Letters To The Editor

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

August 05, 2005

Backing Bolton as he endeavors to overhaul U.N.

The Sun's editorial regarding John R. Bolton is outrageous and full of half-truths ("Prove us wrong," Aug. 2).

The statement about him "getting banged around by the Senate like a political piM-qata" implies that there was actually some substance to the continuing whining and crying against him from the "get-Bush-at-any-price" crowd.

There would have been a vote in favor of his approval if the obstructionist Democrats had the intestinal fortitude to let the majority rule.

But, of course, this isn't the way the losers want to play - they resort to cheap tricks and sneaking in activist judges to get their agenda through no matter the outcome of the elections or the Constitution.

I have never seen a sorrier bunch of losers in my life.

I fail to see how Mr. Bolton is going to the United Nations in a "diminished condition," though perhaps he will be if the Democrats make enough noise. Nevertheless, the way he is perceived by the other U.N. delegates isn't high on my list of important issues.

The United Nations is a cacophony of crackpot Third World countries led by mostly tyrants and murderers - yet The Sun apparently believes that our best bet in dealing with these dictators is to appease them.

All the years of our so-called consensus-building at the United Nations has gotten us nothing but heartache and foreign criminals in New York.

This entire organization needs a thorough overhaul, and if the president believes that Mr. Bolton is the guy to do it, then so do I.

I wish Mr. Bolton Godspeed in cleaning up that cesspool, and I don't care at all if he's diplomatic or not.

Robert Kapp

Sparks

Let U.N. members vent on own dime

In "Prove us wrong" (editorial, Aug. 2), The Sun stated that it hopes that "Mr. Bush's risky gamble" - John R. Bolton's appointment as ambassador to the United Nations - doesn't lead to reforms that "rob the United Nations of its invaluable role as an outlet for unhappy nations to vent."

I wonder if The Sun and its readers know just how much money it costs the U.S. taxpayer to provide this "invaluable role" to nations of thieves and thugs who wish to "vent."

I say, let them vent on their own dime.

William D. Young

Timonium

Appointment offends separation of powers

President Bush's recess appointment of John R. Bolton as U.N. ambassador is a flagrant violation of the spirit of the Founding Fathers' plan to promote separation of powers in government and protect minority rights ("Bush installs Bolton as ambassador to U.N.," Aug. 2).

It is clear that this appointment should have been made with the advice and consent of the Senate.

I gag when pundits say that the president should have the right to have his own man in such a position. That's not what the process is about. It's about the two branches of government reaching a consensus on who would be an appropriate choice.

And in this case, even a number of Republicans think Mr. Bolton is a poor choice.

It is ironic that this president, who praises the rule of law and strict constructionism and said he wanted to be a uniter, not a divider, flaunts his powers as he uses a loophole to trash bipartisanship and the intent of our Founding Fathers.

Harry Brodie

Fulton

An ominous portent for nation's future

The air hangs heavy over our nation. Where are we going? What are we becoming?

The president has won a victory in his recess appointment of John R. Bolton to be our nation's ambassador to the United Nations ("Bush installs Bolton as ambassador to U.N.," Aug. 2). But at what price?

Mr. Bush promised civility. What we have instead is a thuggish "my way or the highway" approach.

The Senate has been emasculated by the ruling party.

Now the struggle is not between "conservatives" and "liberals," it is between radicals who are ready to take away our constitutional liberties and those who would fight to preserve them.

Gunther Wertheimer

Baltimore

Corn syrup can be part of healthy diet

The Sun's article "Sips with zip" (July 27) unfortunately mischaracterizes high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), a natural, homegrown sweetener from U.S. cornfields, by suggesting that it is unnatural.

Although the Food and Drug Administration has not established a formal definition of "natural" for food ingredients, it is accepted that products derived from natural materials with minimal processing are considered natural.

HFCS is made from corn, a natural grain product, and is therefore consistent with the definition of natural.

As a natural, nutritive sweetener, HFCS can be enjoyed as part of a balanced diet.

And readers should know that HFCS has proved beneficial to consumers through its use in many foods and beverages, including several products specifically for people trying to control their weight.

It also protects freshness as it inhibits microbial spoilage by reducing water activity and extends shelf life through superior moisture control.

Audrae Erickson

Washington

The writer is president of the Corn Refiners Association.

Common ground on abortion debate

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.