Howard Stern, more court
jester than kingmaker
From John Salsgiver:
While the 2004 presidential race may be a close one — although
in my opinion, President Bush is going to win by a comfortable margin
— I do appreciate Howard Stern’s contribution in your
June 15 issue, for its comedic value (“Howard Stern says he
can deliver swing voters to Kerry”).
A man is known by the company he keeps, and those whom Stern appeals
to are the vocal minority of America. Stern is quite comfortable and
safe, basking in the glow and acceptance of his minion of malcontents
whom he indeed likely influences, to the detriment of our Republic.
After all, what can one point to as Stern’s base audience? His
ratings and pandering to the “anything goes” crowd could
bring about votes for Kerry, but to expect Stern to deliver a substantial
bloc of voters is nothing more than Stern’s fantasy.
Stern’s admission that he backed Republicans like New York Gov.
George Pataki and former New Jersey Gov. Christine Whitman is irrelevant
since they are, in my opinion, Republicans in name only. Neither believes
in the values of conservatives, who are the base of the Republican
Party.
In a nutshell, Stern is an aberration and insignificant as a player
in the political scene. In short, he is not the kingmaker he fancies
himself to be, but rather the court jester.
Ford City, Pa.
Reagan $10 bill
From Robert Eingurt:
The recent debate over whether President Reagan should replace Alexander
Hamilton on the $10 bill seems centered on forcing legislators and
the Treasury to choose sides.
This would be unfortunate considering the important roles Hamilton
and Reagan both played in shaping this nation. Hamilton, it can be
argued, was just as important as any other Founding Father, but because
he was never president, there are far fewer images and namesake monuments
that pay homage to his legacy.
Reagan, meanwhile, will forever be preserved in our consciousness
through film, video, and photography.
Perhaps the answer is to honor both men — and, at the same time,
use our paper currency to honor other deserving Americans without
removing the Lincolns, Hamiltons, Grants, and Franklins from our wallets.
Rather than alter the face of the bills, turn them over and use the
backs of our most popular bills — excepting the iconic $1 bill
— to reflect moments, events, and people who have greatly influenced
the United States over the past 228 years.
On the Lincoln $5 bill, change the current image of the Lincoln Memorial
to that of the memorial hosting Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I
have a dream” speech. Keep Mr. Hamilton on the face of the $10
bill and let the reverse side show President Reagan imploring the
Soviet Union to tear down the Berlin Wall — connecting the birth
of American capitalism and its triumph over communism.
Use the flip sides of Gens. Jackson or Grant to offer a tribute to
veterans, and perhaps make use of Benjamin Franklin’s role as
part-time scientist to honor American ingenuity (Edison, the Wright
Brothers, Apollo 11, etc.) Rather than erase the faces of the past,
increase them and let us celebrate and honor as many great Americans
as possible.
Pomona, N.Y.
Wanda Baucus: No Stepford wife
From Debra Morse Kahn:
I’m reading the June 3 issue of The Hill, and I’m unhappy
with the article about Wanda Baucus’s court appearance (“Loud
snoring in the background as Wanda Baucus makes a deal”).
Your reporter may be writing for the inside-the-Beltway group, but
you don’t describe a woman, I don’t care who she is, as
“an earthy woman with no makeup and thick, wavy, shoulder-length
blond hair.”
The problem is that outside the Beltway, an awful lot of American
women actually do look like that. We’re just not doing the “Stepford
Wives” professional or political thing. I felt resentful, and
I felt irritated. I know your articles are written for the inside-the-Beltway
crowd, but still, an editor should have said, “Fix this and
come back and show me something better.”
Minneapolis, Minn. |
