I beg to differ with Mr. Capes about the abilities of Newt Gingrich to lead our country (“When in doubt, pick Newt,” Feb. 6).
While Gingrich has a facile brain, a sharp wit, a good debating record and a wealth of experience in government service, he’s also faster than Quick-Draw McGraw to show his temper when challenged.
Capes’ phrase “slinging slime” appears to be more applicable to Gingrich than to anyone else on the Republican ticket. His very accessible record shows that he resorts to innuendo, outright prevarication and snarling when he doesn’t get his way. I would call that desperation, not the credentials of a national leader!
I also think his conservative views have been manufactured and touted as sincere when necessary, but wouldn’t hold up to his expedient nature. He’s the one with the racy record from his years in Washington! I’m not sure how he thinks “live free or die” fits into his mantra.
I find it odd that Mitt Romney should be held accountable for running companies and making money. The alternative would be to fail in that endeavor. Would he then be an acceptable candidate? He was the recipient of slime in the beginning, not the slinger.
This campaign for the Republican nomination for president should focus on real issues of taking this country back to the time when we were admired. I also think the initial crowd of would-be candidates gave the appearance of a tent circus.
Now more than ever we need to get serious about changing to a leader who has true American values at heart. We’re down to Ron Paul, a Libertarian who knows he won’t win; Rick Santorum, who espouses to be the true conservative, but whose record as a U.S. senator proves otherwise; Gingrich, tarnished by years as a Washington insider; and Romney.
My wish is that people who want a true change in Washington do their homework on the candidates before voting in November, and then be sure to vote!
Molly Gray
Aiken, S.C.
It's really difficult to defeat an incumbent president. It hasn't happened very often in American history.
If the Republicans truly want to replace Obama, they will need a candidate and policies that will pull enough of the independent voters away from Obama to their candidate.
On the other hand, if they want a dream candidate they can select the hardest of the hardline Republicans. Then they can dream about their candidate for the next four years of the Obama presidency.
Agreed again Robaroo. That's why I supported Huntsman- he is a guy who is capable of beating Obama because he is not extreme, nor pandering. People don't like to be pandered too.
! agtree with the LTE, make a choice and then vote against Obama. Any one of the 4 will do, or we can take all four. It might take 4 to clean up the mess.
ditto tparty; Huntsman would have given Obama a real race, many of us demo's would have liked to hear more about his 'plan' for the country. All these other candidates prove is how inept these 'religious value voters' are at picking 'leadership'.
Yes, such a shame the Republicans aren't smart enough to nominate the candidate most favored by liberals.
What are they thinking?
Not the Huntsman thing again, his unviability has been beat to death in these forums.
Huntsman never had chance at the nomination; he is on record supporting Newton’s Laws.
First law: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.
Second law: The acceleration “a” of a body is parallel and directly proportional to the net force “F” and inversely proportional to the mass “m”, i.e., F = ma.
Third law: The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal, opposite and collinear.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
