Readers Write 3/18

President and his party never tried to cooperate

I had to laugh at a letter writer’s comments (“Columnist falls into trap of all the others,” Readers write, Opinion, March 11). He’s upset that a Republican appears to be poised to thwart any effort made by President Obama in a second term (instead of fostering cooperation and bipartisanship to serve the country).

As a voting bystander, I have watched for more than three years as the president and his congressional fan club did everything but reach across the aisle. I believe many of the president’s policies, edicts and ideas should be thwarted. They have proven to be unwise, half-baked and/or contrary to American benefit. Unless and until he changes the mindset from which he governs, I, too will stand ready to oppose him.

Betsy M. Kerr, Lilburn

Time to find nominee everyone can support

After this week’s primaries, we have an impasse. We have Mitt Romney (who can’t relate to ordinary folks), Rick Santorum (who can’t relate to women), Newt Gingrich (who has related to too many women), and dear old Ron Paul (who everyone relates to, but nobody seriously wants as president). It’s time for the Republican party to find a real candidate who can win in November.

Ian Shaw, Cumming

Cohabitation article wrong for ‘family’ paper

Regarding “More couples stay happily unmarried” (ajc.com, March 11), who decided this article was newsworthy? My first thought was that it belonged on the front page of a tabloid or “Cosmopolitan” — not a “family-friendly” newspaper. While a large segment of the population may believe “moral judgments about cohabitation...have largely disappeared,” that doesn’t change the fact that for many of us who hold to the teachings of God, cohabitation is still “living in sin.” God’s word hasn’t changed — even if society’s mores have.

Anita P. Albert, Sandy Springs

Statements weren’t funny, apology not real

Regarding “Toleration isn’t just for people we agree with” (Readers write, Opinion, March 14), as a liberal, progressive woman, I disagree with the writer who calls on us to give Rush Limbaugh a pass to be a rude loudmouth. Why should we give anyone such a pass?

And I don’t believe Rush intended his comments as humor — calling a woman a “slut” and a “prostitute” isn’t funny. I also question the sincerity of his “apology.” He was trying to get out of a tight spot.

Sara Hines Martin, Acworth

Response to “Routes can keep seniors driving” (Business, March 11)

My husband is 68. I will be 64 next month. We drive just fine — and so do our friends and relatives, also in their 60s and 70s. This article suggested that all drivers over 65 are equally at risk. That is not true. If our community wants to reduce risks for elderly drivers, it should understand that not all people over 65 are alike. In most parts of the city, driving oneself is the most convenient and cost-effective option. We do not have the transit and taxi options that help elders stay on the move in cities like New York and Washington.

Let’s also think twice about how we issue drivers licenses. Surely, an automatic, 10-year renewal does not apply once you are 80 years or older.