Letters: Mitt Romney endorsement draws criticism

Newsday received a strong response to its endorsement Sunday, "Mitt Romney for president" [Editorial, Nov. 4]. The response was overwhelmingly negative. Here's a sample.
 

Newsday's reasoning is hard to fathom. You point out President Barack Obama's lack of bipartisanship, but neglect to mention his appointment of Republicans as secretaries of Defense, the Army, and Transportation, his offer to a Republican to head the Commerce Department, and his hiring of Republican Craig Fugate at the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

You cite Mitt Romney's alleged willingness to "represent the will of his constituents," but ignore more than 800 vetoes as Massachusetts governor -- most of which were overridden -- as well as his 34 percent approval rating when he left that office.

Your main argument seems to be that Romney would be better able to tame the intransigent Republican far-right in Congress. But this would reward a Republican obstructionism. Surrendering to this "America held hostage" strategy would surely encourage future obstruction by whichever party does not hold the presidency.

Andy Herschkowitz, Little Neck
 

I'm very sad to read that Newsday has endorsed Romney. Before Obama, if your spouse had cancer and lost a job, you were told coverage for a pre-existing condition was not available. Families with children younger than 26 didn't have coverage for the many who are forced to live at home while trying to get full-time jobs. Obama corrected these injustices for all Americans.

Frank Salmonese, Mount Sinai
 

After 31 years as Newsday subscribers, my husband and I are canceling our subscription. Newsday's misguided endorsement of Romney is such an insult to the working people, and to the women and minorities of Long Island, that we can no longer support your paper.

Susan Feifer, Massapequa
 

I am completely disgusted with Newsday's endorsement of a presidential candidate who has nothing in common with most Long Islanders and couldn't care less about 47 percent of us. As a subscriber for more than 40 years, I have had my moments of disagreement with your editorials and endorsements, but never, in the history of this relationship, have I felt more marginalized.

Your claims regarding Romney couldn't be further from fact. This is a man who refuses to disclose how much of his money he's hidden in foreign countries to avoid paying his fair share of taxes. While I have no problem with very successful people doing whatever they want with their money and investments, I have a real problem with this person claiming he loves his country enough to lead it, when he doesn't have enough love of country to keep his dealings transparent.

June Zeger, East Meadow
 

I am so disgusted that I stopped my subscription. Romney's immigration plan would be inferior and designed to placate Hispanics rather than truly address a difficult problem. Science, research and related policy would tragically suffer. Global warming would continue unabated and dangerously approach the many horrible tipping points that await humankind and the planet Earth.

Carlos Montero, Northport
 

In its endorsement, Newsday argues that Romney will be able to reel in the firebrands in his party while Obama, the "dogmatic Democrat," will not. There are two things wrong with this argument: First, far from being a dogmatic Democrat, Obama has taken a conservative approach to many issues, even adopting a Republican model for health care reform. He also reached out numerous times to Republicans, who in return promised to make his electoral defeat their top priority. This leads us to the second issue with Newsday's argument: If Romney wins, the GOP will believe that its strategy of opposing the president at every turn paid off with an electoral victory. Far from enabling Romney to bring the party back toward the center, the GOP will see its lurch to the right as the reason for its success.

Dan Verderosa, Ronkonkoma
 

You, of course, have the right to endorse whomever you choose. However, your tepid-at-best assessment of Romney -- especially your concerns regarding his criteria for the Supreme Court and the likelihood that he'll lead us (or be led by his President George W. Bush-era advisers) into an ill-conceived war in Iran -- suggest you should have refrained from endorsing anyone.

At least columnist Peter Goldmark was honest enough to say that he is not satisfied with or inspired by either candidate ["Neither of these guys is inspiring," Opinion, Nov. 4].

Suzanne Mueller, Great Neck
 

I wholeheartedly disagree with your endorsement of Mitt Romney. You state that Romney "will have far more power to bring the firebrands in his own party to heel." What fantasy world are you living in? Romney has done everything he can to appease the tea party, including selecting one of its own as his vice-presidential candidate. They will never allow him to backtrack on his "severely conservative" positions.

Carl Borruso, Valley Stream
 

Here's what you just endorsed: tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, exacerbating the rising income inequality that's killing the middle class; Republican deregulation policies that brought the country to the brink of another Great Depression only a few years ago; attitudes and policies toward women that can only be described as Neanderthal.

Bruce Torff, Locust Valley
 

And one who agrees

Thank you for endorsing Mitt Romney and telling it like it really is: that Barack Obama has been a failure at being president.

Martin Kenna, Patchogue