ELECTIONS
‘American Dream’ is
candidates’ measure
Current campaign rhetoric has distorted the idea of the “American Dream” with claims that current economic conditions have put the American Dream out of reach. What exactly is “the American Dream”? It was most clearly articulated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, the seminal document of our country.
The American Dream is a noble vision of equal rights of all people to live and freely pursue their dreams. The American Dream has never been a right to acquire unlimited wealth and power. While the desire for wealth and power are part of human nature, such crass materialism is hardly noble.
As we make choices in the upcoming election, let us choose candidates whose vision is the true Jeffersonian American Dream.
ARNOLD C. MCQUAIDE, JR., BERKELEY LAKE
POLITICS
This campaign’s about
more than economics
It’s about the economy, stupid — not.
If folks think Mitt Romney is going to transform the economy, they’re naive. The economy is slowly improving — and while the Republicans won’t interfere, they’ll take credit when things normalize.
The real danger of a Republican victory is the societal changes the religious right wants to force on the rest of us: destruction of the wall separating church and state; the insinuation of Christian prayers in our schools; the invasion of our bedrooms in regard to contraception and reproductive rights, and a return to what they erroneously refer to as our founding as a specifically Christian nation.
If you think this is an exaggeration, think again, when a Supreme Court moderate or liberal justice retires or dies, and Mitt Romney caters to his base when he chooses a replacement. Think long and hard, friends — then vote.
FRANK BRENNAN, ACWORTH
On women’s concerns,
Romney stand unclear
Mitt Romney talks a good line on protecting the right to equal treatment with “binders of women” claims, but when it comes to things that really count (such as enforceable legal rights for all women), he can’t say whether he would’ve supported the Lilly Ledbetter Act. On this issue, like all others, you cannot be sure just what Mitt Romney is for from one day to the next.
DENNIS MICHAEL SMITH, MARIETTA
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Obama’s proven inept
handling global threats
In accusing Mitt Romney of knowing absolutely nothing about foreign policy (“Romney without clue in international affairs”, Readers write, Opinion, Oct. 23), the letter writer is unaware of President Obama’s complete lack of foreign policy knowledge in 2008. He doesn’t seem to have gained much knowledge since.
President Obama’s plan was to befriend the foreign leaders so they would like us. How has that worked out? It would be laughable if it weren’t so tragic — and dangerous.
JUDITH MCCARTHY, ATLANTA
Don’t play blame game
after Benghazi attack
My reaction to the front-page article, “New details in Libya attack” (News, Oct. 25) is: So what? Will it bring the dead back to life?
Do you think this is a scoop?
Hindsight is often 20/20. After a catastrophe (for example, Sept. 11), memos and emails are always found.
Surely, you noticed that Mitt Romney didn’t mention Benghazi at the most recent debate. Why? Because he looked like a fool when he tried to use it for political purposes during a prior debate.
It is a blame game, and a lot of us recognize it for the destructive game that it is. I expect it on Fox News, but not from the AJC.
GENE GRIESSMAN, SANDY SPRINGS
