You don’t have to love the supermarket, but be civil with criticism
Re Neil Nusbaum’s May 4 letter [“Chopper can’t escape truth about ‘free’ gas”], which I find troubling, mean-spirited and discourteous: I have no association with the Golub Corp. and I am an infrequent Price Chopper customer because of our location.
We Americans have the First Amendment right and fortunate privilege to render our opinions, but we have a responsibility and obligation to be thoughtful, reasonable and polite. I feel that the opportunity to have an opinion published in the newspaper is indeed an uniquely American privilege associated with improving our system, rather than a chance to demean an entity that we do not personally care for.
Price Chopper, or any other business, can adjust or redirect itself in terms of its business needs. The free market system allows easy choice to be made, with no reason for public complaint or personal attack, as on [company spokeswoman] Mona Golub, or implied threats of doom and gloom.
Our system of democracy and culture has generally avoided whining, complaints and mindless accusation. The Golub Corp. has been a significant benefactor or our region, not only as a respected merchant, but also as a substantial employer and huge philanthropic benefactor. Mr. Nusbaum’s attack is unwarranted and tasteless.
If a consumer feels unhappy, misinformed or even cheated, there is always a different food vendor available. For those who have a need for impolite and excessive verbiage, perhaps a bit of really rough meat from another market will provide sufficient exercise for jaws which require more activity.
If you find this letter not charming, it is my intention to demonstrate how foolish negativism is unappealing, inappropriate and also tasteless. This issue goes beyond marketing and the price of food and gasoline.
Consider our country’s tradition of being decent, positive and respectful of others. The privilege of self-expression and opinion certainly does demand reasonable boundaries and tempered judgment.
Lyle W. Barlyn
Insurance mandate drove USPS to brink
Re the April 29 opinion cartoon [depicting a U.S. Postal Service worker biting the rump of U.S. taxpayers] and James Gattuso’s Viewpoint about the U.S. Postal Service losing “$25 billion in the last five years”:
The truth is, the USPS receives no money from taxpayers. But in 2006, Congress ordered a $5.5 billion-per-year bite out of the USPS for it to pre-fund retiree health benefits 75 years into the future over a 10-year period.
That is the cause of the $25 billion loss. Without that mandate, the USPS would have been in the black four out of the last five years. Tell Congress to end that absurd mandate. That’s all the USPS needs.
Gattuso is from the Heritage Foundation. No surprise, then, that he “Swift-boated” the USPS.
Louis M. Philips
The writer is a postal worker.
Sch’dy school district dropped ball on bullying
I am at once troubled and confused by comments attributed to Schenectady school district spokeswoman Karen Corona in Kathleen Moore’s May 5 article, “Aide can’t stop attack on student,” about last month’s attack on an 11-year-old student at Yates Elementary School.
While the attack itself was extremely troubling, it was equally troubling, in light of past bullying within the school district, resulting in student suicides and arrest sweeps made by law enforcement agencies, that the district apparently has no policy in place regarding parental notification in cases where a child reports fears of being attacked by a bully.
Ms. Corona was quoted as saying, “There’s not a policy. It’s really a judgment call a principal has to make, because the situations are all very different.” Bullying is bullying, regardless of so-called “different situations.”
On face, having no policy in place to cover such a situation as described in the article, the district failed in its responsibility to the young student who was attacked, and to every student in its charge, seemingly having learned nothing from recent history.
Discipline from an early age the key to maturity
Re April 18 AP article, “Officials probe impacts of prostitution scandal”: I am very much saddened by the incident in Colombia.
Secret service agents [must be] very intelligent to hold that important position. Were they drugged — or drunk — to lose their judgment and wisdom? Was it worth losing their career and family and being a role model to [their] sons?
Don’t let alcohol and sex bring down the country’s reputation and safety — especially the president’s — by accident.
Parents, give children good discipline. They will not depart from it when they grow up.
The Gazette wants your opinions on public issues.
There is no strict word limit, though letters under 200 words are preferred.
All letters are subject to editing for length, style and fairness, and we will run no more than one letter per month from the same writer.
Please include your signature, address and day phone for verification.
For information on how to send, see bottom of this page.
For more letters, visit our website: www.dailygazette.com.