The article, “We found Saddam Hussein,” in the Jan. 28 Academic Advocate crossed a line and was, in fact, offensive and insulting.

We have tremendous freedom in this country, and I defend the right of Annie Chuprevich to express her opinion and disagree with the Bush administration.

And yet, does that give her, or anyone, liberty to treat the president with strident disrespect? Privileges in our society once came with responsibilities such as civility and dignity. Her words were dripping with caustic sarcasm.

She has a right to speak out against the positions of political leaders, that is a fundamental principle we all enjoy. But why does she evidence such hatred for President Bush?

Is she simply parroting the lines of others, or does she truly believe them? How should we have responded to the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11? Does she honestly believe that our president “loves nothing more than a good old fashioned execution?” What does she mean, we “promise a democracy we don’t even have?” Does she actually think it is possible to “shake hands with Saddam Hussein and start rebuilding the friendship?”

If Ms. Chuprevich intended to get a kick out of president-bashing, then she succeeded. However, if she was trying to encourage a reasoned discussion of the issues, she failed.

I look forward to a healthy dialogue with her. That, and not biting hatred in the guise of journalism, is what’s needed in this difficult time in history.

Michael Ring, Mechanic Falls