Offer constructive criticism, solutions

Thank God our Founding Fathers created the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and a free press so every 30 days people like Tony Moschetti (letter, April 8) can write vacuous arguments against the nefarious liberal establishment. Oh boy.

Tell us something new, Mr. Moschetti. Give us some better alternatives instead of ad hominem attacks. I am conservative on some issues, liberal on others and moderate on most, however, I try to see value on both sides of the issue. I think most Americans do.

When I listen to or read conservative pundits, there is a consistent underlying contempt for any opinion not in line with their own. There always seems to be the childish need for name-calling. They believe they can easily identify the problem but never seem to offer a better solution.

Let's have some positive discussions about the issues that affect our nation.
Let's do it with compassion and understanding without the animosity and personal attacks. I challenge Moschetti next month to write a letter that offers constructive improvements to both national and world issues.

I would not be surprised if, after careful reflection, he found himself leaning a little to the left.

Donald B. Conrad
Greensboro

News & Record
April 25, 2004

Editorial types live in liberal fantasy world

I could only chuckle as I read your laughable explanations of the operation of the editorial department (Dec. 28). Let's begin with the "frequently asked questions" explanation. Why are you so liberal (conservative)? Conservative? I assume that it was someone to the left of the Unabomber who asked that ridiculous question.

Political endorsements? According to a recent Gallup poll a mere 18 percent admitted being liberal. Yet you liberals think that you are the majority. Well, in college classrooms, and media newsrooms that 18 percent becomes 80 percent.
Outside those bastions of liberalism the 18 percent shrinks considerably. How, therefore, can you possibly claim to know how the newspaper "as a whole" would vote? You assume they would vote as you would vote.

You remind me of the New Yorker book reviewer 30 years ago who couldn't understand how Nixon could possibly have won the election since she didn't know a single person who voted for him! You need to revisit the last electoral map, the red vs. blue states, counties, and cities. The map is covered in red. Remove the mindless lemming vote and the last election was a landslide.

You editorial types live in a fantasy world. You represent only your own biases. Have you ever endorsed a conservative? Have you ever opposed the continuing expansion of government, except when it interfered with the rights of terrorists? Your daily "brainstorming" sessions must be rather brief. How long can it take to reprint the DNC talking points?

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
January 2, 2004

Left can't stand Bush's success

By Tony Moschetti

I'm having a difficult time understanding the left's mindless obsession that the Iraq conflict is over oil. Therefore, to try to better understand these folks, I've decided to have half my brain removed.

Greg Meyerson, who calls Sharon a war criminal but thinks Arafat is a mainstream leader, is the latest to push the oil lunacy. This crowd said the same thing about the 1991 conflict with Iraq. We were in Kuwait, and Iraq. We had little opposition. Why did we not appropriate the oil fields then if oil is our motive? We have been in Saudi Arabia for decades. Why have we not taken those oil fields?

If our goal is take over the Middle East oil, why do we continue to let ourselves be held hostage by these folks as they manipulate the cost of oil by manipulating production? Why haven't we simply taken the oil fields? Why do we sit by as our economy suffers whenever the Middle East cartel decides to put the squeeze on us? Why don't we just take the oil fields? This is not a trick question. Send your answers to the News & Record.

Meyerson should have sent his letter to Le Monde. It is the French who are profiting from Iraqi oil. They have made billions thus far, and hoped to make even more in the future. If you follow the news, you know that is why the French tried so hard to stop this action. They also know that we will, as we said, make certain it is the people of Iraq who benefit from their oil. Their claims that we will profit are laughable.

They have been wrong about everything beginning with the 1991 conflict. There was the "quagmire" in Afghanistan, the house to house fighting in Baghdad costing thousands of American casualties, the poorly thought out war plan, etc.
They cannot deal with the success of the Bush administration. They are livid at his poll numbers, and the trust he engenders with 70 to 80 percent of Americans.

I'm still waiting for a member of the "no blood for oil" or "it's all about oil" crowd to tell us they have decided to permanently boycott all oil products.
No SUV, no plastic, no polyester slacks, no oil heat, etc.

The left and hypocrisy is a marriage made in heaven.

The writer lives in High Point.

