| Send to Printer | << Back to Article |
| Letters |
|
Letters: July 26, 2006
Comptroller Schaefer’s big mouth doesn’t diminish his recordYes and no. Some behavior is indeed beyond the pale. Licentious and fraudulent activities come to mind. However, state Comptroller William Donald Schaefer’s behavior is simply in bad taste and only offends the “politically correct” crowd. Most elected officials are capable of acting irresponsibly or boorish when before the public. But that does not diminish their deeds as leaders, lawmakers or law enforcers. Schaefer falls into this category. His lifelong dedication to the people of Maryland speaks for itself. His accomplishments are too numerous to mention here. Just look up his record. As for other incumbents or candidates, I judge them on their positions on issues, on their records and on my real or perceived knowledge of their moral turpitude.
What’s all the fuss about anyway? No shame in Schaefer’s actionsThe racism charge seems to stem from William Donald Schaefer’s preference for the English language and for not delineating closely enough between North and South Koreans in reference to the firing of missiles by North Korea. The sexism charge is even more interesting. Schaefer’s faux pas seems to have been a comment to a young woman about her way of walking. In other words, he made an audible comment about what every other man in attendance was probably thinking. Oh, the shame of it all! Schaefer’s behavior is an embarrassmentI believe a government official, who is in an elected position, is responsible for both performance and public behavior. Actually, because an elected official is representing the people, public behavior is a significant component of job performance. I find William Donald Schaefer’s public displays embarrassing, demeaning and humiliating. He no longer is capable of representing me, my interests or my pride in the officials of the state of Maryland.
Edison Schools: Nothing more than a sales pitchHowever, Whittle is correct in his July 21 column (A year does not a school make), saying that if Edison fails, “public schools will and should turn elsewhere.” Whittle didn’t practice what he preached in San Francisco, where Edison’s school was the lowest-performing in its district, and the School Board moved to sever Edison’s contract. Edison fought a divisive media and legal battle that harmed both the district and the students. Twenty-seven school districts nationwide have taken Whittle’s advice and kicked Edison out. And the Rand Corp. report on Edison was striking for its lukewarm conclusions, given that Edison Schools paid for the report. With comments like “[We] cannot make strong predictions for prospective clients about whether they will achieve better long-term results with Edison,” Rand damned its paying customer with faint praise. |