Party on.

Bravo to an insightful and all too rarely civil comparison of both party's human flaws ("Party Down" by Benjamin Wallace-Wells, October). I am a lifelong Democrat, and I have seldom seen such honest introspection voiced by any pol or pundit concerning the Democrats' mistakes of the '70s. It makes the author's analogies to the current Republican Party's woes all the more relevant. But the part of the article that haunts me the most is the author's description of his dinner companion and his misguided lack of sympathy for his constituent's "weeping" over prescription drug costs. ("You should have saved more then, shouldn't you?")

From this person's lofty yet obscured perch on the branches of his federal health-care plan, he has no idea what awaits him when he enters the real world of private health-care plans for seniors. As a former agent and purveyor of these programs, I could tell him he is woefully ignorant of the true costs and pitfalls faced now by seniors, let alone when he takes his future place among them.

It is my sincere wish that someone, perhaps the author, will remind this fellow, at some point in the distant future, when half to 60 percent of his monthly income is devoted to drugs to keep him alive, that he should have saved more.

Bob Freukes

Cedar Hill, Mo

After reading "Party Down," I feel like I must be stuck in some parallel universe. All the parts are familiar, but the effect of the whole is surreal and unsettling.

The analogy between Republicans today and Democrats of the late '70s is intriguing and offers some valuable insights. But from where I sit, my own perspective as a Republican activist and sometime party officer and public official for nearly 40 years, as well as the people I speak to in both South Carolina and Pennsylvania, what I see is a party rank and file near revolt over the leftward movement of the GOP under the Bush administration and the current Senate and House leadership.

We want to get the federal government out of the business of running (and ruining) our schools. What we get is No Child Left Behind, passed with the active assistance of Ted Kennedy, which extends federal funding and the control that goes with it.

We know there is no such thing as a Social Security trust fund, never has been. We know there is a demographic train wreck coming and we can't tax our way out of it. Hard choices need to be made. Higher savings rates, higher retirement ages, lower benefits will all likely be required. We certainly can't afford new entitlements like the prescription drug bill recently passed. Unpleasant as it may be, there is no free lunch.

The glue that holds many of us to the GOP consists of a very few issues, chiefly right to life, guns, and judicial appointments. And there is the war and the spectacularly poor choice of candidates made by the Democrats this year. We may not be entirely pleased with the war or Bush's strategy, but the alternative is awful.

So, lots of grumbling, lots of agonizing over whether we ought to vote for Peroutka or Badnarik or some other hopeless but principled alternative, but most of us will pull the Republican lever one more time. But we wouldn't even consider voting for the sort of new and improved GOP your article envisions.

J. Keen Holland

Simpsonville, S.C.