Tom Finch – 12/13/06

This page was last updated on December 17, 2006.

Bush didn’t fix problems; Thomas Finch; Beaver County Times; December 13, 2006.

Mr. Finch’s letters never disappoint. As usual, his letter is little more than a string of liberal talking points. It’s at least the 13^th anti-Bush and/or anti-Republican letter from Mr. Finch since December 2004 and the eighth since August 1^st. I wish he could get a regular column in the Times. I also wish he could get at least five minutes per day on a local radio and/or TV station.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“I resent the implication of Roy Whipple’s letter (‘How will Democrats fare?’ Wednesday) that considers it a disgrace that Democrats don’t have a magic wand to wave over America to cure the myriad problems this country faces after six years of the most incompetent, corrupt administration in U.S. history.”

[RWC] Read Mr. Whipple’s letter and you find Mr. Finch misrepresents it. Mr. Whipple simply asked to hear Democrats tell us their plans. For example, during the 2004 campaign, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) said he had a better plan for Iraq than President Bush. It’s been more than two years since then and we still haven’t heard the plan.

As Mr. Finch himself pointed out, Democrats have had six years to assemble their plan. Shouldn’t it be ready for public review by now?

Mr. Finch referred to “the most incompetent, corrupt administration in U.S. history” yet failed to provide examples and proof.

I was glad to see Mr. Finch didn’t waste any time getting into name-calling.

By the way, you’ll note Mr. Whipple’s letter didn’t have one bit of name-calling in it. Yet Mr. Finch’s response is simply name-calling from beginning to end.

“Some of the problems have been with us longer than Bush, but my question is this: What did his hero Bush - and his Republican cronies - do to solve any of them?”

[RWC] I have to give Mr. Finch credit for conceding “[s]ome of the problems have been with us longer than Bush.” For most folks like Mr. Finch, history started with President Bush’s inauguration in 2001, and before then everything was copacetic.

While we’re asking what Republicans did, and that’s a legitimate question, what did Democrats “do to solve any of them?” Maybe it’s just me, but simply saying “you suck” and filibustering doesn’t qualify as helping.

“Bush and his rubber-stamp Congress had six years to address all of the problems Whipple mentioned: unemployment, energy independence, health care, illegal aliens, civil rights and international relations.”

[RWC] “[R]ubber-stamp Congress?” Does Mr. Finch believe congressional Democrats rubberstamped Bush administration policy? Remember, Democrats in the Senate filibustered anything they didn’t like.

What problems do we have with unemployment, civil rights, and international relations? Remember, the November unemployment rate was 4.5%. That’s below the average for the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. Regarding international relations, the same people who are not our friends now weren’t our friends before. The second they get into trouble, though, guess whom they’ll be asking for help. Then again, they won’t have to ask.

Regarding energy independence, it was those “rubber-stamp” Democrats (along with some liberal Republicans) who opposed domestic exploration and production of oil and natural gas.

Regarding healthcare, President Bush and Congress did take action, though nothing to the satisfaction of conservatives. The Medicare prescription drug plan was straight out of the socialist playbook and Republicans who voted for it should be ashamed. The only reason Democrats complained is that they didn’t get “credit” for the plan and it didn’t cost enough.

There’s no question President Bush and Congress dropped the ball on illegal immigration, just as their predecessors – Democrat and Republican – did.

“The solution? Tell lies to get us involved in a war that benefits big oil, corporate lobbyists and war profiteers like Halliburton, give tax breaks to the rich and gut - or try to gut - the programs that most Americans depend on.”

[RWC] Having worked for Texaco for 22 years, I’d like to hear Mr. Finch explain how the war “benefits big oil.”

I’d also be interested to hear how war helps “corporate lobbyists.” Though Mr. Finch probably hates to admit it, there are just as many Democrat “corporate lobbyists” as there are Republican.

Regarding so-called “war profiteers,” doesn’t that apply to any business that sells materiel and/or services to the military?

I always get a laugh out of folks like Mr. Finch writing about Halliburton. I think it must be on the liberal talking points list. I have to wonder how much Mr. Finch and his ilk complained when the Clinton administration employed Halliburton.

