements laying blame totally on the president. It is unreasonable to cite 9/11 as an example of Bush’s failure to protect the nation.

Bush took office earlier that year, and a terrorist attack of that magnitude would have taken years to design and carry out. After the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, Bush has kept our nation safe for eight years (Washington Post 2008).

While Hurricane Katrina was a devastating natural disaster, once again, Bush is not entirely at fault. I would attribute the failures of FEMA to a lack of decentralization. The entire organization was in need of structural reorganization, and it took a natural disaster to point out the management problems that plagued FEMA. It is not plausible to pin the failures of FEMA on Bush alone.

Also, soaring gasoline prices are not the result of the Bush Administration’s policies alone. Oil is a natural resource that is in demand all over the globe. The demand for oil by countries like India and China, with growing economies, is rising. Because oil is a globally traded and relatively inelastic good, and increase in demand means that price will also increase.

I would like to reiterate the Lincoln quote that “a house divided against itself will not stand,” which Mr. Macias used to reinforce the argument that Bush divided the Republican Party. Clearly, Mr. Macias believes that divisiveness can weaken a country. And so I’m puzzled as to why he would contrast McCain’s “agony of defeat” with Obama’s “glory.”

Both McCain and Obama are intelligent individuals that ran fair campaigns, and it was obvious that one would lose. There is no need to add salt to the wound and further divide McCain and Obama supporters.

Also, according to Macias, Scott McClellan “abandoned George W. Bush.” It is more accurate to say that as White House Press Secretary, McClellan abandoned his personal value system and sense of ethics.

With the release of his tell-all book, “What Happened: Inside the Bush Administration and Washington’s Culture of Deception,” McClellan attempted to come out with information of the Bush Administration’s wrongdoing.

As Press Secretary, if the Bush Administration was unethical, McClellan should have gone public with information immediately and resigned from his position immediately. Because McClellan did not expose the Administration in a timely manner, he failed to fulfill his moral obligation as White House Press Secretary and a member of the free press.

If McClellan was concerned with the actions of the Bush Administration, he should have made his concerns know immediately. As Theodore Roosevelt said, “In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the worst thing you can do is nothing.”

It seems that Mr. Macias’ attempt to write on “New leadership in America” fell short. The promising title was tacked on to yet another article citing the failures of George W. Bush.

As 2008 draws to a close, it is time to start searching for new material, as Bush will no longer be in office.