Text Size:
A|
A|
A
Email
PrintAyers maintains the same, tired Leftist agenda
"The Real Bill Ayers," an Oct. 23 Perspectives piece by Noreen Garman and Anna Klaman, was a shallow attempt to burnish the image of a man who still enjoys being photographed standing on the American flag.
"A quiet life of dedication"? "Peacemaking"? Clearly he is still quite the provocateur. Redemption comes with repentance, not America's softening collective memory. Indeed the '60s were "the best and worst of times"; we need not relive or romanticize that era. Unfortunately these aging flower children, suffering from selective amnesia, are delirious at the chance to cram their tired agenda down our unsuspecting throats.
Following Mr. Ayers' substantial paper trail, no word-twisting is needed to conclude his ideas of "compassion" and "justice" are conveniently selective. After 40-plus years of the Left's misguided social engineering, they insist we judge them on their noble intentions, not their miserable results. We have spent trillions on the "War on Poverty," and to hear the Left's version, nothing has improved. Now these gray-haired Robin Hoods are poised to use the last and most coveted arrow in their quiver -- the strong arm of Uncle Karl Marx.
Maybe these two are just naive; maybe they just share the misty-eyed nostalgia of the hippies and yippies of the Sad Old Sixties. More likely they know the Saul Alinsky playbook as well as do Ayers and Obama, seeking to soothe the fears of America's "bitter clingers" before going for the jugular. We better be awake and ready for one hell of a fight, whatever happens Nov. 4.
BILL STANEK
Cranberry
Unreal perspective
To education professor Noreen Garman and doctoral student Anna Klaman: Your essay "The Real Bill Ayers" (Oct. 23) deserves a failing grade. Here are my margin notes:
• You call Mr. Ayers an "education reformer" but fail to mention his so-called liberation/social justice curriculum.
• You take gratuitous slams at President Bush for "reports of his drug use, alcoholic binges and other 1960s behavior" and at Sen. John McCain for gambling and adultery. Clearly, these charges are non sequiturs irrelevant to your topic.
• You make invalid comparisons of Messrs. Bush's and McCain's personally harmful actions to the bombing of the Pentagon and other sites by the Ayers co-founded Weather Underground.
• You label American soldiers "aggressors" for their valiant efforts to halt the spread of communism in Vietnam and the surrounding region.
• You justify Mr. Ayers' turn to violence by stating that he "succumbed to despair" when nonviolent methods weren't working fast enough. This statement is nonsense.
• Finally, you claim Mr. Ayers has been redeemed. When? In this decade, he stated that "we didn't do enough," he posed for a magazine cover trampling on the American flag and, most recently, he admitted that he was still an anarchist and a Marxist.
For your benefit as educators, I would be glad to enroll you both in a remedial logic course, starting immediately.
ARTHUR J. MARINO JR.
Churchill
Strange priorities
I would like to comment on two articles in the Oct. 23 PG. First, the commentary by Noreen Garman and Anna Klaman on how Bill Ayers has led an exemplary life since his '60s terrorist activities is interesting. I don't doubt that he has made some positive contributions to society. Earlier last week I listened to a recording from a Chicago radio station from the early 2000s where Mr. Ayers admits to being a Marxist and an anarchist. His participation in education reform should be a concern.
In another article, an issue was raised about Sarah Palin's wardrobe ("Main St. Meets Saks Fifth Ave."). Why is the money spent on Ms. Palin's wardrobe a front-page story? How many millions do you think the Obama campaign will spend on its planned election night bash in Chicago's Grant Park? Mr. Obama also has funneled $800,000 of campaign funds to an ACORN subsidiary. That would be more worthy of a front-page news story but has been ignored by the Obama-loving media.
R.A. COHEN
Elizabeth Township
Murtha's blather
U.S. Rep. John Murtha doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. It was wrong of him to say that Western Pennsylvania is a racist area just because our votes are for John McCain. If Mr. Obama doesn't win the majority vote in Western Pennsylvania, it doesn't imply that we are racists ... It just means that we are smart.
R.A. MONICO
O'Hara
Read the school plan
The Pittsburgh Public School District has reached a positive tipping point, thanks to momentum generated by exciting new initiatives -- but you'd never know it from reading its final draft strategic plan. At A+ Schools, our review of the plan identified some very exciting ideas. Unfortunately, many were difficult to find and the plan includes gaps that are hard to ignore.
Buried in the strategic plan are proposals to improve the parent hot line and Web site, provide a new planning approach, develop career and technical education and extend the way the district uses data to inform teaching and learning. The plan calls for expanding culturally relevant courses for students and continuing improved professional development for principals and teachers.
