LETTERS: Columnist’s topics expose the truth

To the editor:

Denny Eckstein’s letter to the editor, regarding the commentary topics chosen by Sherman Frederick, seems a little biased (“Find a new topic,” Thursday Review-Journal). Mr. Eckstein doesn’t want the Review-Journal to expose President Barack Obama’s true nature.

The president of the United States must be a man of unquestioned character and integrity. He must possess outstanding leadership qualities. President Obama has shown none of these qualities. He deceives the American people with impunity. He does not consult with leaders who hold opposing points of view. Everything he does is defined by politics, not what is right for America or her people.

The president is in constant campaign mode and attempts to govern by rhetoric, rather than leadership. The only people who listen to him anymore are his extreme liberal socialist base. President Obama is the most deceiving, destructive and divisive political figure in U.S. history.

The economy would thrive with low energy prices, competitive corporate tax rates and simple, inexpensive regulations. A thriving, growing economy is what is most needed to lower our massive federal deficits and unemployment. These conditions are political in nature, and at the present led by a man who has no clue how to lead, govern or provide the political climate necessary for economic success.



Vacation destinations

To the editor:

Regarding Harold Mann’s letter (“Obama’s Hawaii vacation not so funny,” Thursday Review-Journal), I think Mr. Mann either watches too much Fox News or is unaware of history. President Barack Obama went to grade school and high school in Hawaii, and he spread his mother’s ashes there, so he has a connection to Hawaii. Furthermore, all presidents are entitled to vacations.

I would also like to add that, according to the media that tabulated presidential time away from Washington, President George W. Bush was number one, spending a lot of time at his Crawford, Texas, ranch.

From my experience living near Santa Barbara, Calif., it seemed as if every time one turned around, the roar of military helicopters announced that the Reagans were back in town. We can’t forget President Richard Nixon, who spent a lot of time at his California home, which the taxpayers built and secured. And, of course, if you needed President Dwight Eisenhower, he was either at his Gettysburg farm tending his prized cows or playing golf with any number of celebrities, such as Bob Hope.

All of our presidents are entitled to vacation time, and we have nothing to say about their destinations.



Minimum wage

To the editor:

The 1968 minimum wage adjusted for inflation is about $10.60 an hour. And every time a minimum wage increase is proposed, I hear the same arguments that I have heard for more than 40 years. Those who argue against increasing the minimum wage would not argue that a jet plane cannot fly, because they know from experience that jet planes do fly.

Do these people ever look back to see the effect on employment when the minimum wage was increased? No. But economists have looked back to see the effect on employment. Their conclusion is that increasing the minimum wage has no discernible effect on employment. Adam Smith stated that as a matter of equity, workers should be paid “as for themselves to be tolerably well fed, clothed and lodged.” Do those opposing increasing the minimum wage dislike workers?

Another reason to increase the minimum wage is to save taxpayer money. A Wal-Mart in Ohio had a food drive in its store for full-time workers. McDonald’s has a help line to assist workers in getting public aid and food stamps. If these companies and others paid better wages, their employees would not need public aid.