Cooke, Angelos must recognize two markets
The most highly regarded type of deal in the business world is one in which both parties work out a "win-win" situation.
When it comes to the National Football League in Baltimore and Washington, Jack Kent Cooke is not interested in a "win-win" situation; he is fighting a war in which it's winner-take-all. Now I ask you, is that the noblest way of doing business?
Regarding major league baseball, it would seem that perhaps Peter Angelos is not interested in a "win-win" situation either.
Mr. Angelos and the Baltimore Orioles organization have rather brutishly refused to keep the word "Baltimore" on the team's road jerseys and logo. Mr. Angelos has refused to comment on whether he would oppose the placing of a major league baseball team in Northern Virginia.
Mr. Angelos now has a baseball "monster," while doggedly pursuing an NFL franchise, but he needs to come face to face with the cold, clear reality that if we are two markets when it comes to football then so are we two markets regarding baseball.
Mr. Angelos should call a press conference and go on public record stating that he has no opposition to baseball for the District of Columbia (i.e. Northern Virginia). In the same conference, he should announce the return of "Baltimore" to the logo and road jerseys.
I submit that the best solution for Mr. Cooke would be to build his football stadium on the Virginia side of the Potomac (as he has contemplated), perhaps somewhere along Interstate 66 between Fairfax and Manassas.
This site would tie in well with what I believe is a very hot Redskins area and would fit well with transportation, being very accessible to I-66, U.S. 29 and the D.C. Metro system.
Perhaps the people interested in bringing major league baseball to Northern Virginia could build their new baseball stadium there, and D.C. would have a baseball/football complex that would rival Camden Yards.
And for football, Baltimore and D.C. in the same division would be the NFL's best.
Richard F. Bahr Jr.
With the city election upon us in full force, we will once again be inundated with the usual campaign paraphernalia.
On my commute through the city on a recent morning, I was disturbed and offended by the number of bumper stickers and large signs plastered to light poles, vacant buildings and bus shelters.
The biggest offenders were the campaigns of Mayor Kurt Schmoke and City Council president candidate Vera Hall. Particularly disappointing is that, while running for city-wide office, they are promising to improve our environment, while contributing to its trashier appearance.
Taping signs to plastic bus shelters with electrical tape and stapling signs to boarded-up windows (all of which, experience has shown, will remain long after the last memory of the election has faded) is nothing but defacement of public and private property. The mayor, Mrs. Hall and all others offering themselves as public servants need to take control of their campaigns and overzealous supporters and start to lead by example, not promises.
Edward R. Jeunette Jr.
Take the next bus
The July 26 letter from Dave Reich about affirmative action is typical of the response of the so-called "angry white male" . . . in that it reduces affirmative action to a simplistic analogy that totally misses the point.
If we were to compare affirmative action to a law affecting Rosa Parks, it would not in any way "dictate that whites must now sit in the back of the bus." Such a law would, in fact, dictate that a black person such as Ms. Parks would have as much right as a white person to sit in any seat on the bus, front or back.
The fact that holding a seat open for a person such as Ms. Parks would deny a "deserving white person" a seat on the bus is irrelevant and insulting. Does Mr. Reich feel that handicapped parking spaces should be removed from parking lots because they take up more space and deprive the non-handicapped of their "deserved" spaces?
Besides, the "deserving white person" on Ms. Parks' bus merely faces the same situation as if all the seats on the bus were already full. He is always free to take the next bus.
William M. Smith
Schmoke and the middle class
Will the real Kurt Schmoke stand up? Is he the man Baltimore elected mayor eight years ago, or is he the man running for re-election in 1995?
Clearly they cannot be the same man.
In 1987, Kurt Schmoke was Baltimore's "rising sun," our hope for the future. He was full of promise, new ideas, new directions.
After eight years, the city is worse. Crime, a poor school system, suburban migration and the lack of a strong business community are the problems of 1995.
What does our "rising sun" do about these problems. Who knows unless you are Ron Shapiro, Larry Gibson or Dan Henson?
What is happening smells of a "good ol' boy" system. If you make a good contribution to my campaign, I'll see you get legal work, a good city job or a no-bid contract. A look at this situation would make a Chicago politician envious.
In the last eight years, Mayor Schmoke has created an HTC endangered species -- the middle class of Baltimore. It makes no difference if you are black or white, of any nationality.
The mayor shows no discrimination, he tries to kill us all off.
Baltimore may attract "empowerment zones," but these are not Baltimore's future.
History has shown that urban renewal, public housing in projects, so-called social reform programs are all designed from inception to fail. The empowerment zone will follow in their footsteps.
What has not failed is home ownership -- the ability to create stable neighborhoods safe from crime with good schools. This is what is attracting the middle class to the suburbs.
If he were to concentrate on the needs of the middle class more, maybe the tide could be stemmed. He cannot expect the rich to pay for the poor. It has never happened and never will.
However, over the last eight years he has catered to the needs of the rich and the poor.
For Baltimore's future, the mayor should wake up and smell the roses. Baltimore's future is in the middle class, its needs and concerns.
If this falls on deaf ears there may not be a middle class in Baltimore's future.
Smoke police go too far
The other night I was enjoying myself at the CFL football game (and yes, I still refer to them as the CFLs). The weather was, well, we weren't struck by lightning, and we weren't sweltering in the heat.
Anyway, the rain was for the most part letting up, when up the steps came the police. Immediately, I looked around to see what warranted the presence of the armed men.
Illegal drugs? Assault? Conduct unbecoming of a gentleman? It must have been important, there were a few of them heading our way.
As they passed by me I couldn't help thinking that whatever the crime was, it must have been a dastardly deed to attract such notice in the torrential downpour that we all were experiencing.
They wrenched the criminal, and I still wasn't clear as to what the offense was. Judging by the armament and strength of the arresting officers, I started to think they had just apprehended someone on the FBI's most wanted list.
The man was brought down in handcuffs, and word leaked down with him. The man had committed the most heinous of crimes.
He had smoked a cigarette.
I was astounded. Was this a joke? Maybe a one-time thing? No, at least four more times the police were summoned by the smiling usher who perhaps wanted to vent his frustration at the fans for making him stand out in the rain while we all watched the game.
At one time, and I'm not making this up, six blue clad storm troopers marched away a citizen in handcuffs for smoking a Camel cigarette. I know Camels are strong, but sheesh!
I hate to resort to cliche, but isn't an Orwellian comment apropos right about now?
I don't smoke, but my mother does. I cringe to think that in this day and age, she could be dragged away by a gaggle of police in handcuffs for smoking a cigarette in an open air environment.
How much farther are we as citizens going to allow ourselves to be pushed?