Letter to the editor: March 9, 2016

Response to rebuttal

Charles L. Klotzer’s March 2 letter of rebuttal to Professor J. Martin Rochester’s Feb. 24 commentary in the Jewish Light (“Waiting for the political center to coalesce”) takes umbrage with Rochester’s calling Hillary Clinton an extremist on par with Donald Trump, which Klotzer says betrays Rochester’s “myopic vision.” Klotzer goes on to say that what he finds so objectionable is Rochester’s claim to offer historic underpinnings for Rochester’s political opinions. He ends by stating  that by implication, Rochester insults all who support Clinton for supposedly supporting an extremist.

Klotzer’s argument is deeply flawed, as Clinton is, in fact, as much of an extremist as Trump. In refuting Rochester, Klotzer betrays his true colors as a liberal ideologue. 

First, allow me to define political extremism: Going to great lengths or beyond normal limits. Below are examples of Clinton’s extremism, irrespective of their popularity. Clinton advocates:

Serendipity Ice Cream ad

• Free community college

• Raising capital gains taxes on investments held for less than six years in an attempt to get Wall Street companies to focus less on short-term earnings

• Allowing the government to negotiate with pharmaceutical manufacturers for better prices

• Holding gun manufacturers liable for deaths caused by their products

• Allowing illegal immigrants to sign up for Obamacare

It’s unfortunate that Klotzer has not only chosen to completely ignore these facts, but even worse, has chosen to go down a path that is neither fair nor balanced. 

Gene Carton, Olivette