Letters to the Editor | Aug. 21, 2024

In Donald Trump’s latest round of verbal ineptitude, he stated that the Presidential Medal of Freedom is worth more than the Congressional Medal of Honor awarded to war heroes because they are wounded or dead. He said this in reference to the award he gave to a Republican mega-donor and Las Vegas casino mogul, which was also bestowed upon conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh. This goes along with his suckers and losers comment about military members wounded and killed or, like the late Sen. John McCain, captured. The best way to restore the integrity of the Presidential Medal of Freedom would be for Kamala Harris, upon being sworn in as president, to present the award to Joe Biden for his 50-plus years serving our country, being the most effective president since FDR, and for the selfless and patriotic act of stepping aside from the 2024 election. This would be something Trump would not be able to understand.

Steve Erlichman, Elkins Park

In 1918, my uncle, a first sergeant and head of Company K of the 77th Division of the 308th Infantry, saved the life of one of his men and was blinded by toxic gas and wounded while fighting the Germans in the Argonne during the First World War. Anxious to get back to his men, he left the hospital without permission and went back to the front. On Oct. 4, 1918, while on patrol, he was separated from his men, and with a shattered right arm, he managed to wipe out a German machine gun nest by heaving grenades with his left hand. He then captured a German soldier, marched him back to the American line, and revealed the German position to his command — all before fainting from the loss of blood.

For his bravery, on April 8, 1919, he was awarded the Medal of Honor. In addition, he was awarded the prestigious Croix de Guerre as well as nine international awards. After the war, he became a civic activist as well as serving terms as the director of the Disabled American Veterans and as the national commander of the Jewish War Veterans. At age 48, he tried to reenlist to fight in World War II.

There are over 3,500 Medal of Honor recipients with similar stories of heroism and bravery who put their lives on the line while serving their country. No one who disrespects the medal recipients and continually demeans those who made the ultimate sacrifice should ever be allowed to enter the Oval Office, let alone return to it. It is dishonorable, un-American, and unacceptable.

I. David Popkin, Yardley

I agree with the recent letter to the editor on ending the Cuban embargo, albeit my reasons are broader. After 62 years, the embargo not only failed its intended purpose of changing the Cuban communist regime, but it also undermined its intended goals by becoming the number one excuse used by said regime for its failure to provide for the Cuban people. Nowadays, the embargo is a dog whistle for the three (soon to be two) “Cuban” senators: Bob Menendez, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz.

While they carry on about human rights, their Cuban constituents’ remittances to family (around $3 billion) represent the second largest source of income for the island. At the same time, U.S. exports of foodstuffs to Cuba reached $337 million in 2023. In short, the embargo features convenient loopholes; it is purely punitive. We fought a war with Vietnam and have excellent and productive relations with that country, despite its communist government. The same goes for China. Let’s get rid of the Cuban embargo and allow open communication between our countries. Exposure is more likely to succeed where the embargo failed.

Jim Kempner, Holland, rbpjsk@yahoo.com

Donald Trump became president by virtue of the Electoral College, an archaic vestige of early America, after losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by more than two million votes. As president, he appointed three U.S. Supreme Court justices to seats opened by retirement, death, and the dubious manipulation of Senate protocol by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who denied President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, a hearing.

Trump’s three appointees — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — offered at the behest of conservative power brokers, tipped the political scales to the right. Once seated, these three joined conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts to find in favor of laws restricting voting rights, denying equal opportunity, punting abortion laws to the states, and granting executive immunity that virtually puts any U.S. president above the law. This, together with Justice Thomas’ and Justice Alito’s ethical lapses, is the situation we find ourselves in. Reform is required.

David R. Appleton, New Hope, dwapple@verizon.net

So, Donald Trump claims he knows nothing about Project 2025? That’s hard to believe, and not just because he habitually lies. It’s also because the Project 2025 wish list reflects so many hallmarks of Trump’s presidency: the contempt for democracy’s norms, climate denialism, a massive tax break for the richest Americans, and anti-immigrant measures, among other things.

Project 2025, of course, doubles down on Trumpism: using the Insurrection Act, advocating massive detention camps, purging the civil service then filling it with Trumpist flunkies, and eliminating federal bodies like the U.S. Department of Education and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. And, of course, it targets reproductive rights by attacking contraception and advocating harsher restrictions on abortion. Trump’s stump speeches paint the U.S. as an uncivilized dystopian nightmare, a failed state under siege by rampaging violent immigrants. His proposed remedy is to become a dictator on his first day back in the White House. It’s clear our real dystopian nightmare is the autocratic prospect of another Trump presidency as outlined in Project 2025.

John Ascenzi, Philadelphia

Do no harm. That is one of the main tenets of the Hippocratic Oath taken for centuries by medical students and physicians. In contrast, Project 2025, developed by the Heritage Foundation and others, does much harm, and too many people either don’t yet know about it or are just finding out. This dangerous plan is geared toward a possible second Donald Trump presidency but can be applied by any president with an authoritarian mindset.

As described earlier by columnist Will Bunch and others, among its planks is the dismantling of the civil service system. It would replace thousands of workers with Trump’s unquestioning followers. That would leave no one to mitigate Trump’s worst impulses. It would politicize the U.S. Justice Department to prosecute perceived enemies, which might include peaceful protesters. It would also negatively affect regulations regarding climate change, the environment, and basic rights. Should we hold future presidents to the same high standards we expect of medical students and physicians? Should we demand they also take an oath to do no harm?

Joan Chinitz, Philadelphia, jjchin@comcast.net

Using the last four digits of a Social Security number for verification has not been safe for many years. Millions of numbers are suspected to have been recently compromised. When will our legislative knuckleheads make using these as proof of identity illegal? Companies can use question and answer, passwords, and PINs — all of which can be changed. I cannot change my Social Security number to protect my accounts. Companies that use them and are fooled by a scammer to get my information or worse should be held liable. What is taking so long to change this?

Ted Swirsky, Erial

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.