News & Record
April 30, 2003

There's never been a real racism debate

You state in a recent editorial that Trent Lott's demise reopens the debate on racism. There never has been a "debate" on racism, only a one-sided monologue by white liberals, and most minorities. Webster defines racism as believing that some races are inherently superior to others, and as discrimination based on race. I believe that few believe that any race is superior, or inferior, to any other.

Discrimination based on race is widespread in our society and must be eradicated. I refer to affirmative action. Most white liberals and minorities support this race-based discrimination, making them the racists in our society.

Yet, these folks insist on labeling those of us opposed to this abhorrent form of racism, as the racists.

Where, except in the liberal mind, can one decry discrimination against one race, then demand discrimination against other races?

So, please, let's debate racism.

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
January 27, 2003

Why the violence?

The obvious reason for the increase in violence in the public schools is that we don't spend enough money on education. We also put too much stress on the children by expecting them to be tested regularly to determine whether they are actually learning anything.

How can we expect there not be violence in public schools?

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
November 13, 2002

Pacifists supporting Arafat's terrorists

I have oft contended that liberalism is derived from a combination of brain damage and having Satan somewhere in your family tree. Some think that I'm joking. Wrong! Why otherwise would anyone align themselves with Yasser Arafat, a barbaric, murdering terrorist? I recently saw a television report that 32 pacifists have joined Arafat in his headquarters and have vowed to stay until the standoff is resolved. This says more about the pacifist movement than anything I could say. Their concern is for the life of one of the world's most notorious terrorists. They apparently condone the wanton murder of innocent people who threaten no one. They apparently condone the teaching of young children that being a suicide bomber is a heroic rather than an evil action.
Pacifists apparently believe that murdering innocents is a form of conflict resolution. Where else but in the liberal mind would such lunacy be concocted?

The Israelis do not have a policy of destruction of the Arabs. The Israelis do not send children into Palestinian areas with bombs attached to their bodies.

They have the right and the duty to defend themselves by taking whatever action is required. This is such a fundamentally simple concept that to deny it one is either brain damaged or evil. Ergo, a liberal!

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
April 18, 2002

Misfit protesters, take your cause to Pakistan

I find it ironic that one day after your chilling editorial concerning the brutal murder of Daniel Pearl by the Muslim/Arab barbarians in Pakistan, we hear from that small group of misfits whose only contribution to America is hanging out on street corners and telling us that we are the problem.

These folks are totally detached from reality. If the Pearl murder does not convince these fools that the Arab/Muslim terrorists are pure evil then nothing ever will. They have lived so long with their heads in the sand that I'm surprised they haven't suffocated.

Fortunately, these misfits are but a small segment of our great society. They are the price we pay for freedom. Those of us who do understand that there is evil in the world, and have been willing to fight to defend our freedoms, find it sad that these types reap the benefits of others sacrifices.

I suggest that this group, instead of protesting in Greensboro, take their contingent to the streets of Pakistan. I'm certain they would receive a warm welcome, as they always side with the terrorists.

Perhaps they can meet with Pearl's killers and try to determine what it was Pearl did to so anger them. They can wear peace symbols. They can bring flowers.

I'm sure their Arab/Muslim terrorist friends over there would be more than willing to negotiate with them.

I'm willing to chip in for the airfare.

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
March 6, 2002

Guilford's 'leftists' see only one side

The "enlightened" inmates at the left-wing indoctrination camp, known as Guilford College, recently attempted to simulate conditions under which the peace-loving Palestinians are forced to confront each day of their lives.

And since only one side of any issue is permitted at these indoctrination camps, there was no "simulation" as to why these conditions exist.

Was there a "simulation" of the Yom Kippur war? The one where Israel was attacked by its peace-loving Arab neighbors on the eve of its holiest holiday of the year?

Among the results of the attack was a humiliating defeat for the Arab states, and the loss of most of the land now "occupied" by Israel.

Was there a "simulation" of Palestinian terrorists strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up buses, malls, etc., murdering countless innocent people?

Israel then "continues the cycle of violence" by reacting to the killings. It responds by attempting to seek out those responsible. Israelis do not train their children to become suicide bombers.

They do not celebrate in the streets at the slaughter of thousands of innocent victims in the name of God, as did the Palestinians after the World Trade Center bombing.

Israel has checkpoints for the same reason we have security checkpoints at our airports: safety. Mr. Arafat was offered almost everything he claimed he wanted.