But in addition to these hidden treasures, we found important gaps, including specific measurable outcomes (besides those required to meet adequate yearly progress, or AYP) that the district hopes to achieve and projected dates for achieving those outcomes. Also absent are ways the school board plans to encourage public confidence and involvement.
While we commend the district on its efforts to engage the public in its strategic planning process, the plan itself is neither concise nor does it provide a coherent description of the current reform agenda outlined in "Excellence for All." We urge Pittsburghers to read the plan and offer their own comments. It's available on the Pittsburgh Public Schools' Web site at www.pps.k12.pa.us/strategicplan. But time is running out -- the required 30-day public comment period ends tomorrow.
CAREY HARRIS
Executive Director
A+ Schools
Downtown
Picking Sides: Barack Obama
America is ready to go back to work. The most pressing issue is jobs, and it's about time we rebuilt our infrastructure. With jobs across America, businesses would thrive from the actual rebuilding costs and from the economic boost it would give consumers. No one can support a household on one-at-a-time government "stimulus" checks.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden have the necessary know-how to get legislation passed in Washington. Obama and Biden both have lived in rural areas and big cities and understand that different industries have different needs. If elected, John McCain would be a lame-duck president from day one.
NANCY FLAHERTY BECK
Mt. Lebanon
Picking Sides: John McCain
I'm a nonpartisan patriot of the USA, and for the first time I switched my status to Republican to vote in the primaries. Although John McCain wasn't my first choice, he's an honorable man with a distinguished resume of service for our country.
He's not the most physically charismatic or most eloquent speaker, but it's clear for those like me who don't base their judgments on superficial traits and mainstream media sound bites that he has the quality of character and background of experience to make him best qualified for the position of the president of the United States of America.
JONATHON D. GROSSMAN
Cranberry
Black-and-Gold political fumble?
Here is some simple advice to the owners of the Black and Gold and for any sports franchise for that matter. Keep your political thoughts and choices for your own house. Please don't bring personal political picks into the arena or stadium.Watching Dan Rooney hand out a team jersey with a political leader's name on it in front of thousands of Obama supporters ("Big Arena Crowd Hear's Obama's 'Closing Argument,' " Oct. 28) or seeing Gov. Sarah Palin dropping a hockey puck at an NHL game is just wrong. You don't blend personal politics with sport, OK? The beauty of spectator sport is that it's about competition on the field and not about the all the other stuff we are slammed with in everyday life.
Sport is played on sacred ground and team owners infusing their personal belief is a serious threat to the very fabric that makes us fans happy and you owners wealthy, so can it!
LOCKE ROBERTS
Perry Hilltop
I want something different, not perfect
When I voted in the April primary, I had a hard time making a choice, but as a woman of working class background, certain age and long memory, I voted for Hillary Clinton. She lost.On Nov. 4, I will vote with no ambivalence at all. My vote will have little to do with tax reduction or abortion. It will have everything to do with the last eight years. Both Barack Obama and John McCain speak of change. Beyond change, I want different:
Different from a pre-emptive war that has destroyed lives, our credibility and our economy.
Different from what has regulated, or not regulated, our financial systems.
Different from "incentives" that decrease in buying power even as they come through the mail.
Different from the attempted redirection of such social programs as social security.
Different from an expensive health-care system that excludes many and benefits insurance companies more than doctors or their patients.
Different from the emasculation of the administrative agencies intended to protect us: the FCC, the EPA, the FDA, the SEC, to name a few.
Different from a politicized Justice Department.
Different from an underfunded State Department and Veterans Administration.
Different from a party and philosophy, which, convinced that government is the problem, does everything in its power to make sure that government does not work.
I will vote without ambivalence. I will vote aware that some promises will not be kept. That's the nature of campaigns and government, the difference between rhetoric and reality. I will vote believing that anyone who truly expects a tax break is dreaming or happy with their descendants deep in debt.
I will go to the polls. We all should. I will vote for the candidate who, I believe, will give me different. Not perfect, but different.
JOAN GAUL
Shadyside
Scare or be scared
How apt that Election Day follows close upon the heels of Halloween Night. "The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear," said H.P. Lovecraft, the horror writer who Stephen King said opened the way for him. Undecided voters should contemplate Lovecraft's observation long and hard.John McCain, strong, clear of thought, and battle-tested, instills fear in the hearts of our enemies. It strikes me as altogether desirable that the Islamist madman in Iran, Ahmadinejad, and the ruthless tyrant in Russia, Putin, should fear the American president. John McCain in the White House will deter rogue nations from sponsoring terrorism or from embarking on international adventures.
