LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (10/24/04)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

A reader's vote for John F. Kerry

Dear Editor:

I guess after reading Myron Kuropas's latest column ("Wealth, power and privilege") we can surmise that only conservative Republicans are allowed to be wealthy and influential in American politics. However, unlike Dr. Kuropas, I am delighted Sen. John Kerry has five houses and is married to a billionaire. It may level the playing field a bit.

Perhaps, as Dr. Kuropas notes, Sen. Kerry has "never run a business, met a payroll nor administered anything." I just wish the readers of The Ukrainian Weekly were provided with details of President George W. Bush's brilliant business career.

Finally, Dr. Kuropas bangs out the tired old "culture war" slurs against same-sex marriage, etc. to smear the Democrats. I write from the belly of the liberal beast of San Francisco, where last February I had the privilege to interview in the driving rain outside City Hall newly married gay and lesbian couples. Let me assure you they also, just as Dr. Kuropas, believe in "the sanctity of the American family." After all, these couples are trying to create a family and why should they, just as one daughter of the current vice-president, be denied their rights in this worthy endeavor?

We must be grateful for Dr. Kuropas's many years of public service to the Ukrainian American community through his anti-defamation and Famine education efforts. However, he has stumbled badly in these forays into election commentary and his increasingly frantic fulminations against Sen. Kerry and the Democratic Party cannot obscure the domestic and foreign policy failures of the current administration.

Peter Bejger
San Francisco

A suggestion: elect Boris Danik

Dear Editor:

Elect Boris Danik - only because it's become an embarrassment to read The Ukrainian Weekly. Between Myron Kuropas' constant shilling for the Republican Party and perpetual apologies for the Bush administration's senseless policies in the rest of the paper, I'm afraid The Weekly's become a one-note, right-wing rag. In this election year, the Weekly is somehow fine with the neocon agenda. Only Mr. Danik's eloquent, informative letters shine a welcome light into the slanted muck. To which I'd like to add a few (non-partisan) words.

When Dr. Kuropas distorts history in order to slam Sen. John Kerry, as in the last few issues (October 3 and 10), it's beyond irresponsible. References to the so-called "evil Vietnamese" fail to acknowledge U.S. arrogance in that war, which Mr. Kerry addressed then - with good reason. I suggest Dr. Kuropas view the excellent Errol Morris film "The Fog of War" and listen to McNamara come clean about that whole debacle. Also, I suggest a thorough perusal of Pulitzer Prize-winning, "A Bright Shining Lie," by Neil Sheehan. Oh, and "The Pentagon Papers." Ho Chi Minh came to America first and we turned him away. "American moral fiber"?! Please...

Oh, by the way Dr. Kuropas, George W. Bush is a wealthy Yale graduate, too. And he lives well because, well, his parents have made him rich - every business he's run has been unsuccessful. Hey - just like Mr. Kerry!

Unlike Mr. Bush, I read the newspapers, and I refuse to vote for a guy who doesn't. Because the price of democracy is vigilance.

Remember that on November 2.

Andrew Cherney
Los Angeles

A clarification on Reserve service

Dear Editor:

Permit me as a 31-year veteran of the U.S. Army Reserve who just retired last year with the rank of master sergeant, to add a clarification to the ongoing debate on the presidential candidates' military service. A reservist/guardsman is required to earn a minimum of 50 retirement points per year. There are times when he earns much more than that, based on his active duty time.

As Taras Wolansky correctly notes in his letter (October 10), George W. Bush's military records clearly show that he always made more than the minimum, especially in his early years when he performed extensive active duty. In fact Mr. Bush logged 336 flight hours on the F-102 jet fighter in 1972 alone. It is not at all unusual for a reservist/guardsman to occasionally skip his monthly weekend duty if he has enough retirement points for the year or if he makes up the lost time by performing administrative duties at a different time.

Once a reservist/guardsman receives his annual statement of retirement points and verifies that it is correct, there is really no need to keep detailed records of the completed year for the next three decades. Similarly, in the civilian world, once an employee receives an accurate annual statement of earnings from the Social Security Administration, there is no need for him to keep that year's weekly pay stubs for the next 30 years. To expect that employee to recall in 2004 why he had some absences in 1972 is just as ridiculous as to expect a reservist/guardsman to explain in 2004 why he may have had a brief lapse in his duties back in 1972, especially if he had earned the required number of points for that year.

The liberal media's unsuccessful attempts to find fault with President Bush's military service culminated in the "Memogate" scandal, where a crude forgery was blindly accepted by a [Dan] Rather-biased CBS in a desperate attempt to smear the president.

In contrast, the same media eagerly embraced Sen. John F. Kerry's "reporting for duty" slogan. However, too many living veterans have stepped forward, tarnishing his medals (the ones he claimed to throw away, then denied doing it). Even so, the fact remains that both men were honorably discharged from the service. The problem with Sen. Kerry is his sworn testimony before Congress, branding all American servicemen in Vietnam as war criminals at a time when American POWs were being tortured in North Vietnam. The words of Sen. Kerry and other leftists of that time were then used against the POWs by their Communist captors. In the words of Sir John Harrington: "Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

Leo Iwaskiw
Philadelphia

Why I'm voting for John F. Kerry

Dear Editor:

In his October 3 column, Myron Kuropas wrote that the GOP-controlled Foreign Relations Committee is blocking Senate Resolution 202 on the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide, because of pressure from Turkey, which fears that such a resolution would pave the way for a similar resolution regarding the Armenian genocide. As much as I respect and admire Dr. Kuropas for his many years of brilliant contributions on Ukrainian American issues, in this case, I feel he is simply wrong, perhaps more influenced by his position as an organizer for Ukrainian Americans for Bush-Cheney than by the facts.

