Tolerance

I strongly agree with the editorial on Friday March 16, singing the praises of Rudy Giuliani as a potential candidate for president. His tolerance of liberal social issues was touted as well as his show of "courage and fortitude" during his term as Mayor of New York. I also congratulate the Republican Party for their willingness to accept these liberal views as well as celebrating the drop in crime and the improvement of life in the city during his term.

I would be happy to vote for a candidate from either party who would be willing to put the good of the country ahead of their party's political agenda and social views.

I would be happy to vote for a strong and courageous candidate who would provide safety and security for our communities and cities.

I would be happy to support a candidate who shows intelligence, thoughtfulness, and is willing to work with countries that disagree to find solutions to the world's problems.

I would vote for candidate who can talk about the problems of the Middle East from a basis of knowledge and who can talk about solving our differences with Iran, Syria, and North Korea without referring to them as the "axis of evil."

Finally, I would support any candidate who shows true courage, wisdom, and strength by speaking out strongly that the American way is not about Imperialism or world domination by military might; that privatization of everything is not the best policy for all Americans; and that a purely political machine is not the best way to govern.

I thought it was very open and honest of the editor to show us that his feelings were hurt by "some folks on the left" for being called a "hardcore Neanderthal" and for being falsely accused of requiring a "social litmus test" for any political office. I would remind him that in reference to Senator Lieberman, the Democrats turned him out in a primary election because of his steadfast support of the failed Iraq policy and his unbending loyalty to the president. Primaries, of course reflect the values and political process of our country, not the politically correct views of radicals from the left or the right.

Contrast this with the vehemence of the vitriol from the tabloid media of the right wing spin machine. If you haven't read the latest diatribe from humorist, Ann Coulter, if you haven't bothered to read any of the recent statements of Dick Cheney, if you haven't seen or heard from Rush, Sean, Wolf, or Brit lately you need to turn on and tune in. The tolerance of the these commentators is legendary! Anything goes as long as the pundits show the proper respect for the conservative agenda. Want to call someone a "Faggot?" Go right ahead! Accuse anyone of "Treason?" No problem. Want to feminize the whole Democratic Party? Have a ball!

Does any of this happen from the left? Of course! Just go to any moderate to radical left-leaning web site and read down through hundreds of anonymous comments left by citizens participating in this unique form of free speech and you'll find plenty of name calling, hate filled rhetoric, and venomous vitriol. Of course, you'll find the same thing on any moderate to right-leaning web site as well.

Let's see... nationally known pundits who have audiences of millions versus anonymous citizen bloggers? How do you spell cowardice?