Readers write



Governor’s first commitment should be to the people

A governor who has just been reemployed for four more years has a primary calling to support those for whom he works and a commitment to impartiality in the process. In addition, he is trusted to make clear and intelligent decisions.

According to the Georgia State Constitution, the governor implements state laws and oversees their operation. At no place in the “resume” of a governor is there even a suggestion that a sitting governor support a weak and inadequate candidate for another state political office and plan “to join him on the campaign trail” (News, Nov. 20). This situation calls into question the veracity of the governor, whose commitment is not first to the people of his state and who does not care about the quality for the position of U.S. Senator from Georgia. A governor who misunderstands his professional calling is confusing and embarrassing to citizens in that state.


Pitts disparages Republicans, but never Democrats, as election deniers

Leonard Pitts Jr., in full hogwash mode, “struggles to know how to feel” about GOP candidates losing their midterm elections without denying the results, “Hear that? It’s the silence of losing election deniers” (Opinion, Nov. 20).

Pitts is perplexed, for he was set (probably already had a column written) to again disparage Republicans (but never Democrats) for questioning election outcomes. He concludes that GOP candidates questioning 2020 presidential election results but not their own 2022 losses must be disingenuous about their 2020 doubts, or else they would have doubted their own losses. But Pitts, as usual, automatically ascribes improper intentions and uses biased logic.

More likely, these GOP candidates truly questioned 2020 results because of numerous, unprecedented, if not outright improper, voting law machinations contrived by governors, secretaries of state and state courts. And accepting their own losses as adults gives the lie to Democrats’ constant haranguing about a GOP threat to democracy and stymies Pitts’ chance to complain, thereby putting a dent in his pathetic brand.