Although Turkey may not be thrilled by such a resolution, the killer voice on S. Res. 202 comes from the Bush White House itself. As Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joseph Biden told The Ukrainian Weekly earlier this year, the White House is blocking the Famine-Genocide Resolution in deference to Russia, above all. Trying to shift the blame to Turkey (does that make it OK?) is just sucker bait. This is just one more small favor that President George W. Bush has elected to deliver to Russian President Vladimir Putin after their infamous meeting at Mr. Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, when Mr. Bush looked into Mr. Putin's eyes and liked what he saw.

My deep concern is that President Bush saw himself in President Putin's eyes. I am concerned that they agreed not to hinder each other as they try to divide the world between them. This would explain the mealy mouthed U.S.A. response to Russia's attack on the Island of Tuzla and the midnight switch (or back stab) on the Odesa-Brody Pipeline - just two of a long litany of disappointments in the Bush-Cheney policy on Ukraine.

The Bush administration's only interest seems to be keeping Ukrainian troops in Iraq. Beyond that, Russia has a blank check to do what it wants. I am concerned that another four years of this blank check will see the destruction of Ukraine as a viable independent nation. Ukraine will not survive another term of Bush-Cheney rule in Washington. That's why I'm voting for Sen. Kerry for president.

Charmian Carl
Los Angeles

The letter-writer is a member of California Ukrainian Americans for Kerry-Edwards.

A reader's reasons to not elect Bush

Dear Editor:

One of the comments l received in response to my opinion about President George W. Bush (letter, September 6) suggested that Sen. John Kerry is a good candidate for president. Sen. Kerry has a shot at unseating Mr. Bush and, if elected, will most likely "not mislead us into war"; will scrap Mr. Bush's tax cuts for the upper class (doing so will revive the economy and cut the deficit, as it did when Bill Clinton took similar action in 1993); stop the environmental devastation perpetrated by deregulated industrial polluters, and halt the Republican assault on Social Security. That is huge.

A third-party candidacy of Ralph Nader helps re-elect President Bush besides providing schadenfreude (feel-good from mischief). Although in tune with Mr. Nader more than with Sen. Kerry, I would rather take what Sen. Kerry can deliver, instead of enjoying the righteous satisfaction of voting for Mr. Nader and watching America going down the tubes under Mr. Bush.

For some, prognosticating which candidate for U.S. president may be best for Ukraine seems to be the main factor in casting their vote. Such prognoses have a 50-50 chance of being wrong, except in rare cases of a flash warning, as in the "Chicken Kiev" fiasco.

Occasionally the Ukraine line is stretched even when its connection to a U.S. candidate for president is rather tenuous. For instance, Dr. Jaroslaw Sawka in his letter (October 3) lambasts the IMF as bad for Ukraine, and will vote for Mr. Nader, no fan of the IMF. The IMF's relevance for Ukraine today is rather academic, pro or con. Dr. Sawka also finds fault with the Republicans for peripheral reasons, and is dismissive of Sen. Kerry for reasons based on false disparagement of Kerry's Vietnam service in Dr. Myron Kuropas's column (September 12).

It is now common knowledge that the Kerry Vietnam smear campaign was financed in the heart mof Texas by a Houston tycoon Bob Perry, a major contributor to Republican campaigns. Benjamin L. Ginsberg, the legal adviser to the veterans group that was used as a conduit to pay for advertisements condemning Sen. Kerry was serving at the same time as national counsel for the Bush re-election campaign, and was forced to resign in the aftermath. But the president personally refused to distance himself from the group.

This scam was widely condemned by Sen. John McCain among others, a Vietnam veteran himself who was a victim of a similar "am-Bush" - in the Republican primary election campaign in year 2000, and by former Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia, a Vietnam War triple amputee shamelessly savaged by right-wing activists in his failed re-election bid. But Dr. Kuropas, true to his form, apparently could not resist pasting the same smear on Sen. Kerry in his column, after the mainstream media backed off.

Dr. Sawka, in general, has valid insights about Ukraine, which appear to be his main focus in the U.S. election campaign. My point is that election of the U.S. president affects our lives and our children's lives as Americans in a very real sense, whereas splitting hairs about its fallout on another country (when there is no pressing connective issue) can become an end in itself. Although Ukraine can expect no favors from the Bush dynasty, President Bush is not nearly as bad for Ukraine as he is for America.

Boris Danik
North Caldwell, N.J.

Correction

Last week's issue (October 17) carried a letter to the editor written by a supporter of the Libertarian candidate for U.S. president, Michael Badnarik. The candidate's last name was misspelled as Bednarik.

The Ukrainian Weekly welcomes letters to the editor. Letter-writers must provide a daytime phone number and mailing address for verification purposes.Please note that a daytime phone number is essential in order for editors to contact letter-writers regarding clarifications or questions.

| Home Page |