By contrast, Barack Obama, weak, naive and inexperienced, has the support of all the regimes that wish America ill. They will test him early and often, and based upon all that we know of Obama -- the man who still won't fully endorse the McCain-backed surge in Iraq, the man who was a day late and a dollar short in reacting to the Russian incursion into Georgia -- he will fail to meet the test.
Our enemies fear Obama not at all. But in the hearts of all who still believe in America's greatness and see it as a bulwark of freedom in a dangerous world, Obama inspires what Lovecraft described as "a certain atmosphere of breathless and unexplainable dread of outer, unknown forces." Such dread is not misplaced.
BOB G. WYETH
Munhall
Dangerously out of touch
Since the final presidential debate, it would seem that there are a few points that should be made clear.First, no one is in favor of abortion. As President Clinton said, "Abortion should be legal, safe and rare." Our focus should be in favor of reducing unwanted pregnancies and teaching all of our citizens that sex can have unfortunate consequences.
Next, when Sen. John McCain stated his opposition to abortion, even at times when the health or life of the mother was endangered, he was clearly stepping off into the abyss.
I can only think of this issue in very simple terms. I happen to have an 8-year-old granddaughter. Someday, she will become sexually active. As much as I pray that it never happens, perhaps she will find herself in a situation where preserving her life requires that she terminate a pregnancy. Although the situation is theoretical, for some people the result would be only too real.
Based on the position that Sen. McCain took in the last debate, I must believe that in the choice between an abortion and death, John McCain would prefer that my granddaughter be dead. So much for being pro-life. This sort of hateful placating of his party's right wing sears one final point into my mind: John McCain is a very dangerous and desperately out-of-touch man who should never be allowed anywhere near the presidency.
ALBERT SCHUBERT
Penn Hills
This slaughter deserves immediate attention
Imagine walking down a street and seeing a child sitting on the curb, crying from hunger. At the same time, you see another child is stepping off the curb into the path of an oncoming bus. We instantly recognize that we are morally obligated to help both children, but we must turn our attention to the child in immediate danger first or it will be too late.So it is with abortion, poverty, health care and ending the war. All are serious issues that deserve our full attention. But every day in this country, it becomes too late to help more than 3,000 Americans who are murdered in their mother's wombs.
A vote for Barack Obama is a vote not only to continue the slaughter of these innocents, but to remove even the most modest, common-sense restrictions from the heinous practice of abortion. In measuring our vote, we must give the most weight to the grave and immediate danger inherent in this issue and vote for John McCain.
JENNIFER McDEVITT
Crafton
Catholics can't rationalize a vote for Obama
Like many Catholics, I am surprised when people, including some nuns, rationalize that Barack Obama is really pro-life; Sen. Bob Casey himself said Democrats are not ready to nominate even a pro-life vice president.Mr. Obama's "protect the health of the mother" is simply double speak for abortion, any time, no restrictions allowed -- the Democratic platform.
Bishop David Zubik's cautious letter nonetheless stated that "the intentional destruction of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia, is not just one issue among many" but pre-eminent. Father Campion Gavaler ("Faithful Citizenship," Oct. 16 letters), in contrast to the nuns' recent letters about the election, merely said good Catholics will be on both sides. He did not say those who work actively to protect abortion on demand -- the killing of children -- (like Pelosi, Kennedy and Kerry) considered the church's teaching in their effort.
The major fallacies used to conclude that Mr. Obama is pro-life: mainly "poor" women seek abortions, so eliminating poverty will cut down on abortions. Second, raising the economic level will lower the number of abortions. Both are false. Poor girls, for whatever reason, are more likely to keep the baby. Further, it is debatable which party's programs will most effectively provide the greatest economic fruit for the most people. There is no debate about aborted infants -- or assisted suicides.
It is a tribute to the common Catholics' understanding of faith, the sensus fidelium, that most simply understand that allowing a living aborted baby to die or sucking out the brain of a not-completely-born child is not moral. Nor are Catholics alone among religious and moral people in realizing this.
WALT WEAVER
Canonsburg
Neither candidate is perfect on 'non-negotiables'
John Rieg's Oct. 5 letter ("Intrinsic Evil") throws dust in the eyes of his fellow Catholics and incorrectly represents church teaching on the need for a well-informed conscience when voting in this election. He correctly points out that the church neither supports nor opposes any candidate. According to his moral reasoning, the bishops would be obliged to forbid Catholics to vote for certain candidates; in fact, we could vote for neither John McCain nor Barack Obama.McCain supports abortion in the case of rape, incest and the endangered life of the mother. Obama opposes the overturn of Roe v. Wade and the criminalization of abortion; both support stem cell research using aborted fetuses. Our bishops are much wiser than Mr. Rieg and recognize that in an imperfect world, no political candidate will perfectly reflect all the "non-negotiables" of the Catholic position. Mr. Rieg ignores the fundamental requirement for a Catholic to vote for a candidate who does not support one or all of the non-negotiables: that he or she must never vote with the primary intention of supporting that policy.
