Letters to the Editor

Loftis should rethink Romney endorsement

Reading the Oct. 12 column by Michael Gerson, I was appalled that our state treasurer, Curtis Loftis, who describes himself as a conservative tea party-type, endorsed Mitt Romney way back in August, even before debates started. The column says Loftis' tea party friends initially expressed anger about his ill-conceived endorsement. I dare say, if they are true friends, they're probably still angry about it.

Most tea party groups adopt a hard-and-fast rule: They do not make endorsements. Tea party groups promote education and responsible citizenship. Citizens should be smart enough to make up their own minds. Endorsements are for people who are either too ignorant or too lazy to study the issues themselves.

Over the course of presidential debates, we've learned that Herman Cain is the only candidate in the race who has never been in public office. He is the one who has never been tainted by the widespread corruption that infects government at all levels. Common-sense Americans see Cain as the one who is apt to be most trustworthy when it comes to handling the people's business. Cain is a man of the people, not a professional politician.

On the other hand, Romney presents himself as a slick politician. He says he will repeal and replace Obamacare. Does that mean he would repeal and replace that behemoth with Romneycare? Once again, when ordinary Americans apply common sense to what Romney says, they're not buying his brand of snake oil.

Jane Kenny