In Europe during the dark ages it was “tantamount to trea-son” to castigate the leader – but this is the 21st century in the United States. Freedom of speech is part of the democratic package that our troops are dying for. By advocating censorship, it is you who are being unpatriotic. In actuality, Bush is not get-ting half of the criticism that he deserves, especially from the media, particularly in reference to his motives for going to war. While we couldn’t be sure of Hus-sein’s situation with “WMDs,” we were sure of Kim Jong-Il’s. If this war was over nuclear weapons, why did we not also invade North Korea? As with most of your claims, you completely missed the point with the parallel between Iraq and Vietnam. In each case, vet-erans from both wars came home and agreed that they should have stayed home. Furthermore, while John Kerry may have changed his mind, that does not make him indecisive. In 2004, we were already embroiled in a losing war – the obvious choice for com-mander in chief should have been the candidate that had actually gone to war. Please don’t bring women’s suffrage into this either. Vio-lence is the least effective way to bring social and legal change. Study history: education is the best weapon against oppression. So, while you and your constitu-ents might have more than half a brain, at least we are using the half we have.