- The Washington Times - Saturday, September 21, 2002

How to save a wasted dollar

Of course the U.S. Mint wasted money in trying to push the acceptance of the dollar coin ("A $67.1 million mistake," Editorial, Wednesday). That's what governments do: waste money. That doesn't mean the goal of the program wasn't worth pursuing, however. I like the new coins, and frankly, I'm tired of having a wallet full of what feels like wilted lettuce. I have been getting rolls of the coins from my bank and spending them. The people to whom I offer them are, for the most part, delighted. Granted, this is not a scientific survey, but it seems to me to indicate that the problem with getting the coins in circulation is a bottleneck of some kind. At street level, there doesn't seem to be any distaste for them. Maybe an advertising campaign wasn't a bad idea.
I'm usually not a fan of command-and-control-style government, but printing and minting the nation's money is a legitimate governmental function. If there are leftist social-engineering implications to replacing the dollar bill with a coin, I must confess I don't see them. The new coin is not easily confused with a quarter, which was the objection to the previous design. Maybe the government should simply stop printing $1 bills and let the coin take over by attrition.

C.S.P. Schofield
Frenchtown, N.J.

Administrations contribute to PC craziness

Columnist John Leo is correct: Campuses are becoming "ideological monopolies," but administrations as well as faculty are often to blame ("The absent professors," Commentary, Thursday).
George Washington University hired the Pinkertons to receive anonymous complaints about just about anything, including reportedly sexist, racist and even homophobic comments; violations of other "feel good" policies; and even smoking on the sidewalk and then proposed to eliminate hearings for those accused.
Is it any wonder that students and faculty are reluctant to say anything that could be considered sexist, etc.?

Professor of public interest law
George Washington University Law School

Let airlines drop out of the sky

So the airlines want assurances from the porkers in Congress that they will be given cut-rate deals on insurance and taxes ("Airlines ask U.S. to ease war costs," Page 1, Thursday). Well, wouldn't we all.
For many years, the airlines have exhibited irresponsible fiscal behavior, living on debt-ridden balance sheets and visions of glory and "world crassness" and so on. They just had to fly everywhere, outside of our borders. At the same time, they cut back on services to American cities, including Sarasota, Fla., where I Iive an affluent community chock-full of rich retirees who love to travel, internationally and first-class more often than not.
What did the airlines do in Sarasota? They left, by and large, except for Delta, which gouges us with its monopolistic fares and lousy service to Atlanta, one of the larger hub-circles from hell.
How can we get onboard one of those highly touted jumbos from Chicago to Peking if we can't get to Chicago? Ask United it seems to think we manage to do that somehow. Rather, I think United doesn't give a darn, and now it's paying the price for its hubris.
If the airlines are so strapped, let them continue to deflate. If the U.S. government is expected to rescue all irresponsibly run corporations in a downsizing period, we are doomed to further overtaxation, which will lead to even fewer people being able to board those jumbo jets for the far-off reaches of the globe, assuming they could find even a bus to Chicago.

Sarasota, Fla.

Critiquing Cardinal McCarrick

Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick made several questionable statements in his interview with The Washington Times ("McCarrick sees crisis of faith, not morals," Page 1, Wednesday).
First, he called the clerical sexual abuse scandals "the crisis, which hopefully we have just finished passing through . This statement indicates he thinks it is over. One could hardly claim this crisis is over. It may be that the intense publicity is over, but the bishops have not even begun to address the problems of dissent on church sexual morals and the problem of homosexuality in seminaries issues that have abetted the sexual abuses of the past several decades and that the cardinal himself admitted in the interview.
Furthermore, Cardinal McCarrick said, "The U.S. has abandoned its vigorous anti-life positions" in foreign policy and at home is "more supportive of the right to life and family values." While he is correct about our foreign policy under President Bush, vigorous anti-life positions abound in the United States. Just consider such anti-life Democrats as Sens. Tom Daschle, Patrick J. Leahy and Edward M. Kennedy, all of whom identify themselves as Catholics.
Some glaring examples of growing anti-life sentiment in our society:
Pro-life judges are having a difficult time getting jobs because Democrats are discriminating against them.
Polls show that about 50 percent of Catholics approve of abortion.
Some bishops continually court pro-abortion politicians.
State legislators are trying to pass laws that would force the Catholic Church to pay for health insurance that covers contraception for its employees.
Embryos are being used for research, and cloning is progressing.
Finally, there is Cardinal McCarrick's characterization of the American bishops' National Review Board, which will monitor what the bishops are doing to eliminate sexual abuse in the clergy and episcopate. "It's a fine board," he claimed. Yet, one of the board members is former Clinton chief of staff Leon Panetta, who as a congressman was a reliable pro-abortion voter (97 percent of the time, to be exact). How can the board have a member who scores so low on Catholic sexual morality evaluate bishops on matters of Catholic sexual morality? Mr. Panetta's presence on the board is an insult to all who hold dear the sanctity of human life.


Lest the Germans forget

I am outraged that a German Cabinet minister - Justice Minister Herta Daeubler-Gmelin - has compared President Bush to Adolf Hitler ("German leader links Bush's 'style' to Hitler's," Page 1, Friday).
As a combat pilot who spent nearly four years with NATO forces in an effort to prevent further encroachment upon Germany by Soviet forces during the Cold War, I find this a bitter pill to swallow. How soon such Germans as Mrs. Daeubler-Gmelin forget.
May I remind her and her countrymen that the United States has a long record of coming to the defense of nations that are threatened by the likes of Hitler, Stalin and now Saddam Hussein? The United States has demonstrated many times that we do not seek annexation of foreign property (as in the case of Hitler) and do not seek war for economic benefit.
May I remind the minister that hundreds of thousands of our military have given their lives and shed blood to preserve freedom in Europe and other parts of the world?
May I also remind the minister that we are not in the habit of using a "war issue" to divert attention away from "domestic problems"?
We still have the strongest and most productive economy in the world, and our Department of Justice is handling corporate scandals with vigorous prosecution and indictments. Furthermore, as far as the economy is concerned, it troubles me that Iraq's program for producing weapons of mass destruction is supported by some German industries that are exporting equipment for the development of Saddam's chemical, biological and nuclear capabilities. Perhaps Germany's justice department should concern itself with investigating this activity. If and when any weapons inspection discovers more German equipment in Iraq, it will be another major embarrassment to Germany.
I would suggest to the minister that she might direct some attention to the growing anti-Semitism in Germany, as demonstrated by numerous instances of violence directed against German-Jewish citizens and by the desecration of Jewish grave sites and places of worship. Now that does bring back reminders of Hitler's regime.

U.S. Air Force (retired)

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide