Save the Colleges
Editor: Civic and political reactions to the proposed $450-million cuts in the state budget have been full of anguish, anger and some expressions of animosity.
It is welcome that the legislature is now moving forward to participate in the challenge to ensure a balanced budget through meaningful adjustments.
In the outcry, quite a few concerns have been raised.
Let me add my own to that list -- higher education.
This decade's tremendous political changes have been accompanied, or will soon be followed, by serious economic, technological and scientific challenges.
Higher education will greatly assist in our meeting those challenges adequately both at the state and national levels.
Incumbent on Governor Schaefer and the General Assembly is the maximum implementation, therefore, of their 1988 program to strengthen and elevate higher education.
L We, and posterity, will thank them for this far-sightedness.
Hardev S. Palta.
Editor: Issue No. 1: Does the end justify the means?
Conservatives defend and liberals decry Oliver North's tactics in the Iran-contra scandal. Conservatives say the end justifies the means; liberals disagree.
Now, each group moves 180 degrees on the matter of a Democrat staffer supposedly leaking Anita Hill's statement to the press. Liberals say the end justifies the means; conservatives say it does not.
Issue No. 2: Nothing to hide?
Frequently, liberals criticize and conservatives defend the growth of police powers (even to the extent of entering one's private domain), the defense being based on the old, "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about."
Yet now, conservatives object to the idea of an "innocent" Judge Thomas having to answer accusatory questions, and liberals say, "He must have something to hide, or he wouldn't object so much."
It kind of makes one question how deep any of their beliefs in their principles are.
Brian D. Taylor.
It's Time to Share
Editor: John F. Kennedy once implored us not to ask what our country can do for us, but what we can do for our country. George Bush expressed a related sentiment with his "thousand points of light." As the state budget shortfall increases daily, perhaps it is time to consider the wisdom of such statements.
Are there not enough wealthy corporations and individuals in Baltimore City and all the counties of Maryland to erase all or a large portion of the budget shortfall and therefore maintain essential services to the citizens of Maryland?
But who are the wealthy? One criterion we might consider is our need, for I believe we are not justified in keeping more than we need while others are in need.
Let corporations and individuals assess their needs honestly, then contact Gov. William Donald Schaefer, Mayor Kurt L. Schmoke or a county executive and pledge $1,000, $10,000 or $100,000. Experience the joy of giving with abandon.
There is so much money in the world just sitting in accounts earning more money which just sits in accounts. Is it not time to rearrange our priorities, even slightly? By so doing the Free State just might set a shining example for the rest of America as those who have share more generously with those who have not.
Readers Comment on the Thomas Hearings
Editor: To all those who were shocked at the confirmation of Judge Clarence Thomas, I ask, "Why?" After all, he was judged by a jury of his peers.
Editor: The biggest joke of the Thomas hearings to me was the fact that Sen. Edward Kennedy was sitting in judgment of him. The wolf watching the sheep.
Joseph C. Matassa.
Editor: Women who worked with Judge Thomas portrayed him as a man whose conduct was above reproach, who never told dirty jokes and who "looked down at his shoes when other men craned their necks to look at a woman."
Perhaps our senators could learn a lesson in respecting women from the judge.
Editor: Who knows what evil lies in the hearts of men?
! Anita Hill knows.
Editor: The British often use the expression "smarmy" when they speak derogatorily of someone. I believe Sen. Joe Biden defines the word to perfection.
His performance in the Clarence Thomas affair was nauseating at best. At worst, he typified the gutless members of Congress who, when confronted with a male/female issue, automatically take the female side out of fear of the female lobby.
George B. Gammie.
Editor: The Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill inquiry is a classic example why confirmations for the Supreme Court should be decided by a two-thirds majority vote.
The Republicans, led by Senators Spector and Hatch, went for the jugular and won. The Democrats, led by the chairman, Senator Biden, took the defensive position and lost, proving the truth of the late Leo Durocher's assertion that "nice guys finish last."
Albert E. Denny.
Editor: I opposed the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.
I simply felt that any man, especially a judge who allows himself to be manipulated into giving the kinds of ambivalent, equivocal and evasive answers that Thomas gave to his interrogators, is inherently unqualified to be a justice on the Supreme Court of our nation.
Ruth H. Schaeffer.
Editor: Judge Thomas was subjected to unprecedented scrutiny and cruel and unusual punishment. He was "Borked" and tried by the media. He is a man to be admired for his convictions.
Paul Michael Blitz.
Editor: What a prize collection -- Kennedy of Chappaquiddick fame, Biden of plagiarism fame, Leahy of leaking report fame and Metzenbaum of financial finagling fame.
Searching for that silver lining, I finally found one. While those blokes who recently voted themselves a whopping raise were frittering away their time for the TV cameras, they weren't squandering our hard-earned taxes on foreign aid bribery or some favorite pork barrel project.
G; Perhaps we should be grateful for even minor blessings.
John J. O'Connor Jr.
Editor: I am left with an abiding anger -- anger that America has a Congress so firmly entrenched and rabidly dedicated to its self-serving ways that fairness and justice have become a mockery; a Congress so addicted to the vote-garnering and fund-raising promises of special interest groups, so drunk with its own sense of self-importance that it has sold its soul.
Editor: As a woman, I am truly embarrassed by Anita Hill's descriptions. I cannot believe that anyone with a mite of self-respect would dare to be so graphic.
With the education Anita Hill apparently has, I feel she could have found a better way of expressing her problem.
May Disney Carre.
Editor: Both the senators and Judge Thomas' witnesses
viciously attacked Professor Hill's character, integrity, sanity -- and with virtually no regard to the body of evidence in the case.
Whether or not Anita Hill was abused at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, she suffered blatant, public abuse at the U.S. Senate.
Editor: What an almost totally absurd display of human injustice toward one another.
Until we can honestly admit our own inadequacies, we will only become more divisive while maintaining our stubborn, narcissistic ways.