Debates important to outcome of presidential election
I am a Holocaust survivor, Korean veteran and naturalized immigrant who 60 years ago was the first person to advocate modern,
televised, presidential debates.
I am sending you this letter for the interest of your readers. I was honored on Aug. 23 by the Commission on Presidential Debates, the sponsor of the forthcoming debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. I think that the debates will be very important for the outcome of the election; it is likely it will have the largest viewing audience ever.
The demeanor in the debates, hopefully respectful to each other, and concentrating on the issues ought to open the way to more respectful discussions than in the past.
FRED A. KAHN
Voters left with dreadful choices in presidential election
The article “What’s a Republican Jew to do?” (Sept. 1) suggested that Jews who vote Republican have problems in supporting Donald Trump in the forthcoming election. Your political reporter glossed over the fact that traditionally too few Jews normally vote Republican, and the reportedly 70 percent who vote Democrat also have a candidate with a very low public trustworthy rating. As an unaffiliated Jewish voter, I find both candidates unworthy of becoming president.
In my opinion, Hillary Clinton, while claiming wide experience as a senator and secretary of state, has no accomplishments in either position. She has demonstrated an inability to handle highly classified material correctly and clearly has difficulty in being honest.
Trump has all the faults outlined in your article and certainly has made outrageous statements in counterattacking opponents he considered have criticized him. Yes, any intelligent voter is left with dreadful choices. Do we vote for a third-party candidate, or take the plunge and reluctantly choose Trump or Clinton?
Personally I have decided that Clinton has proved herself incompetent, while Trump has merely behaved extremely foolishly at times. Trump, however, will certainly select better-balanced Judges for the Supreme Court and undoubtedly will support Israel, as Iran continues to become more belligerent.
Lest we forget, Iran has become more hostile since securing the so-called nuclear agreement, one that Clinton supported while Trump has condemned as American surrender. Jewish voters should carefully reconsider their voting intentions if they want a more secure America and the continued existence of Israel.
Writer’s generalization offensive
Though I disagree with letter-writer Jesse Rabinowitz, I can abide by his own disagreement with a reporter’s conclusion that Israel maintains a “well-regulated militia” in the behavior of its army and treatment of Palestinians who are to a vast degree seeking Israel’s destruction (“Not a well-regulated militia,” Letters, July 7). It’s always fair and beneficial to debate in a public forum.
But what I find supercilious and offensive is his insistence that he understands my psyche and how my “internalized anti-Semitism” has caused me to glamorize “guns and military might,” as I believe Israel has the right to defend itself against a 68-year assault by its neighbors threatening its daily existence. This sort of an assessment cannot even qualify for a mail-order diploma given for a Freudian 101 bit of psychoanalysis.
I’d prefer that the letter writer asked me what I am thinking and feeling, and if he did, I would tell him that I am sorry the terror drives the need for Israel to defend itself with no end in sight and that the words of [former Israeli Prime Minister] Golda Meir echo through my head, touch my heart and bring tears to my eyes as she stated: “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children.”