Many good Catholics who are opposed to abortion will vote for Obama or perhaps McCain not because of their position on abortion but despite it. Catholics for Obama are convinced that he is far more pro-life on most issues and that his policies will more effectively reduce abortions. Catholics should read the U.S. Catholic Bishops' document on Faithful Citizenship and then do as the bishops recommend. Vote your conscience and do not listen to amateur theologians.
KATHLEEN RUPPEL
Bethel Park
I can't vote for either of them
The national soul is, or should be, against torture, against needless war, in favor of child welfare, the health of the aged and infirm, helping the little man ... all of that and more. And this year, it seems clear that Barack Obama is on the side of the angels on all those things.John McCain is no slouch in those departments, but this is not his year. I just don't see a coherent vision for 2009 coming from him.
But, as much as I dislike torture, indefinite detention, the death penalty and the mounting casualties of wars in two different countries, the numbers pale in comparison to over 1 million terminations of human life annually in our beloved country. As of the end of 2007 the statistics show that legal abortions have resulted in almost 50 million potential fellow citizens never to see the light of day.
The Democratic Party mostly everywhere, but especially in their presidential candidates, has a litmus test that mandates espousing abortion.
So, even though I cannot vote for Johnny Mac, I can't vote for Barack either.
JAMES F. CATALDI
Moon
Joe the Plumber enlightened us
Thank you, Joe the Plumber, for a preview of the "change" promised by Sen. Barack Obama.Poor Joe had the audacity to hope that his right to free speech would be respected by Obama and the media. Joe asked the senator about his promised tax increases on small business. Obama said his plan to take money from the people who earn it and give it to those who don't, "spread the wealth around," is a good idea. Sounds like socialism to me, said Joe.
Obama/Biden and the faithful media went to work. Within 24 hours Joe's tax, marital and work records were investigated. Joe was even ridiculed for going by his middle name, something Barack Hussein Obama would never do.
I looked up socialism just to be sure, and Joe is right. I also looked up fascism, and the definition includes a suppression of opposition, like the attempt to intimidate and destroy Joe.
On Nov. 4, we can vote for Obama's "change" or we can vote to support our Constitution, our right to free speech and democracy.
ROY JOSEPH WHIPPLE
Freedom
Another McCain misstep
It appears that John McCain spent as much time vetting "Joe the Plumber" as he did vetting Sarah Palin.STEPHAN K. TODD
Cranberry
For the economy and energy, we need Obama
Our economy is in deep trouble. America lost 159,000 jobs in September -- the worst month in five years. The unemployment rate is 6.1 percent and rising. Home values are falling, banks are failing, food costs are climbing and gas prices are far too high.Clearly, we need a comprehensive plan to revitalize the American economy. Fundamentally changing the way we produce and consume energy will create vast economic opportunities and millions of new jobs. That's why this presidential election is so important.
Democrat Barack Obama has a plan to invest in clean, homegrown, renewable power that will create 5 million green-collar jobs, improve national security and decrease our dependence on foreign oil. He recognizes the promise of transforming America into a global leader on clean energy.
John McCain wants to follow the current administration's lead, embracing the very same policies that put us in this energy and economic crisis in the first place. His ads may showcase wind turbines, but his policies push us back into the dark ages. They are summed up by the chants of his supporters at the Republican National Convention, "Drill, baby, drill!"
Pennsylvanians need to be especially concerned if McCain is elected. Our commonwealth has created more than 3,000 green-collar jobs in solar, wind, biofuels and other advanced fuels, including many locally, and we've seen $2.8 billion in clean energy investments since 2003. But this growth could screech to a halt under a McCain administration.
No two issues right now are more important than energy and economy. And it's no wonder -- they are so closely linked. Investing in clean energy is the right choice. Barack Obama will make the right choice.
NATHANIEL DOYNO
Director
Steel City Biofuels
Point Breeze
Head Start success
Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain mentioned Head Start in their debate on Oct. 15. Sen. Obama talked about his plan to increase federal funding for Head Start and stated that every dollar invested in Head Start is returned many times over. Sen. McCain countered that studies showed that by third grade, children who had gone through Head Start were not ahead in reading compared to other children.I checked this issue with my daughter, who is director of a Head Start program in Ohio. She said that the study about lack of effectiveness into third grade is 40 years old. She told me to check out the Web site of the National Head Start Association for a list of many more recent studies that clearly show remarkable effectiveness into the whole educational career of its graduates. Perhaps your readers might want to check this site, too.
