Sarah Becker's use of the neologism "Herstory" as the title of her April 2011 column is unfortunate and misguided, promising much more than it delivers, for even a casual reading readily reveals that Ms. Becker's piece is little more than a hodgepodge of events that might or might not bear on the topic; perpetuating the erroneous assumption that the word "history" is inherently sexist, when clearly it comes from the Latin, historia, meaning "inquiry, knowledge acquired by investigation"; propounding the intellectually dubious view best articulated by critic Christina Hoff Sommers as the infusion of education with ideology at the sacrifice of knowledge; and conflating the women's movement struggle for equality with the historical reality indicates that the two are not the same.
Re: "Things Gov. Martin O'Malley could learn from Willie Don" April 20, 2011.
Gregory Kane lauds the late William Donald Schaefer for his refusal to engage in racial pandering, for not succumbing to political correctness, and for not being Gov. Martin O'Malley. Granted, Schaefer was an exemplary public servant having served as mayor, governor, and state comptroller; however, his legacy will be tainted by his unfortunate propensity, particularly in his later years, for uttering racist and sexist remarks. Alas, there were lessons that Willie Don failed to learn.
Letter to the editor (Washington Examiner):
Re: “Here we go again, following a president to war”, March 31, 2011.
Reading Gregory Kane’s criticism of President Obama’s humanitarian intervention of Libya, one infers that (1) Kane’s observations are only confined to those that happened during his lifetime – “I was way too young to remember any of President Truman’s reasons for involvement in the Korean War”; (2) that he is foreclosed from gaining information through reading, the route most intelligent people use in acquiring knowledge about events that happened before they were born; and (3) that since he gives George W. Bush a pass on Iraq, Democratic presidents – Truman, Johnson, and Obama - are the primary practitioners of US interventionism.
For Mr. Kane’s edification, the following is a list of United States interventions into the internal affairs of other nations since 1964 when Mr. Kane reached the age of 12 and presumably became conscious of world affairs: Indonesia 1965, the CIA backed a military coup, overthrowing President Sukarno and ushering in General Suharto; Congo 1965, the CIA backed a military coup, overthrowing President Joseph Kasavubu and bringing Joseph Mobutu to power; Dominican Republic 1965, 23,000 US troops landed in the Caribbean nation; Laos 1965, a bombing campaign was initiated that lasts eight years; Ghana 1966, CIA backed a military coup, overthrowing President Kwame Nkrumah; Guatemala 1966, the US began an extensive counterinsurgency operation; Cambodia 1969, CIA supported military coup overthrowing Prince Sihanouk ; Oman 1970, US conducted counter-insurgency operation; Laos 1971, US along with South Vietnamese forces invaded country; Chile 1973, CIA backed military coup, ousting President Salvador Allende and bringing to power Gen. Augusto Pinochet; Cambodia 1975, Marines invaded, engaging in combat with government forces; Angola 1976, US conducted military and CIA operations; Libya 1981, US naval jets shot down two Libyan jets in maneuvers over Mediterranean Sea; El Salvador 1981, CIA and special forces began a counter-insurgency campaign lasting several years; Nicaragua 1981, US directed Contra operations against regime; Lebanon 1982, Marines and naval forces landed in country; Grenada 1983, US forces invaded the country; Libya 1986, US conducted strikes against Gaddafi’s official residence; Bolivia 1986, US special forces units conducted counterinsurgency; Libya 1989, US Naval aircraft shot down two Libyan jets over Gulf of Sidra; Philippines 1989, CIA and special forces involved in counterinsurgency; Panama 1989, US dispatched 27,000 troops to overthrow President Noriega; Liberia 1990, troops deployed, conducting major military operations, naval blockade, and airstrikes; Somalia 1992, US special forces intervened; Yugoslavia 1992, US played significant role in NATO blockade; Bosnia 1993, US conducted major military operations, involving air and ground forces; Croatia 1995, US attacked Krajina Serb airfields; Zaire 1996, US marines involved in military operations in country’s eastern region; Iraq 2003, US led forces invade country, ousting Saddam Hussein from power; Haiti 2004, US marines landed and in concert with CIA backed forces overthrow President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
Of particular interest is Mr. Kane’s take on what can be described as President Ronald Reagan’s 1986 humanitarian intervention in Grenada (“It is worth remembering who liberated people of Grenada”, Feb. 7, 2011). According to Mr. Kane, invading American military personnel were greeted with outpourings of hospitality and affection – “Others simply shouted ‘we love you’ to American troops as they passed by.” Mr. Kane concluded his glowing praise of the Gipper with, “Reagan delivered an island of black people from the clutches of Marxists thugs. You can rest assured he is remembered in Grenada.” One wonders how can the same rationale employed by Reagan in 1986 and Obama in 2011, for essentially similar actions, be viewed so differently. Apparently, in the world of punditry, especially the sort practiced by Mr. Kane, principle, consistency and intellectual integrity don’t matter.
