Bornstein didn't present a balanced view

Dear Editor:

I’m writing to object to three statements by David Bornstein in his July 10 column. I’ve skipped others due to The Heritage’s word limit.

Bornstien said President Trump denounced NATO. President Trump criticized our NATO allies for paying too little for our common defense, much less than they had committed. Since he objected, they have paid more.

President Trump said he admired Vladimir Putin. What would Bornstein do if he was meeting Putin to advance American interests? Insult the man? Bornstein ignored President Obama’s open microphone comment to Russian President Medvedev, “After my election I have more flexibility.”  President Trump confronted Russia by building up our military, making us energy independent, and supplying weapons to Ukraine to defend itself.

Bornstein criticized President Trump for his “friendship and admiration” of China’s President Xi. I believe he was practicing effective diplomacy, as he was with Putin. Trump is the first U.S. president to get tough with China about stealing American intellectual property. President Trump negotiated a critical trade deal with China that is starting to roll back past economic losses. He is standing up to China’s military moves in East Asia.

President Trump has been a vigorous advocate for American interests and engineered an economic boom (pre-virus) that benefited all of us, with the greatest percentage wage gains for low-income workers. I believe Bornstein’s reflexive zeal to oppose President Trump kept him from presenting a more balanced view.

Rabbi Sanford (Sandy) Olshansky

Member, National Leadership Council

Republican Jewish Coalition