LEONORA CAYARD
Cranberry
What we now know about McCain
The McCain/Palin campaign slogan of "Who is the real Barack Obama?" is absolutely abhorrent. Poll numbers for Obama have risen steadily, no doubt a reflection of American's growing confidence that he can best deal with the economic crisis. John McCain's campaign planners are trying one last trump to reverse this trend. They are playing the fear card. It has worked for Republicans in the past.After nearly two years of campaigning and public vetting, they are pretending there is much about Barack Obama that we don't know.
And what do they think that is? The worst dirt they could trump up was that Obama served on the same board as William Ayers, who was a Weather Underground bomber four decades ago. If there was more dirt, I'm sure we'd hear about it. But because there isn't anything, John McCain and Sarah Palin think that stoking the fires at their rallies and getting angry mobs shouting "terrorist" will scare enough voters away from Obama.
We may not know everything about John McCain either, but there is one thing about his character that is becoming increasingly clear: He will stoop to unbelievably low levels just to become president.
GRACE CAP
Moon
The GOP continues its strategy of racial division
Ruth Ann Dailey's Oct. 13 column ("The Next Step in Post-Racial Politics") wasn't just wrong; it was intellectually dishonest. Not all Republicans are racist but the party uses racial division as an electoral strategy.The current Republican Party electoral strategy is founded in the racial division of Nixon's Southern Strategy. Richard Nixon's political strategist, Kevin Phillips, stated in a 1970 New York Times interview, "The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans." Ms. Dailey may deny Mr. Phillips' words, but the politics of racial division hasn't.
The Republican Party continued to use race as an issue, even though the party's young, open-minded members allegedly took control of the party. Lee Atwater and George Bush played the Willie Horton race card in 1988. Even though Atwater could have found many white murderers, he chose a black man.
The Republican Party even turned race on one of their own in 2000. A week before the South Carolina primary, Karl Rove started the rumor that John McCain had fathered a child to a black woman. His target was white voters who might normally support a war hero, when Mr. Rove's candidate was anything but a war hero.
In this election, the party has tried to make race an issue again, through guilt by association. Ms. Dailey is just frustrated that Americans aren't buying her version of racial politics any longer.
The Republican Party continues the practice of racial division to this day. Ms. Dailey knows it; she just won't admit it.
JEFFREY ALTDORFER
Colonel, U.S. Army (Retired)
Triangle, Va.
America, brace yourself to be fooled again
In regard to the Post-Gazette's endorsement of Barack Obama ("It's Obama: We Need a President Who Will Break With the Past," Oct. 12). I have to direct attention to The Who's song "Won't Get Fooled Again." By all means Mr. Obama is a fresh agent of change; I'm glad that he changes his buzzword constantly; oh wait, he doesn't. Change has been his slogan forever, yet can we believe that this Obama revolution will take our country in a different direction?"Won't Get Fooled Again," was written by Pete Townshend in direct criticism of any politician or political body that promises a drastic change.
I realize that Barack Obama will most likely be elected; I'm prepared to meet the new boss, who I hear will be the same as the old boss. If placing faith in a "fresh" politician makes America feel secure, so be it. Kurt Vonnegut advised in "Cat's Cradle" to "Live by the [lies] that make you happy." From past presidential trends, I predict that America will smile and grin at the changes all around, live just like yesterday all the while praying not to get fooled again in 2012.
JON STEIN
Franklin Park
Let's right the ship of America
I am writing in response to the Oct. 22 letter from A. Cuda of Plum ("So What Will It Be?"), who wrote, "The liberal Democrats in the House are directly responsible for the mess we are in now. Government intervention in the free market got us here, and not George W. Bush!"Mr. Cuda, the last time I looked it was the administration of George W. Bush that was in charge when this mess happened. I, as an independent, am so tired of Republicans always trying to blame Democrats for the mess that happened on the Republicans' watch.
Mr. Cuda also wrote: "Politicians blame everyone else but themselves." He obviously meant to say Republicans blame everyone else but themselves. The Republican Party presided over the largest intervention in the banking industry history. It was not the Democrats, it was not the liberals, it was not the progressives who got us into this mess; it was the administration of George W. Bush.
Let us stop the blame- and name-calling game. Let us join together as one in righting this ship called the United States of America. Come on, A. Cuda, join us; it's time for change. Vote for Obama for president!
H. ANDRE KENDEALL
Plum
We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.
