Democrats and GOP are too much alike on individual freedom

Montesquieu said 400 years ago that people get the government they deserve. Andrew Bernstein's article ("Two major parties increasingly alike," Nov. 8, Perspective) on the increasing similarity of our two major parties is a call to all who struggle to deserve a government based upon inalienable individual rights.

As Mr. Bernstein pointed out, the creeping crud of collectivism practiced by Democrats and Republicans is increasing government's role in all aspects of our lives. Neither party appears to take our "inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" seriously anymore, and we are forced to choose between Republicans who want to control our bodies and Democrats who want to control our money.

Fortunately, Americans continue to reject the Marxist premise held by many liberals and conservatives alike that the individual is secondary to the group.

Thomas Jefferson said that eternal vigilance was the price of freedom. I hope to see The Sun take a decisive stand in favor of individual rights and print more articles in support of individualism as expressed by Mr. Bernstein and columnist Gregory Kane.

Manfred Smith

Columbia

Jesse Ventura won election, but he didn't get a majority

In response to Tom Paxton's letter ("Professional wrestler delivers a body slam to professional politics," Nov. 10), I would like to point out that Jesse Ventura was elected by just over one-third of the voters of Minnesota.

Mr. Paxton may not feel Gov. Parris N. Glendening was returned to office on his own merits, but he was elected by a clear majority. I would hesitate to call a governor-elect who was rejected by nearly two-thirds of the voters a "true representation of the people."

Jonathon Wolfe

Baltimore

Moderation is the reason for Republican loss at polls

As a registered Republican, all I can say is that I hope we Republicans have learned from this election that moderation in the face of liberalism is the surest way to defeat.

Victory will always come to the party of less government, lower taxes, and the champions of the Judeo-Christian values that include the defense of innocent human life.

Ellen R. Sauerbrey the conservative came within a few thousand votes of victory, but Ellen R. Sauerbrey the moderate, defender of the status quo, was royally whomped.

The American people want only one Democratic Party, not two.

The moderate-minded cannot blame the National Rifle Association for our defeat. Nor the Christian Coalition, the pro-life movement or any other conservative.

School vouchers, greater availability of concealed gun-carrying permits, a vigorous defense of the unborn -- all were rejected as too controversial, too extreme.

Apparently, moderate Republicans were too worried that the mean, liberal news media would call them nasty-sounding names.

All the liberals had to oppose us was racial fear-mongering and class-envy-based bigotry.

As a viable ideology, liberalism, like socialism and Marxism and communism, is intellectually quite dead.

I hope this lesson has been learned and that the "big tent" of moderation will soon be discarded and quickly replaced with something that appeals more to conservative moral values, less government, lower taxes and an end to the liberal distortion of the Constitution.

Michael N. Ryan

Bel Air

Republicans' best chance was Helen Bentley

Another election has come and gone, and we still have not put a new face in our State House. Watching the results on TV, I realized that probably our last chance of this century had slipped away four years ago. That chance was former U.S. Rep. Helen Delich Bentley.

This grand lady of the Republicans had been steering her party to a winning situation when the right wing swept it away.

I've worked the polls for 20 years, and this was a devastating year for our party. If this party doesn't take notice and stop supporting the likes of Ross Z. Pierpont and Ellen R. Sauerbrey, we will never have a Republican elected statewide.

Dwain Wolf

Baltimore

Glendening victory came through unfair portrayal

Your post-election editorial ("Glendening wins race for second term," Nov. 4) is most revealing. First you state that Gov. Parris N. Glendening's victory was achieved by "blasting [Ellen R.] Sauerbrey for alleged anti-civil rights votes" and by "portraying Ms. Sauerbrey as a dangerous right-winger."

You acknowledge that Mr. Glendening "coasted to victory, thanks to an expensive barrage of attack ads." The editorial finishes with a complimentary tone, suggesting that Mr. Glendening won by "stressing his solid, progressive record of achievements over the past four years."

I believe you were right the first time. Mr. Glendening's main goal was to be re-elected. He achieved this with a "win at all costs" campaign, featuring devastating attack ads that painted Ms. Sauerbrey as a closet racist.

Even members of the governor's own party refused to go along with these ads as they knew that they were false and misleading. Instead of acting as a responsible governor by trying to unify the state, he has divided us along racial lines again.

Michael Langbaum

Baltimore

America still wants a moral president

Your editorial ("An end to the myth of the 'moral leader,' " Nov. 9) reports moral leadership by American presidents is a myth that has run its course. How depressing.

Having seen first-hand how immoral activity in the White House, intimate and foreign, can put the country asunder, one would have thought you might have tried to raise our sights and hopes, not lower and dash them forever.

You are correct in stating that we no longer link President Clinton to moral leadership (if we ever did). But does his legacy have to be ours as well?

I believe that more than ever, Americans deserve and yearn for a moral, presidential president.

Virginia L. Bennett

Pasadena

Headline was misleading for Jerusalem bomb story

You published a misleading headline with respect to Israeli-Arab affairs. On Nov. 6, an Arab terrorist car bomb exploded in a busy Jerusalem market, injuring 21 Israelis. A greater disaster was averted only as a result of the terrorists' ineptitude in carrying out their suicide mission.

An accurate and appropriate headline would have read: "Terrorist bomb in Jerusalem market injures 21." You chose, however, to headline your story "Israeli Cabinet stops discussing hTC Wye pact" (Nov. 7), implying that Israel initiated the chain of events that led to the interruption of the peace agreement discussion in the Cabinet.

In reality, it was Yasser Arafat's failure to control terrorism within Israeli borders that led the Cabinet to suspend consideration of the deal. While your headline was technically accurate, it was simply a consequence of the more heinous act that preceded it.

Deborah Cohen

Baltimore

Framers would oppose 'oppressive' government

I read with interest the two letters in The Sun Nov. 6 addressing both sides of the Second Amendment.

One can read both letters and agree with both opinions. It is when one reads between the lines that facts and fallacies become blurred.

I believe if the Framers were to reconvene today, their attitudes and opinions would be more reinforced than ever.

The Framers had overthrown a tyrannical, oppressive government and were in process of creating a document to protect and guarantee certain unalienable rights to the free citizens of the United States of America. If they were to return today, I think drugs and violence would be the least of their ills.

They would be appalled by our equally oppressive government, which seeks to strip its free citizens of their Constitutional rights bit by bit in the name of public safety, or even more insidious, the new catch phrase, "for the children."

Brian D. Hess

Bel Air

Pub Date: 11/15/98