BUSH IS RIGHT TO STOP ANSWERING

There is a general assumption that if Texas Gov. George W. Bush says,
"Yes, I used cocaine over 25 years ago," then the issue is closed.
This is not so. The press will not let it end.

Here, then, is why it is perfectly acceptable for Gov. Bush not to
definitively answer whether or not he has used cocaine. My reasons are
based on hypothetical, yet logical, follow-up questions by members of
the press were the governor to admit prior use of an illicit substance
such as cocaine:

1. "Governor, you've now admitted to using cocaine. Were you a casual
user or addicted?"

2. "Governor, how many times did you use cocaine -- once, twice,
scores of times, hundreds of times?"

3. "Governor, was the cocaine merely given to you, or did you purchase
it?"

4. "Governor, have you ever sold cocaine?"

5. "Governor, do you think in a pressure situation as president, you
might relapse and start drinking or using cocaine again?"

6. "Governor, did you ever use cocaine when you were a member of the
National Guard?"

7. "Governor, were you ever under the influence of cocaine while
flying training missions for the National Guard?"

8. "Governor, did you ever use cocaine when you ran for Congress many
years ago?"

9. "Governor, assuming you used cocaine while running for Congress
many years ago, do you think it contributed to your loss?"

10. "Governor, did you ever suffer from cocaine-induced blackouts or
rages?"

All right, that's sufficient, and I rest my case. It is safe to say
the governor has not used cocaine in many, many years. Were it only
true that Bill Clinton had not taken his illegal (yes, sexual
harassment -- of Monica Lewinsky, Kathleen Willey, and probably others
- -- is illegal) behavior directly into the oval office.

THOMAS R. BECKER,
Mattapoisett