His reply: More terrorism.

And Palestinians wonder why so few Americans support them.

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
December 31, 2001

Airport bomb scare highlights problem

So, the leftist News & Record editorial staff cheers the federalization of airport security. The leftists think that big government is the answer to all our problems, when in fact, government is the source of most of our problems. If recent events in the name of increased security are examples of what we can expect in the future, I cringe.

Consider the Air Tran bomb threat at Piedmont Triad International Airport. I am not a federal employee, but if someone suggested a bomb on the plane my immediate reaction would be to get the plane emptied as quickly as possible. But that's me. Apparently the government agencies involved thought it best to let the passengers sit on the plane with the potential bomb for 30 minutes. When questioned, all agencies insisted that they had acted properly. Sadly, they actually believe that they did.

A passenger makes the mistake of having to go to the lavatory at the wrong time. Before the federal government got involved, a flight attendant would merely have asked the person to return to his seat. I've seen it dozens of times.

Now, with the federales involved, the person gets a gun pulled on him and gets put on the floor. The other passengers are told to put their hands behind their heads as if they were federal prisoners rather than paying customers, and the plane is diverted to another airport.

Boy, I feel safer now.

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
November 26, 2001

The real price gougers

On Sept. 23, Tony Moschetti wrote about gasoline price gouging and asked that someone associated with that business respond. I do not meet that criterion and I am not certain he really wanted an answer, but I will try.

First, if Moschetti has ever sold his home, was his selling price based on his cost or on the current prevailing market prices? I suspect the latter since he would be replacing it at those current prevailing market prices.

Second, when Moschetti goes to the grocery store to buy chicken noodle soup, he probably finds the shelves fully stocked or near-fully stocked most every time; if the shelves were sparsely stocked with just a few cans, he would probably go elsewhere. This base stock is as much a necessary requirement for doing business as are the shelves and store. A business person who sells off the basic assets for an ongoing business only to replace them at higher prices will not remain in business for long.

I detest price gouging as much as Moschetti. I just think he is kicking the wrong dog. Proper examples could include a local book store more than doubling the printed price of a Sept. 12 Washington Post; the Pinehurst U.S. Open charging $3 a bottle for the only available water; and Piedmont Triad International Airport raising the price of 20-minute parking from 25 cents to 75 cents.

Bruce B. Raynor Jr.
Greensboro

News & Record
October 4, 2001

Price-gouging charge was a very low blow

Tony Moschetti (letter, Sept. 23) asks why a few price gougers come out in times of crisis. I would ask a different question: Why, when we are all busy uniting against terrorism, must a few whiners complain that gasoline prices are too high?

Normally I am against coercion, but perhaps the time has come for mandatory economics classes for the masses. Maybe then we wouldn't have people complaining that prices shouldn't increase when demand increases or supply decreases. Maybe then people would appreciate the fact that higher gas prices keep a few people from running out and pumping all they can in a state of panic, saving fuel for the rest of us. Maybe then we would recognize that the private act of "gouging" serves the public end of conservation.

We have been exposed to many macabre sights and sounds over the past few weeks. Statements equating our nation's gasoline sellers with the real terrorists are among the worst.

Jack Bladel
Greensboro

News & Record
September 28, 2001

Gas price increases are unconscionable

Why is it that in times of crisis when most Americans unite against a common enemy, a few profiteers show their fangs? Among the usual suspects are the oil profiteers. We have seen huge increases in gas prices overnight. Why? In almost every case that product has been paid for. It is current stock. How can that price change?

Once the tanks are filled and the bill paid I doubt whether a request for additional payment is sent. If the dealer paid $1 per gallon and charged $1.10 per gallon, why all of a sudden with no new delivery does he begin to charge $1.20 per gallon? He is still selling the same product for which he paid $1.

The dealers, whom most of us trust, tell us that they are told what price to charge by those from whom they buy the gasoline. If this is not gouging, what is it, and who is responsible?

Don't tell me about probable cuts in production, or rises in the price of crude oil. Those products will not arrive as refined gasoline for 90 days or more. We will understand a price increase at that time. But will someone in the oil distribution or wholesaling business please explain to us why you are again profiteering during a time of crisis? And what kind of people are you to do such a dastardly thing?

Tony Moschetti
High Point

News & Record
September 23, 2001