Subscriber login

Letters to the Editor
What you need to know for 01/20/2018

Letters to the Editor for July 7

Letters to the Editor for July 7

  • Column opposing gas pipeline full of emotion, but had no scientific facts
  • New Deal did las
  • Column opposing gas pipeline full of emotion, but had no scientific facts

    To quote Ronald Reagan when he was debating President Carter, “There you go again.” The “you” in this case is Karen Cookson writing a column on the front page of the July 1 Opinion section, “Adding insult to injury.”

    This time she is against the proposed gas pipeline going through Schoharie. And this time she again has no technical arguments against the project.

    She points out all the complex work needed to complete the pipeline, such as removing bedrock, drilling to go under some creeks and wetlands and roadways. But that is what one does to build pipelines. That has been going on for decades to bring energy to all Americans. America uses gas to heat homes and supply factories that create jobs. In the United States there are 305,000 miles of gas pipelines that bring prosperity, heat, light and jobs to Americans.

    Just as in the anti-fracking column she previously wrote for the Gazette [April 15], she includes no scientific facts as to its danger and it is all about emotion.

    I consider myself an environmentalist who also wants to save the Earth, but I believe we can use its vast resources in a safe way. It is too bad that others who also want to save the Earth do so in a way that is not credible. Ms. Cookson and other environmentalists who have a knee-jerk reaction to stop all energy projects, should be allowed to freeze in the dark.

    Don Cazer


    New Deal did lasting good; Obama stimulus temporary

    Our current president, like his progressive predecessor FDR, believes in Keynesian macroeconomic theory. Simply described, this is the belief that if the federal government spends taxpayers’ money, it will “stimulate” the economy and reduce unemployment. Economists are still arguing whether the New Deal helped to end the Great Depression and there is no consensus today on the efficacy of Obama’s stimulus on our current great recession.

    FDR’s New Deal cost approximately $500 billion in today’s dollars. Obama’s stimulus package (the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) cost approximately $830 billion. However, FDR’s stimulus was much more worthwhile than Obama’s.

    FDR’s New Deal provided 650,000 miles of new/improved roads, 78,000 new/improved bridges, 950 new/improved airports and many of the Tennessee Valley Authority’s dams and power plants. It also left us with Camp David, the Timberline Lodge, the Griffith Observatory and the Blue Ridge Parkway, all important parts of America’s heritage. It employed 8.5 million different Americans, with peak employment of 3.3 million in 1938 (U.S. population in 1938 was 130 million).

    In comparison, Obama’s stimulus has provided unemployment benefits, temporary tax cuts, social welfare provisions and speculative investments in failed green energy projects like Solyndra, SunPower and A123 Systems. All ephemeral, with no lasting impact. The New Deal was a much better deal for America.

    Bob Lindinger


    Check list of President Obama’s accomplishments

    Health care for all — check.

    Small but continued job growth — check.

    No war on women — check (except pending bill in Mississippi to outlaw all abortions, but I bet Viagra is still covered for men.)

    Progress on immigration — check.

    Stock market up over 5 percent for the year as of June 29 — check.

    Osama bin Laden dead — check.

    President Obama saved this country as we were over the cliff when he took office. It takes more than a few years to at least bring us back to the edge of that cliff.

    Thank you, Mr. President. Looking forward to four more years!

    Diane Hombach


    Favoring illegal immigrants with Dream Act is unfair

    The Dream Act for illegal immigrants is just another ploy for votes, as is gay marriage.

    What about all the immigrants that go through the system legally and have to wait a long time to become a citizen? Shouldn’t they come first? What about the Americans who want a higher education and can’t afford it — aren’t they more entitled to be helped first?

    James Maxfield


    Letters Policy

    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:

    View Comments
    Hide Comments
    0 premium 1 premium 2 premium 3 premium 4 premium 5 premium article articles remaining SUBSCRIBE TODAY

    You have reached your monthly premium content limit.

    Continue to enjoy Daily Gazette premium content by becoming a subscriber.
    Already a subscriber? Log In