To the Editor (Delaware County Daily Times):
Judge Michael Coll’s sentencing of Terri Phifer Vaugh, former Yeadon finance director, to prison from 12 to 24 months after being found guilty of charges of theft by failure to make required disposition of funds and unlawful use of a computer was wrong, inappropriate and an abuse of discretion (“Ex-Yeadon official given prison sentence”, March 23rd). According to the article, Judge Coll justified the punishment because he found Ms. Vaughn insufficiently remorseful for misappropriation of $67,498 and because her misdeeds had cast a pall over the work environment for other borough workers.
From the beginning of this sordid affair, Ms. Vaughn has steadfastly and consistently denied all wrongdoing. That she was tried in a court of law, by a jury of her peers, and ultimately found guilty of some of the original charges does not mean that she should suddenly reverse course, admitting her guilt for a crime she didn’t commit and throwing herself on the mercy of Judge Coll, a judge not predisposed to staying within the parameters of the law. The judge, in pronouncing sentence, said: “What happened to this money? She took the cash, trashed the checks and used the money for her purposes.” Under even the most charitable interpretation, Judge Coll’s remarks manifestly exceed the specific charges for which Ms. Vaughn was found guilty, namely “failure to make required disposition of funds and lawful use of a computer.”
Under the circumstances, Ms. Vaughn comported herself about as well as anybody could reasonably expect. She acknowledged the pain of being charged, tried and found guilty of criminal acts; she once again declared her innocence; and she respectfully accepted the verdict of the jury, however flawed she believed it to be. Innocent defendants, as a rule, have nothing to be remorseful about.
But Judge Coll’s sentence is also objectionable because it not only is inconsistent with the specific acts, it also fails to fit the defendant. As demonstrated by pre-sentencing reports, Ms. Vaughn has been a law abiding citizen with no previous criminal record and no history of violent behavior. Being a first time offender who represents no threat to the community, the sentence of 12 to 24 months seems especially onerous. As State Rep. Ronald G. Waters, chairman, Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus, noted in these pages on March 21st: “Why should we spend taxpayer dollars to incarcerate more nonviolent offenders when there are more and effective alternatives to help them? Each inmate costs the state an average of $33,000. Is this money well spent?”
As for the negative impact on other borough employees, this charge is not without irony given that the Yeadon city council essentially condoned and covered up former council member Terry McGirth’s sexual harassment of Ms. Vaughn and therefore the council fostered a hostile work environment. Mr. McGirth, a confessed embezzler of more than $100,000 from a kidney dialysis company and whose somewhat unconventional rehabilitation was a stint on Yeadon city council, ultimately pled guilt to the sexual harassment and resigned his seat. It is not difficult to see a connection between the zeal under which Ms. Vaughn has been prosecuted and the possible action for damages stemming from Mr. McGirth’s behavior and the Yeadon city council’s complicity therewith.
