Letters to the Editor
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
‘The U.N.’s Latest’
Re: “The U.N.’s Latest,” Editorial, August 26, 2005. Reforming something implies that it has worth and needs only some fixing. However, the United Nations not only presents nothing of value for our nation, it poses a distinct and growing threat to American independence. The United Nations’ ultimate purpose has been from the beginning to ensnare the nations of the world in a U.N.-dominated world government. Yes, U.N. peacekeepers have performed criminal acts. And yes, the cost to American taxpayers is disproportionate and unfair. But these are not the most important reasons why Congress should be reexamining our United Nations membership.
America’s leaders must not debate which measures are needed to reform the United Nations anymore than a cancer-stricken person should seek ways to reform his cancer. The United Nations threatens our nation’s very independence. The sound policy for Congress is to enact H.R. 1146, the measure designed to have America withdraw from the United Nations. For additional information, please contact www.TheNewAmerican.com.
FRANK S. FERRARI
Bayside, N.Y.
‘Robert Moses’
In the article about Robert Moses [“Longing for Robert Moses,” Francis Morrone, Page 1, August 22, 2005], the author yearns for the “the days when things got done” and says it’s a sad fact that it’s so difficult to complete major city projects. Major projects would get done in this city if officeholders like Robert Moses would stop restraining anyone who has an idea for a big project.
Far more often than not, it is officeholders who are responsible for sandbagging ideas rather than executing them. Consider the site of the privately built Time Warner complex that sat unused for years, the former World Trade Center site that is still bare, and finally the West Side, which has been underused for years so Mike Bloomberg or an MTA bureaucrat can have a piece of land to create a pet project and erroneously go down in history as someone who supposedly got things done. Something would get done tomorrow if politicians would remove zoning laws, onerous building codes, and mandates for subsidized housing, which discourage practically all development.
If we don’t want this city to decay even further, we have two choices: Embrace an iron fist or the invisible hand. The iron fist leads to misguided projects that destroy neighborhoods, as was done by the Cross-Bronx Expressway. The invisible hand leads to thousands of private projects that meet the real needs of citizens.
Those who rave that Mussolini made the trains run on time don’t mention the alternatives. The trains would have run on time if he had let private companies run them. This city will flourish if we leave it in the hands of private citizens who built this city long before Robert Moses arrived.
DAVID DOCTOR
Manhattan
‘Double Dippers’
Regarding Andrew Wolf’s “Lessons From the Double Dippers” [Opinion, August 26, 2005]: Teachers take second jobs because they simply cannot make ends meet on the salary that they are paid. They pursue other interests because they are not defined as only “educators.”
Mr. Kaye and Ms. Matson called in sick because apparently they wanted to work at their second job during school time. It was a mistake that resulted in both being fired from the “day job.” Teachers can be dedicated, but they do not have to be singularly devoted to the job. It is not a requirement that teachers limit their world to include only the subject area that they teach. Many educators do not want their talents included in their lessons or manifested in the classroom. They have learned to keep their job and artistic endeavors separate, thus keeping the Department of Education and supervisors’ critiques out of their personal lives and pursuits.
MARJORIE J. LEVINE
Manhattan
‘Painting the Town’
Re: “Painting the Town,” Editorial, August 24, 2005. How can you show such concern for the free speech rights of the International Freedom Center and then turn around and stridently defend Mayor Bloomberg in his attempt to cut off the speech of the graffiti mavens? If the government doesn’t have a more compelling interest in what goes on at the September 11 site, which involves the war on terror, than it does in regulating graffiti in the city, then I give up. Why aren’t you out there defending the rights of taxpayers to cut out totally inappropriate goings on, at a memorial site?
DAVID O’NEILL
Manhattan
Please address letters intended for publication to the Editor of The New York Sun. Letters may be sent by e-mail to editor@nysun.com, facsimile to 212-608-7348, or post to 105 Chambers Street, New York City 10007. Please include a return address and daytime telephone number. Letters may be edited.
