In William Harpine's letter ("Limbaugh should get quotes straight," March 8), he states, "My belief is different from Mr. Limbaugh's" and proceeds with "I believe that people who have no idea what the Constitution actually says have no right to accuse the president of violating the Constitution."
The belief that he quoted as Mr. Limbaugh's is as follows: "We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights -- among them life, liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness."
Mr. Harpine interjected his opinion that Mr. Limbaugh's belief is different from his belief. This is incongruent to his argument. Is the belief Mr. Limbaugh expresses different from Mr. Harpine's belief in the meaning that our forefathers intended in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution?
Is it instead Mr. Harpine's opinion that Mr. Limnbaugh is not an adequate spokesman because of his misquotes? If Mr. Harpine meant to say that he does not believe that "we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights -- among them life, liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness," then that is an opposing and unsettling belief for any American.
This is especially troubling since the writer is a professor at a state college. Most Americans cannot quote the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution verbatim. This does not preclude their right to life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness. The First Amendment to the Constitution confers freedom of speech on citizens, including Mr. Limbaugh, to criticize elected officials, including the president.
It is my opinion that the chairman of a college's Department of Communications should be able to articulate a three-paragraph letter in a more intelligible manner. Surely the University of South Carolina Aiken can find a better voice.
North Augusta, S.C.