An absence of straight talk

RE "SOME straight talk about today's America" (Op-ed, Oct. 27): Jim Gomes observes that the presidential candidates are not discussing the real problems that are facing the country. The reason, of course, is that they can't. Our political system has degenerated into a meaningless charade in which it doesn't matter much which party gets in, because they are both in debt to the same financial interests that have turned Wall Street into a lucrative national gambling parlor.

Our financial problems must be removed from the political arena, if they are to be solved at all. They certainly will not be solved by either party borrowing large sums from the Chinese and slathering it around indiscriminately.

RONALD E. SCOTT
Salem, N.H.

I AGREE with everything Jim Gomes wrote in his op-ed "Some straight talk about today's America," except the point that candidates should talk candidly about the country's problems before the election. If they did, they would not be elected, and could not even begin to make any change. It is up to the next president - I hope it will be Barack Obama - to gradually begin to fix the mess to which all of us have contributed. He will have to gradually move the country in the right direction without alienating too many voters, so that he will not lose his expected congressional majority.

Making change and fixing problems is slow and difficult in a democracy, but it is often impossible in any other form of government.

SUSAN STERN
Newton

PLEASE HELP me get this straight: Senator John McCain is now asking voters to support him by warning of one-party rule in Washington (Page A6, Oct. 27). Following this logic, I expect that McCain would have supported the Democratic presidential candidate in 2004 when the House, Senate, and executive branch were all under Republican majority rule. Guess I missed some "straight talk" back then, or has it morphed into just "dire strait talk" with the probable ascension of the opposition party?

WARREN OLSEN
Westborough