“[T]ax breaks to the rich?” What hooey! Please see my letter to the editor for details.

What “programs that most Americans depend on” did the Bush administration “gut – or try to gut?” For example, the Bush administration added a benefit to Medicare and – with the help of Democrats – increased federal government spending on education. Both were wrong from a conservative point of view, but they should have made Mr. Finch happy.

“Space considerations prohibit me from outlining all the failures, but I don’t have to. The recent ‘thumping’ he refers to them taking in the last election is a fitting testimony to a disgusted public that no longer believes their lies.”

[RWC] “Space considerations?” Come on, Mr. Finch, that’s a cop out. As noted above, you’ve written at least 13 anti-Bush and/or anti-Republican letters over the last two years. Here’s a challenge, Mr. Finch. Pick one of the alleged lies and provide us with your proof.

Though Mr. Finch sure is free with his accusation of lying, he doesn’t list the alleged lies or provide any evidence to support his assertion.

I apologize for nitpicking, but Mr. Whipple wrote, “thumpin’”, not “thumping.”

“If you honestly still support Bush, you just haven’t been paying attention. It is a mistake to think that his ‘war on terror’ has made this country safe. America is more hated and more at risk now than at any time since the Cold War.”

[RWC] Here’s a question for Mr. Finch. If we don’t support our President, whom should we support? I’m truly convinced folks like Mr. Finch believe President Bush is the enemy, not Islamofascists, not Hugo Chavez, not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not Kim Jong Il, not Hezbollah, et cetera.

“[H]is ‘war on terror’?” Unless I’m mistaken, it’s our country’s war on terror. Does Mr. Finch not believe Islamofascists want us dead? How many more attacks does he need? Does Mr. Finch believe terrorists will like us after President Bush leaves office? After all, terrorists were so nice to us during the Clinton, Bush #1, Reagan, and Carter administrations. Oh wait, no they weren’t.

“America is more hated?” More hated than when terrorists carried out the 9/11 attacks and killed nearly 3,000 Americans? More hated than when terrorists attacked the USS Cole in 2000 killing 17 sailors? More hated than when terrorists bombed two U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998 killing 224 African civilians? More hated than when terrorists bombed the Khobar Towers (Saudi Arabia) in 1996 killing 19 soldiers? More hated than when terrorists killed 18 U.S peacekeepers in Somalia in 1993? More hated than when terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 killing six civilians?

You get the idea.

“If we would have spent the $335 billion we squandered in Iraq on improving the infrastructure in this country, a lot of the problems Whipple mentions could have been solved.”

[RWC] Yeah, right. Throw money at problems and they go away. If that were true, why haven’t we won the “war on poverty?” What’s the exit strategy for that debacle?

Beyond that, Mr. Finch’s sentence makes no sense. How would spending $335 billion “on improving the infrastructure in this country” address any of the issues Mr. Whipple mentioned? Not one of those issues was related to infrastructure.

“Yeah, we’ll see you in ‘08 - once we take back the White House. I hope a Democratic progressive surge will make improvements for all of America instead of just benefiting big-money corporations and their Republican lackeys.”

[RWC] Note Mr. Finch’s use of the term “progressive.” Why do liberals/socialists/etc. keep trying to hide who they are? I wonder what the next euphemism will be once liberals figure out “progressive” isn’t fooling anyone.

Before Mr. Finch tries to convince us “a Democratic progressive surge will make improvements for all of America,” perhaps he should provide an example of that happening in the past. Lest we forget, all those marvelous socialist programs Democrats gave us are fiscal disasters and didn’t solve the problems we were told they would.

I’m a conservative and proud of it and I’ve yet to hear any real conservative try to deny he’s a conservative. Liberals, on the other hand, do their darnedest to conceal they are liberals, socialists, et cetera. For example, people who get 100% liberal ratings from the liberal group Americans for Democratic Action try to tell us they are “moderates,” whatever that means.

At least Mr. Finch is consistent. Just as his first sentence, the last sentence engages in name-calling. As I’ve written before, name-calling results from a person’s inability to support his position with facts and logic. I would be truly embarrassed if all I could do was engage in name-calling.