No dictatorship

Dear Editor,

I recently read the letter from Ms. Horendeck (published 10/12/04) and was appalled by her comments.

Ms. Horendeck theorized that instead of subjecting our president to the debates, which have been a customary part of presidential elections since 1781, we need to "shield him from undue analysis and criticism."

This is a ridiculous and offensive notion. In order for the people of the United States to make an educated decision on which candidate to vote for, we must know where said candidates plan to take our country.

We need to know the facts of who we are voting for rather than just marking the name of the incumbent. This practice effectively eradicates the possibility of a democratically elected official.

Mr. Bush is not our child, he is our leader. If anyone feels the need to protect him from anything other than attacks on his person, maybe we need to think about who it is we have in office and whether or not we wish for him to return. If he is not competent enough to engage in "sparring with political snipers" then how can we expect him to be competent enough to lead the free world?

If you honestly think that Mr. Bush should not have to participate in these debates, you should watch "Fahrenheit 9/11" before heading to the polls. This might give you a better perspective.

Please remember, Ms. Horendeck, this country is a democracy not a dictatorship. Let's keep it that way.

Taylor Rogers,

McCook