THE EDITOR, Sir:

It is indeed extremely ironic that the Republicans have consistently castigated President Obama for pitting the rich against the poor without tangible proof, and then to my amazement their presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, turned around and deliberately committed a very tangible divisive social act.

By characterising the poor and low-income earners as moochers, freeloaders and parasites, Mitt Romney has created an enormous social chasm that is unprecedented.

Mitt Romney has indeed shown utter disdain for 47 per cent of the American electorate when he spoke to a group of wealthy Republican fund-raisers. Here he stated, unequivocally, that he has written off approximately half of the electorate since they will never vote for him.

Romney's derisive comments were directed at those whom he said had developed a culture of dependency and entitlement. He stated quite clearly that there is no room in his tent for people "who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it".

ROMNEY DOCTRINE

There is no doubt that Romney's words have given us a clear idea of his doctrine, which is the classic epitome of class warfare. But it is ironic that Romney is now saying that he is for 100 per cent of the American people.

After what had transpired at one of his major fund-raising events, how can Romney look veterans, retirees, the elderly, low-income earners, people with disabilities, and the millions of unemployed in the eye and say vote for me, I am on your side? These are the people who are dependent on the government for subsistence living, and the same people who Romney despises.

At the outset, Republicans wanted the presidential election to be a referendum on Obama. But things have changed dramatically. Now the election is framed around the matter of choice: the choice between President Obama and Mitt Romney.

The choice is quite clear. Do Americans want a president who is bent on giving the wealthy hefty tax breaks and who disdains approximately 50 per cent of the electorate? Or do Americans want a president who vows to represent 100 per cent of the people and who would like to alleviate the economic plight of the poor and downtrodden?

On November 6, Americans have to make a crucial decision which will determine their well-being for many years to come. Therefore, this decision requires a great deal of reflection based on reason, not emotion.

RUPERT JOHNSON

r.b.johnson@sympatico.ca

Toronto, Canada