GOP can't cooperate

This is an archived article that was published on in 2012, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

In "The upside of opportunism" (Opinion, Oct. 31), conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks suggests that we should vote for Gov. Mitt Romney for president because with a second term for President Barack Obama, the same thing would happen as in the first: Nothing would get done because an obstructionist House of Representatives would block every attempt by the Obama administration to get anything done.

But in a Romney administration, Brooks argues, things would get done because even a Democratic-controlled Senate would cooperate with Romney. So we should elect Romney because Democrats will work with, and compromise with, a Republican administration, while Republicans will neither work with, nor compromise with, a Democratic administration.

According to Brooks' own prediction, Democrats are willing to compromise in the best interests of the country, while Republicans are unwilling to compromise, even in the country's best interests.

I don't see this as a reason to vote for Romney. I see this as a reason to not vote for Republicans in general.

Richard Dunie