When I first began to read Jake Thorn’s article (“Time to Trim the Hedges,” Daily Nexus, Feb. 14) I was expecting to hear the same things I’ve been hearing for months now: “Bush lied … Bush broke the law … Bush doesn’t care about our freedom,” etc. However, what I was not expecting was an active and intelligent member of Campus Democrats to take a page from the manuscript of the man all Democrats hate so vehemently, President George W. Bush, and try and use it as a weapon against him.

Ever since their failure in the 2004 election, Democrats have seemingly been scraping the bottom of every barrel trying to derail President Bush and his policies. And ever since 2004, although his approval ratings have been very low, the majority of the American people seem to support the president – while only a select minority are using “aggressive” methods to try and undermine his efforts. Of course dissent is necessary in a democratic society – but one must never forget that freedom without limits is no freedom whatsoever. This is especially clear in times of warfare, and although many prominent presidents – both Democrat and Republican alike – have gone so far as to make dissent essentially illegal during times of war, President Bush, by all accounts, has never even considered such an act. With that said, I truly wonder why Mr. Thorn would go and say something along the lines of President Bush “does not understand what freedom means” – unless Mr. Thorn has some sort of agenda which President Bush does not enforce.

Here in the United States, we have many precedents that we look to for guidance as well as examples to consider in our present actions as a nation. The United States itself sets a precedent – a precedent for freedom, liberty and independence that has influenced revolutionary change unlike any other in recent history.

Almost every president to serve the people of the United States has had to face difficult choices of whether or not to restrain themselves to historic precedents, or expand beyond them due to certain and unavoidable change in the world. As any thinking individual may know, the most popular choice is not always the right one, while the right choice may not always be the most popular. Although we may not agree with decisions that people make, it does not mean the decision is necessarily wrong.

Although Democrats have mercilessly attacked President Bush’s failures after he declared combat in Iraq to be finished, they have yet to realize the real issue at hand: The War on Terror has only just begun. Some have called it “World War III” and, in reality, one can very well say it is. Not since the Second World War has so much been at stake. The future of Western Civilization, world peace and the very essence of freedom and liberty are all at stake in this completely new kind of war. However, unlike the Second World War, our country remains divided along partisan lines while our enemy remains united against us. We are slowly taking the “Third World War” and making it into a second Vietnam War – which, if successful, will become yet another everlasting scar in our country’s history. And unlike Vietnam, the consequences of a defeat of this nature will be 10 times as catastrophic.

But this is not why I decided to write this response. The reason why I wrote this was simply because of yet another example of Democratic hypocrisy courtesy of Mr. Thorn. He concludes his article saying, “The reader … has a decision to make: To defend the Constitution, or not to defend the Constitution.” Funny, I often recall how outraged Democrats become when they hear such absolute statements – like when President Bush stated, “You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists.”

As Gen. Heinz Guderian of Germany once said, “There are no desperate situations; only desperate people.” I’d like to close by thanking Mr. Thorn for being a perfect example of the desperation that his party has reduced itself to. You’ve done a great service to your country, and I thank you.

Michael Sinatra is a freshman history major.