Clinton's clemency for convicted bombers was indefensible
The Sun's editorial defending President Clinton's offer of clemency for 16 Puerto Rican terrorists was flawed ("Clinton within rights to grant clemency," Sept. 21).
It suggested that it would make little sense for Mr. Clinton to try to help his wife's Senate campaign that way and that he signed the clemency papers without much thought.
That's not likely: not when the Department of State and the FBI, among others, had objected to the clemency offer.
The terrorists have been in prison for nearly 20 years. Mr. Clinton has been president for more than six years. Why give them clemency now?
When the clemency offer was made public, Mrs. Clinton's campaign claimed she had no involvement in the decision. But when opinion shifted against the decision, Mrs. Clinton injected herself into the controversy by asking her husband to withdraw the offer immediately.
She has tried to have it both ways, and that won't wash.
I agree with the final two sentences of the editorial: "Her future candidacy has no legitimate connection to his current office-holding. The two should be kept separate, by everyone."
Unfortunately, the Clintons are violating both these boundaries and our trust.
Karl Pfrommer, Baltimore
The Sun's attitude to President Clinton has varied over the year from supine to groveling -- whether the topic is Chinese campaign contributions or on-the-job sexual favors.
So it comes as no surprise that the release of known terrorists -- which drew criticism even from the first lady, to say nothing of the FBI -- would meet the approval of the Sun's editorial page.
Does it bother anyone on the editorial board that readers know their opinions before they do?
John Heasley, Ellicott City
Puerto Rican prisoners had served long enough
I couldn't agree more with The Sun's editorial "Clinton within rights to grant clemency" (Sept. 21), but I fear the problems it illustrates go beyond the obvious ramifications of the president's s decision.
More than 30 years ago, I was on the receiving end of a terrorist bombing. Obviously, I have no use for terrorists and the FALN is a despicable organization.
However, fair is fair: Sentences of 35 to 90 years for convictions that didn't include murder or manslaughter charges were overkill.
In many states, one would be eligible for parole on murder charges after serving as long as the prisoners involved had served.
One would expect the Dan Burtons of the world to howl about a decision such as the president's offer of clemency. What bothers me is that a majority of moderates, from both sides of the aisle, have objected as well.
If there was ever a politically correct issue to join, this is it.
Maybe there's something to be said for the accusation that these 16 people had become politically correct prisoners?
W. Cary deRussy, Timonium
Can Martin O'Malley create a friendlier city?
I am 9 years old, I live in Charles Village and I would like to congratulate Martin O'Malley on his victory in the Democratic mayoral primary.
I think the city should be more relaxed, and if you saw someone on the street you would say, "Hello."
Wouldn't that be a nice city?
I hope Mr. O'Malley can help us be like that.
Celia Neustadt, Baltimore
Bury power lines to prevent blackouts and ugliness
What was the cause of the power failures for thousands of Marylanders this past week? It may have been "pole-ution" -- power lines that should be submerged, but instead are elevated on wooden poles.
In the past 20 years, buried power lines have been designed into many new housing developments and have successfully defied storms.
Power poles and the accompanying profusion of wires and cables are one of the most ubiquitous and ugly products of the technical age. They could be eliminated by placing the lines underground.
The power company's loss of revenue during power failures and the expense of repairs has apparently been insufficient to encourage it to bury power lines.
This makes it necessary that we apply political pressure, and perhaps offer tax incentives, to encourage the power suppliers to put power lines underground, where they are not vulnerable to storms and accidents.
Those incentives could be augmented by making the power company pay a penalty to customers who lose power.
G. Marshall Naul, Chesterstown
Cartoon misrepresented city's response to spill
Mike Lane's Sept. 22 editorial cartoon clearly implied that the Department of Public Works (DPW) did nothing to prevent the sewage spill into the Jones Falls and did not take the spill seriously. That's absolutely wrong.
We had a hurricane. Like 490,000 Baltimore Gas and Electric Co. customers, we faced an electrical outage. Power went out to our sewage pumping station's primary line and backup line.
Heroic efforts by our workers kept damage to the facility at a minimum. The DPW repaired the serious damage to our pumping operations in less than two days.
We take all sewage spills seriously, even this one, which both the state and federal governments called minimal.
BGE was extremely helpful throughout this ordeal.
Kurt L. Kocher, Baltimore
The writer is chief of information services of the Baltimore City Department of Public Works.
Critics who don't 'get it': Considine on country . . .
J. D. Considine just doesn't get it. In his review of the 1999 Country Music Association Awards show, he alternately cursed and praised elements of the show and repeatedly insinuated that they created a sense of discord ("Show-biz creeps into CMA country," Sept. 23).
Mr. Considine focused his review on the clash he sensed between the traditional and the new.
But there was no "clash," just an adept blending of country music's history with its present.
It's a shame he didn't focus instead on the show's many great performances. The most notable was that of Martina McBride, whose long awaited and well-deserved female vocalist award was the highlight of the night. Mr. Considine barely mentioned it.
From his past reviews, it has become apparent to me Mr. Considine is not fan of country music. It appears that he doesn't even respect the genre.
I have learned to take his reviews on anything country with a grain of salt, but I feel a music critic should at least respect all genres -- and present a fair review, even if he is not a fan.
Helen Rhoades, Odenton
. . . and Ann Hornaday on Kevin Costner's film
Her review of Kevin Costner's film "For Love of the Game" shows that once again, Ann Hornaday, by her own admission, doesn't "get it." ("A swing and a miss," Sept. 17).
My husband and I attended a sneak preview of the film and were among a theater full of people who thoroughly enjoyed the movie.
An audience doesn't usually applaud a "stinker," and this one applauded at least four times.
Perhaps we aren't trendy enough to be disdainful of genuine entertainment.
It's only a movie -- and not life or death. Ms. Hornaday needs to know that there are many just plain folks who enjoy a good story.
I'd actually like to thank Ms. Hornaday, because generally if her review is negative, I know it's sure to be a good movie.
Keep up the good work.
Consuelo R. Howe, Severn
To our readers
The Sun welcomes letters from readers. They should be no longer than 200 words and should include the name and address of the writer, along with day and evening telephone numbers.
Send letters to Letters to the Editor, The Sun, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore 21278-0001. Our fax number for letters is 410-332-6977. The e-mail address is email@example.com.
All letters are subject to editing.
Pub Date: 9/29/99