This is in response to a letter from Tom Klingner in the April 22 edition.
I find it amusing that people would take offense about a published article that criticizes a favored politician for not having the necessary background to be president. They then go on to cite the "amateur status" of Barack Obama and list his failings.
Contact information ( * required )
Have they not learned anything? Do they really think that another "amateur" would be better?
Why more of the same?