The Los Angeles Daily News officially endorsed Mitt Romney for president over Barack Obama.
My written response is as follows:
Romney? Really? You're endorsing a man who would bring back pre-existing conditions and lifetime caps in health insurance, who would re-open the doughnut-hole for seniors and who would bring back co-pays for their preventative care? A man who would cut taxes further on the wealthy, while simultaneously ballooning the military budget, yet all the while somehow balancing the budget? A man who said he would not approve of even one dollar in additional taxes to get nine dollars in spending cuts? A man who said he would gladly sign a bill outlawing abortion and who would support a personhood amendment that would make illegal many forms of birth control and possibly bring an end to fertility clinics?
You're endorsing a man who flat-out lied when he said that Obama was dropping the work-requirement for welfare recipients, that Obama had "cut" $700 billion from Medicare, and that Obama was trying to cut back voting rights for military personnel in Ohio? A man who will say anything and take any side on any issue (often simultaneously) to get himself elected, without regard for the truth or the intelligence of his constituents? THIS is the man you're endorsing? Really?
Obviously, there's a great deal more I could have included in this rebuttal, but since it's just one of many letters they will undoubtedly receive today, I needed to keep it fairly short. As it is, it may already be too long for publication. However, I have already had a fair number of my letters published in that paper, so I'm hoping for the best (off topic, we just had a slight earthquake while I was typing that last sentence. Ah, life in California!).