RetractionEditor: In a letter to the editor printed Jan...


November 17, 1991


Editor: In a letter to the editor printed Jan. 30, 1990, I made numerous statements regarding United Optical, Inc., and their contract with the City of Baltimore to provide vision care services city employees and their families.

After further review of the matter, I admit that I made false allegations regarding United Optical, Inc., and I now fully retract those statements.

Jerold M. Wassel, O.D.

Owings Mills.


Editor: It saddened me to read Alice Steinbach's column (Oct. 27) with regard to the end of the office romance.

The situations she so well depicted were excellent illustrations of how people are overreacting to the issue of sexual harassment out of their lack of understanding of just what it is.

The operative word in the phrase ''sexual harassment'' is '' harassment,'' as the issue is a matter of intent, rather than content. In this regard, sexual harassment, as with rape, has little to do with sex and everything to do with power. The intent of such harassment is to humiliate, intimidate and control the person being harassed. Such harassment is perpetrated by people who feel themselves powerless and thus need to exert authority over others by such methods of intimidation.

In other words, those who engage in sexual harassment are bullies, not lovers. It saddens me to think that this misunderstanding of the nature of sexual harassment will only serve to inhibit those people who are genuinely interested in being in a loving, romantic relationship with another person on an equal footing. It saddens me because the growing concern over issues regarding sexual harassment will have little effect on the bullies, as such awareness will serve only to cause them to change the content of their intimidation, but not the intent.

Sandra P. Haines.

Owings Mills.

Gone to Seed

Editor: After trying to make some sense out of Ray Jenkins flip-flopping back and forth between three different issues (Oct. 27), I finally came to this conclusion: Ray Jenkins is in favor of abortions for drunken slave owners.

On every issue he has taken a stance against right and decency. He is for the slaughter of innocent babies by permitting anyone who so desires to kill their own offspring. The right to choose he calls it.

He approves of and gives his hearty endorsement to the carnage on our highways and throughout our society caused by the legal availability of alcoholic beverages, and lastly, because he believes every person should have the right to choose, as he has already stated, then no slave owner should be forced to give up his slaves but each slave owner keep or free his slaves according to the dictates of his conscience and not let religious fanatics like John Brown force their beliefs down the slaveholders throats.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Mr. Jenkins is a prime example of ''ignorance gone to seed.''

James R. Cook.


Hot Stuff


Editor: Where there's Schmoke, there's no firemen!

Edward A. Greenstein


Wrong Programs

Editor: Joseph E. Mueller (letter, Nov. 2) is right about people acting responsibly and making big ticket social programs unnecessary. (And the key to acting responsibly is education; and the key to education is parent education.)

However, he is wrong about 25 years of Great Society bankrupting the nation. There have been Republican administrations in most of those 25 years paring away at social programs while rewarding the rich, business and the military-industrialists.

The Congress was basically Democratic (in name at least) but seldom overrode an administration veto. So if the Republicans want the glory for how they perceive the current economic situation, then they must also face the grief of how others see it.

Our recompense for the Republican voodoo economics of supply-side, trickle-down, is industries, businesses and individuals who, admitting of no social responsibility, have used tax and other government breaks to aggrandize their own positions through buy-outs, mergers, etc. instead of improving products and plowing money into new technology and development, thereby creating new jobs.

And then they cry because they are not competitive, clamor for trade barriers and bash other producing nations.

It is not the tax-and-spend, liberal, bleeding-heart Democrats who have bled our country to its current status; it is supply-side, spend-and-spend (no new taxes), trickle-down, reward-the-rich, -business and -military Republicans.

Liberals are never superfluous, if for no other reason than to keep conservatives from distorting representative democracy into moneyed aristocracy.

Russ Seese.


Restructure the Tax Code

Editor: Barry Rascovar seemed to hit the nail on the head in his column (Oct. 20) on the ''Social Contract.'' Rascovar was exploring the impact of Maryland's budget crisis on the role of government and the level of social services. ''Marylanders'' and ''citizens'' are being asked to evaluate the relationship of taxes to services, he indicated.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.