I am furious. The editorial in The Evening Sun, "Pizzagate," (March 20) indicated that Baltimore County Executive Roger B. Hayden condoned the behavior of the Economic Development Director, Kenneth C. Nohe, in entertaining himself, fellow county conspirators and business leaders at a pair of dinners, plus a pizza-bash, to the tune of $2,100 in county funds in the last two months. Some of that money stems from my tax dollars and I object.
It is a good thing for Mr. Nohe that he doesn't have to be re-elected, but Mr. Hayden does. There will be many voters who will remember appointments like this one. Unless I am mistaken we, the people, cannot "finalize" Mr. Nohe, but as suggested in The Evening Sun and I quote, "perhaps it's time for someone else to look after the county's economic growth."
Maud Dulany Jones
Price too great to pay for revenge
On March 25, Clarence Chance and Benjamin Powell were released from a California jail after serving more than 17 years for a murder they did not commit. The Los Angeles district attorney and the judge in the case agreed that the conviction was a travesty of justice. There was no physical evidence linking the men to the murder. They were convicted on the testimony of three young girls who later admitted police pressured them into lying.
This case occurred during the Supreme Court's moratorium on capital punishment. If the death penalty had been available when these two men were sentenced they would have surely received it, since the victim was a sheriff's deputy. Those who feel it is impossible to execute the innocent should think long and hard about this case. There have been 23 confirmed cases of innocent people being executed in this century, and since death penalty cases are rarely reopened after an execution the real number is unknown.
Many are now calling for increased use of capital punishment with a shortened appeals process. This will surely result in more wrongful executions. Isn't this too much of a price to pay for revenge?
Too dumb to serve?
The media put too much emphasis on the candidates' bedroom activities and too little on important things like intelligence. If we judge candidates solely by the image they project on TV we risk evaluating them on how well they deliver speeches written by other people.
We could end up putting some nitwit in the Oval Office with the IQ of a hedgehog but a nice smile and a pleasing voice. He might even have some acting experience -- remember the "great communicator"? -- but be so dense he has to rely wholly on the advice of others, including fortune tellers.
How about it? Could you give us a run down on the IQ of the various candidates? You might also throw in some data on their education and experience.
Esther L. Nash
Fault on both sides
William Hughes wrote in The Evening Sun March 17 concerning the Irish situation. He doesn't point out that the killings are on all sides; the Protestants, the Catholics and the British.
Each group bears a terrible responsibility for the awful things that have been done, in the name of who knows what: Religion, ZTC fear, simple hatred, intolerance, ignorance or perhaps orders, in the case of the British.
The injustices that have been done are unconscionable; they are for the most part an in-kind response to violence. Apparently, it is almost impossible to isolate and remove from circulation or at least neutralize the small Catholic and Protestant vigilante groups which pose the biggest threat to a reasonable, equitable and mutually agreeable resolution to the conflict.
Simply removing the British from the north certainly would not be a total solution. The armed vigilantes would still be there, glaring (and shooting) over the fences.
Until Protestant and Catholic children, backed by their mothers, stop standing on opposite sides of the street and throwing rocks and shouting insults across at one another, a good solution may not be achievable. What is taught in the home surely will show up on the street; it requires some hard, basic changes in thinking in both the north and the south of Ireland. Resolutions passed by U.S. senators aren't going to have much impact.
James V. McCoy
Oh my, Elise Chisholm's March 17 "Mom Guilt" column struck major chords with me.
Ms. Chisholm discusses guilts associated with Caesarean sections. She's right about the lowering of self-esteem.
But I cringed to read a sentence that talks about "the great pressure society now places upon women to undergo a vaginal delivery." Wow, I guess we have reached the point where the natural design of women is at odds with a desirable surgical alternative! Frightening.
If, too, the pressure to achieve natural childbirth exists, then it is certainly not a powerful pressure, as many hospitals report the incidence of medicated births, especially epidurals, up to 98 percent.