To the editor:
Governments were set up to serve and protect us, the people, so we should be voting for those who will fulfill those functions.
For instance, will the candidate vote for policies that you believe will serve us, or will he vote with others in his party, even if they serve narrow, privileged interests and against what you believe is the “general welfare”? Will the candidate consider the Constitutional mandate to “promote the general Welfare” when voting in Congress? The ability of a president to carry out that mandate depends largely on the collaboration of a legislature that will pass laws to fulfill that function.
Voting for a person because of personal attributes that are extraneous to his function as a legislator and who will vote with a party that neglects the “general welfare” mandate, is to promote the same gridlock we see now in Congress.
If you want President Barack Obama to carry out that constitutional mandate, then give him the representative (John Tierney) and the senator (Elizabeth Warren) he will need.
Alfred Moskowitz
Newburyport
Raw: Tornadoes Spotted in Kansas
Twiggy, the Water Skiing Squirrel
Sailor Surprises His Mom At Her CU Denver Graduation Ceremony
Official: ‘Amazing’ No One Was Killed In CT Train Crash
Lotto Fever Sweeps the Country
Coffee Stop Leads To Arrest Of YouTube Sensation Wanted For Murder
Bearded Dragon Reunited With Owner
Marine Reunited with Warzone Companion
Raw: Crash Sends Car Into Fla. Pool
Beyonce Is Pregnant!
SF baseball player overpaid $500,000 RETURNS money -- and team says KEEP IT
$1 Million in Jewels Stolen at Cannes Film Fest
Dad returns from Afghanistan, surprises family during Rays' first pitch
See Jennifer Lopez's New $10m Hamptons Mansion
Woman tricked into taking abortion pill
Emma Watson Goes Pantless
IRS scandal: Republicans seek to tie Obama to agency's woes
Play of the Day: Flipping to Safety
Pregnant Kim Kardashian Squeezes Her Swollen Feet Into Stilettos
Top Videos of the Week: Angry Taco Bell Guy, Glacier Moves on House, Dog Hates Baths
