Letter: Comparing Bush to Nero is unfair, inaccurate

Monday, Oct. 17, 2005 | 7:58 a.m.

Ray Harbert's Oct. 8 letter to the editor comparing President Bush to Nero was interesting -- but for its lack of historical accuracy and therefore lack of editorial value. Nero, the child emperor who was elevated to that position through the intrigue and treachery of others, ruled in his youth as a mouthpiece of his adult advisers.

As he gained power in his own right, he spent lavishly in building campaigns not for the public good but rather to glorify his own image, a trait not uncommon for Roman emperors. This eventually led to his downfall, as he alienated even those close to him through his lack of concern for Rome.

I somehow do not see our president acting in ways that are meant to glorify his image or out of lack of concern for this great nation.

As to Iraq, what would a Democratic president have done in the wake of 9/11 and the myriad other terroristic attacks throughout the world? As to the president's alleged lack of preparedness in the wake of Katrina and Rita, compare New Orleans with Houston as far as reacting to the "unpredictable" and "totally unmanageable."

This comparison may also be extended to the poor and homeless, as manifested by our most recent views of New Orleans. Which party has had control of the purse strings in that wretched cesspool of inequity known as the Big Easy?

For the liberal, the glass is always half empty and leaking. For the conservative, it is always half full and rising. That is why, given history's ability to weed out the chaff, President Bush will go down as the best man for the job when times in the U.S. got rough. I personally would have never felt safe with a President Gore or a President Kerry in office.

J. L. Kane

Las Vegas