It is to my great disappointment that my governor, Paul LePage, whom I had considered to be the smartest man I know after spending time with him, has chosen to throw away the good people of Maine who voted him in with his vehement support of the Ron Paul delegation to the national convention in Tampa.

Those people do not represent the majority of the GOP voters in Maine, should not be going to Tampa and should not be seated. Thievery was what they achieved in Augusta, and that should not be rewarded.

Ron Paul’s people are simply domestic terrorists and should be treated as such. Paul is the most racist politician we’ve ever seen and routinely dilutes history to suit his needs and pocketbook. Louis Farrakhan loves him and has endorsed him.

Paul refused to endorse John McCain in 2008, and he refuses to endorse Mitt Romney now. In fact, his followers are threatening Ron’s own son, Rand, with violence for daring to endorse Romney. Ron Paul has endorsed people like Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney.

The fact that they will not accept the caveat given by Charlie Webster that they must commit to the GOP pick should be reason enough to not send them to Tampa. They are not part of the GOP, do not represent us and were not legally elected by the majority of the entire state convention. That’s not something anyone should stand behind.

The governor wants to throw away all the progress he has made and his promises and all the work we have all done to make Maine a better place, and that’s not OK with me.

Massachusetts has already removed its Paul delegates; Maine should, too.

Sarah Pearce


To Americans who are undecided on whom to vote for in the coming election: Ron Paul is still in the race. As Paul said several months ago, he changed his strategy from active campaigning to gathering delegates for the Republican runoff in August. This he’s done.

Paul has laid out his plan to reduce our national debt by one trillion dollars the first year in office. Here are a few of his priorities: change our foreign policy; call an immediate halt to our wars; stop all foreign aid; demand that the Federal Reserve account for trillions of dollars in unreported loans; and eliminate bloated agencies and programs that are actually inhibiting economic growth.

He would put the interests of this country first, as he has for the past 30-some years. He sees real danger in this administration and our Congress in their thoughtless, frantic rush to a war with Iran; a knee-jerk reaction based upon similar falsehoods that took us to a pre-emptive attack on Iraq.

If either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney wins the White House, both have stated that they would commit this country to continued war (with the resultant loss and maiming of even more Americans) in addition to a slippery slide toward World War III.

Both these men have pledged to curb our national debt, increase employment and a lot of other stuff, depending upon which group they are speaking to at the time.

What are their plans? Where is the money coming from? How would they reduce our trillions of debt? How would they justify spending trillions more in the Middle East while American families lose jobs and homes and join the swelling number who can no longer feed their families?

Please look at the reality of the condition of this country and realize that Ron Paul has real solutions.

Bruce Bohrmann


Cianbro chief glosses over road’s benefits to his firm

Peter Vigue, chairman of Cianbro, the largest construction company in the Northeast and a chief proponent of the east-west corridor/highway, has repeatedly stated he has nothing to gain from it. When asked if Cianbro has anything to gain, he says, “Cianbro doesn’t build highways.” He neglects to mention that it does build bridges and overpasses.

Cianbro’s 2008 “conceptual feasibility study” shows the corridor having four major bridges and 40 under- and overpasses, costing $150 million. That is a lot to call “nothing to gain” for Cianbro. Also, in an era of outsized bonuses, Vigue is likely to get a big one for this contract.

When asked about long-term job creation, Vigue says, “If you build it, they will come.” However, the corridor will likely siphon tourists off secondary roads, shifting jobs from closed small businesses on the secondary roads to new big-box stores at corridor interchanges. There will be no net gain, and jobs will be low-wage service and retail positions.

Vigue often states, “It is not our intent” to use eminent domain to take unwilling sellers’ property. However, Maine law allows the state to use eminent domain for a private company. Thus, when needed, Cianbro could ask the state to do the dirty work, leaving the company’s hands clean.

Vigue’s artfully worded answers are misleading, making many suspect his claims about economic and employment benefits. The soon-to-be completed taxpayer-funded feasibility study could have been designed to answer questions about economic benefits and risks, job creation (or loss) and environmental impact.

Instead, our legislators wrote it to determine only whether or not the project will produce enough income to entice investors. Once complete, in about six months, the project may commence, with no further legislative input. Methinks there is something rotten in — Augusta and Pittsfield.

Bob Lodato


Defense of assault weapons meets with raised eyebrows

Regarding the letter to the editor dated Aug. 15 and headlined “Reader defends right to own ‘assault weapons,'” I have one comment: Chilling.

I should mention that I am not a member of the National Rifle Association and I vote, too.

Elizabeth Kolodin

Pemaquid Harbor

Phil Smith’s letter supporting the right to own assault weapons avers that it is better to allow some hunters the right to shoot rodents more effectively than it is to stop some maniacs from shooting people more effectively.

And then he says he should not be characterized as a “nut job.”

Gary G. Caplan