Constable's critique of Bush speech lazy

Having read and re-read Burt Constable's commentary on President Bush's State of the Union address (Jan. 29), I can only hope and pray that your star columnist has temporarily become too lazy to think before he writes.

Mr. Constable quotes at length a Bush malapropism from the year 2003.

Besides being irrelevant in 2008, this is equivalent to a stand-up comic telling bathroom humor: It elicits a desired response without being thoughtful.

Then, "I read about Bush-bashing parties where disgruntled Americans got together ... I would have enjoyed such a soiree."

That certainly has nothing to do with the speech and serves only as fair warning to stop reading. Unfortunately, I did not.

Next, Mr. Constable quotes a Rolling Meadows resident regarding Bush's "contempt ... for our Constitution ... ."

I googled in vain for any constitutional scholar from Rolling Meadows. Most professors speak more temperately. I do not believe his interviewee is a scholar. In fact, I suspect she has never read the Constitution.

Then his article gets worse. Not only does he quote an Arlington Heights "peace activist," he uses this spew to organize his next several paragraphs.

Mr. Constable concludes with a quote from Bush's first speech before Congress. That would have been seven years ago.

In this article, there is very little evidence that Mr. Constable actually listened to President Bush's address, nor that he even read a transcript.

I implore you to see to it that Mr. Constable take a long vacation soon, in hopes this will improve his journalism, or at least his effort.

David McNeil

Barrington