| JoeV
|
2
|
 |
|
04-30-2005 03:31 PM ET (US)
|
|
Your recent column "Bush's hard sell on Social Security hard to figure" was interesting if more then a bit misleading. Your expert, David Levene, claims that he is against the borrowing that would be necessary to implement the presidents plan without stating that this borrowing would have to be done anyway but at a later date and a commensurately higher amount. He also opined that the cost of the borrowing would harm the economy without explaining how this would occur. FYI there has never been an example of budget deficits causing interests rates to rise. The Fed raises and lowers rates by increasing/decreasing the money supply and does so in order to stimulate/ retard gwth depending on whether it perceives inflation to be a problem or (retard money supply) or negative growth to be a problem (recession and a subsequent increase of the $ supply to stimulate same).
You and your "expert" both appear to be strongly biased to the left. I read several of your columns and this is evident. Nothing wrong with having a certain agenda, Mr Klurfeld, but perhaps it is better if you state this up front rather then attempt to appear as strictly the giver of information without a bias.
Thank You
Joe,
Brewster, MA.
|
| Jack L. Griffis
|
5
|
|
|
09-01-2006 09:05 PM ET (US)
|
|
James Klurfeld
To Dubya: Forget speeches, replace Rumsfeld
My dear Mr. Kurfeld:
Regarding your article, To Dubya: Forget speeches, replace Rumsfeld, I was hoping you would spare us another ‘drive-by media’ campaign to convince the American people that it's absolutely necessary to cut-and-run from Iraq. The situation has so vastly improved- and the American people know it – that your rhetoric will not make a difference.
It was interesting how you developed your plan on how to handle the Iraqi problem. You went back to Vietnam to Clark Clifford who “leveled with Johnson: The war couldn't be won; it was time to begin diminishing the American presence and looking for a diplomatic way out.” Klurfeld doesn’t sound French, but you certainly seem to have some French genes in you. Are you glad that we did not “cut-and-run” from Germany and Japan in WWII? Or, do you believe we should just run from any conflicts? The reason I ask the question is that you failed to offer any substantive reasoning for your solution, other than if it was good enough for Clifford, it is good enough for us, which you offer apparently with a straight face.
I was underwhelmed with your intellectual process until the end of your article where I read, “My instinct is that he's going to that well once too often. It won't work.” Thank goodness it was only your instinct and not your intellect that resulted in this ludicrous article.
Have a great day, James.
Jack L. Griffis
jacklgriffis@hotmail.com
|
