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 New York Sun
The New York Sun
NEW YORK SUN CONTRIBUTOR

‘Calling Their Bluff’


In his column “Calling Their Bluff,” John Stossel neglected to give his readers some key facts about why he rejected our call for him to teach a high school class for a week [Opinion, April 6, 2006].


In the last week of March, Mr. Stossel told the Department of Education, the principal and staff of Beacon High School, and the United Federation of Teachers that his availability to teach was limited to the week of April 3; that he had no other time the rest of the semester.


It didn’t matter to Mr. Stossel that he was giving teachers and the school just a few days notice. It didn’t matter to Mr. Stossel that the school staff already had plans for the week of April 3, and, given the school-related activities the weekend before, the teachers did not have time to prepare him.


It didn’t matter to Mr. Stossel that I couldn’t cancel my other professional obligations that week to accompany him. It didn’t matter to Mr. Stossel that the school wanted time to draft a teaching plan for Mr. Stossel that would benefit the students. They did not want a publicity stunt.


Mr. Stossel also failed to tell his readers that the DOE, with our support, offered to allow him to teach sometime this school year or in September with one condition – no cameras; to avoid being disruptive. He was not interested.


Clearly, Mr. Stossel put his schedule and his desire to turn a teaching experience into a TV segment ahead of the children. Shame on him for again misrepresenting the truth, this time chastising a great school, Beacon High School, for trying to provide kids a meaningful experience.


RANDI WEINGARTEN
President United Federation of Teachers
Manhattan


‘Automobiles in Central Park’


Regarding “Drive Is Building to Ban Automobiles From Oasis of Central Park,” Bradley Hope, Page 1, March 27, 2006, I think this is a bad idea for two main reasons:


(1) The increase in traffic congestion around the park would generate more air pollution than you would save by not having cars in the park.


(2) Unfairness to the older, infirm and not-so-agile among us who have a right to see the park also.


I’ve often driven – and taken others – around the “loop” to view the flowers of spring, the stillness of summer, the colors in the fall, and the snows of winter without much bothering anyone and hope to keep on doing so.


The park is closed to traffic most of the time anyway – and that’s good – but leave an opportunity open for one of the great rides of America.


REIN VIRKMAA
Manhattan

The New York Sun
NEW YORK SUN CONTRIBUTOR

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 New York Sun

© 2025 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

or
By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use