This letter is in response to Darryl Frierson’s opinion column, “Patriotism more than presidential support,” on Feb. 21.

First of all, I find the suggestion that President Bush is a “cocaine-sniffing, sub-par intelligent, Hooked on Phonics-needing, legacy-benefiting Yale president” to be almost entirely false and unfounded.

I can accept the probability that George W.’s father may have had something to do with his admission into Yale University. I can’t accept, however, the other accusations.

Let’s look at the facts. George Bush, after graduating from Yale, decided to go to Harvard, and earned an MBA (that is a master’s degree in business administration) there. Now, since Mr. Frierson is an undergraduate student in journalism and mass communication at Iowa State University (an institution that does not have high admissions standards by any means), I won’t be able to respect his opinion on our president’s intelligence until he receives an advanced degree from an Ivy League school as well.

I also have to refute Mr. Frierson’s statement: “If it weren’t for the few voices outside the box that went against what the government and president believed true, things like slavery … would not have been legally changed.”

Mr. Frierson, thanks to Abraham Lincoln, a Republican president, no one in this country is enslaved as they were in the 1800s. It wasn’t because of protesting or “voices outside the box” that got things to change, it was his moral integrity and personal convictions.

Thirdly, the suggestion that President Bush is going to “go to war with Iraq to finish what my daddy couldn’t” blatantly ignores fact. Operation Desert Storm’s main purpose was to push the Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. It was the United Nations, not former President Bush, who made the call not to go all the way to Baghdad and get rid of Saddam Hussein.

Now, clearly President Bush is having to deal with both of these mistakes committed by the United Nations. Fortunately, we have a president who is not going to allow the United Nations to prevent our army from doing its job and making it so that Saddam does not become a threat again.

Also in the article, Mr. Frierson calls himself “more of a progressive individual.” I must point out that there is absolutely nothing new, original or “progressive” about his slandering of President Bush.

Every journalist in the country just can’t seem to get over how “dumb” President Bush is. It’s really pretty funny if you think about it, while promoting “critically analyzing” issues, this same man can’t produce any better argument against Bush than to regurgitate the same name-calling techniques used by journalists in the liberal media.

Also, Mr. Frierson says, “I feel a patriot is a person who fights for what he believes, regardless of what others think.” According to Webster’s Dictionary, a patriot is “one who loves their country and/or zealously or loyally supports one’s county” and patriotism is “love for or devotion to one’s country.” Patriotism may have “different meanings for different people,” but that doesn’t make their definition right, true or factual.

This column by Mr. Frierson truly disappoints me. Not only does he have no room to criticize Bush for his misuse of the English language, but he ignores some pretty important facts concerning our country’s 16th president.

Jonathan Bracewell

Freshman

Political Science