Divisive talk leads us down dangerous path
I recall the night that George H.W. Bush was debating Bill Clinton on national television. Someone asked the question, "Do you know the cost of a gallon of milk?"
Bush was forced to admit that he did not, while Clinton had a pretty good idea. It was a kind of final straw for Bush, confirming that he didn't know much about the life of the average person.
Mitt Romney's latest big reveal comes to mind, although it's much more serious this time around. Romney isn't simply a privileged man who sends someone else out to run his errands, he's a man who has formed an iron-clad opinion about half the populace based on his utter lack of understanding of who they really are.
Never miss a local story.
This is a dangerous road to travel if national unity means anything at all; this type of talk leads to a scenario in which all Democrats make sweeping negative statements about all Republicans, etc. What a shame; what a falsehood. My wealthy Republican business friends — Romney supporters one and all — would never come to such a glaringly ugly conclusion about us, their Democratic protégés, whom they like and respect. (The feeling is mutual.)
I'm certain that Romney's remarks about the 47 percent will make many a decent Republican shudder.
We do not need more divisive rhetoric on the national presidential stage. Romney is a religious man. He needs a "come to Jesus" moment with the American public.
T. Meriah Kruse
Confessions from inside the 47 percent
I am the son of a coal miner from Harlan County and the first college graduate from my extended family.
I have been a pharmacist for 45 years and a store owner for 15 years. I spent 17 years in programs for the indigent.
All three of our children are college graduates and professional people; one has a Ph.D.
As I near 70, I am on Social Security and Medicare.
Apparently I am one of Romney's 47 percent.
Romney would not serve all Americans
Mitt Romney's statement about the 47 percent of voters he says "believe the government has a responsibility to care for them" is infuriating.
He has no intention of serving all Americans if elected president. Romney should know that the government exists for the good of its citizens, working or not.
Before going on medical disability, I was employed and paid my taxes. Some of my taxes went into programs whose purpose is to help those who become disabled or are otherwise unable to work.
These programs — food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and others — are called entitlements for a good reason. A caring society, like ours, takes care of its own.
We have a legal right to the benefits we pay for with our taxes. What part of entitlement does Romney fail to understand?
Why vote for a man who says his job is "not to worry about those people," the 47 percent of us that he says are getting government assistance? Who, then, will he serve?
Why should we put someone in the White House who won't represent us if elected?
Zoe L. Langley