Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, July 20, 1994 TAG: 9407220058
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
First, Lauter showed he's so terrified that anti-Clinton sentiment will spread even further than it has that he attempts to portray those opposing Clinton to be either stupid or harboring some ulterior motive. He prominently mentions ``scandal entrepreneurs,'' and tries to convince readers that Clinton's opponents are mindless, gullible nobodies.
Second, he says that the criticism Clinton has had to face is unusual, even unprecedented and ``unbelievable.'' Lauter has a short memory. Then-Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill said in 1981 that it was ``sinful'' for Ronald Reagan to be president. Reagan was routinely portrayed as a man who took food from children's mouths and gave it to the Pentagon, and who longed for nuclear war. Vice-presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro questioned Reagan's Christianity. Clinton has yet to face anything remotely approaching the vile, vituperative criticism leveled at Dan Quayle or Oliver North.
Yet, according to Lauter, it's Clinton's enemies who are ``breathtakingly intense and astonishingly reckless.''
In fact, there is a difference between the Reagan-bashers and the Clinton-bashers. Reagan is hated by the liberal ``opinion elite,'' made up of prominent journalists, entrenched politicians and Hollywood stars. Clinton-bashers are ordinary people, 57 percent of whom saw through him even before he became president. Their growing numbers are driving the elite to increasingly unseemly and transparent cheerleading.
EDWARD A. LYNCH
ROANOKE
Weaseling is not a valid defense
WHOEVER brainwashed our society, turning it into a bunch of sniveling wimps, should be caned at least 20 times, with an additional 20 for emphasis.
For example, whenever some drunk or other addict (crack, cocaine, heroin, marijuana, etc.) gets into trouble, the first thing he or she does is to go to some sharp lawyer. The individual tries to put the blame on alcohol or other goodies. Just ask any mom. She'll tell you that her baby is an angel, and could do no wrong. It must have been the devil causing it.
Nowadays nobody wants to take responsibility for any wrongdoing. The standard procedure is to try to weasel out of the problem. These violators should be charged as if they were in full control of their senses. They were before they took the ``happy'' trip. After a serious accident, can they bring back the dead, restore the maimed or the emotionally torn-up families with an apology?
Another common defense nowadays is called ``parental abuse'' (spanking, if you please) while the wrongdoers were children, and wanted their own way on their trip to social oblivion. Wrongdoers deserve severe punishment, so let them get their lumps. And lawyers taking these cases, who know full well of their clients' guilt, should be disbarred.
ROGER MITCHELL
BLUE RIDGE
A questionable pick for Explore board
A JULY 1 news article in this newspaper, ``Allen axes 6 from board at Explore'' by staff writer Dwayne Yancey, states that D.J. Cooper, owner of Hardy Road Mobile Home Park, and one of George Allen's biggest contributors in Western Virginia ($9,500), has been appointed to the state board that governs Virginia's Explore Park.
Cooper needs to use his financial resources to clean up the dump, consisting of demolished mobile homes and their contents, that he's created on a vacant lot facing Rt. 635 in Bedford County. This dump is an eyesore, and a potential threat to the safety of all who live in this area. In the not too distant past, Cooper was experiencing legal problems over the water supply in his park.
Is this the type of individual who should be appointed to the board of a project that's concerned with the environment - someone who must be forced to supply clean, safe water for his renters, and someone who then dumps unsightly debris in their faces? Cooper needs to clean up his own property before he starts telling others how to use resources owned by taxpayers.
This has got to be one mistake that Allen made in his appointments since taking office. I wonder how many others there are.
FRAN DEEDS
VINTON
Wounds not healed by apologies
AFTER COMING home from the Vacation from Hell, I saw the front-page article about the little girl who had been mauled by the dog (July 8, ``Girl, 7, badly hurt in dog attack''). I had flashbacks of my trip to Indiana, waiting in a rural emergency room with my 3-year-old, who had just been bitten by my cousin's black Labrador retriever. Though my child's wound was minor in comparison with the little girl's in the article, it was still a very nasty puncture that required medical attention.
I was unaware of the Lab's behavioral history, and assumed that my child was partly to blame for the attack. (I later learned that the dog had bitten many times.) Then the dog attacked another cousin's child. Then the dog (still wandering about the house at the insistence of my cousin) attempted a third attack - again directed at my 3-year-old. Finally, the dog's owner placed the dog outside in a pen for the duration of our visit, bemoaning the poor animal's exile, and wondering aloud what it was that the kids had done to cause its behavior.
The point of this story: A dog that bites a human being once will surely do it again, unless the owner/ handler is knowledgeable and adept at training dogs. It's too late to apologize once a child has been bitten or mauled. The responsible thing to do is to put that particular dog down.
For some reason, it's in vogue these days to keep an aggressive dog, and reported attacks by canines against human beings are on the rise. I sure hope that the owners of the dog that tore that little girl's head do the right thing before something worse (if that's possible) happens to another person. And I fervently hope that all those "macho" dog owners out there, who consider it cool to keep an aggressive canine, will realize that the horror of wounds inflicted by a dog cannot be mended by saying they're sorry.
LISA MURPHY
ROANOKE
King didn't give North a fair shake
LIBERAL news reporters in our media have it in for Oliver North. There's no way that he's going to get a fair shake from them - that's clear.
Larry King is a prime example of this. In a recent televised debate, King refused to let North give his campaign number to a caller, but then allowed Doug Wilder to do the same thing. No one even asked Wilder! Or Charles Robb or Marshall Coleman, for that matter.
King wouldn't let North give a complete answer without heckling him, yet he gave the other three plenty of speaking time. My goodness, the others would not even have been there were it not for North's presence in the race!
One thing about it: King couldn't keep North from pulling out his pocket change to demonstrate his comment, ``Slick Willie promised us change. Now, that's all we have left!''
In 1994, my motto will be: ``Annoy the media, elect Oliver North U.S. senator!''
DELORES CHILDRESS
GRUNDY
Maybe the best is yet to come
A LOT OF memories come to the surface on birthdays, especially when it's your 56th one. I've been all the dreaded ages, and have never thought much about them. But this one has hit kind of hard. Just to think the next milestone of my life will be 60. That's scary, but I'd surely rather be 56 than not to be at all.
You think of being a little girl with long curls that bounced when you walked. You remember walking to the drugstore with a nickel clutched tightly in your hand. In 1944, that nickel would have bought an ice-cream cone or a candy bar. Remembering the boundless energy that stayed with you then, you find yourself wondering where it all went.
You remember the first day in school, the last and most everything in between. But you find it hard to remember what you ate yesterday.
The mind is a funny thing. Life is an experience. I wonder what will be next, but then maybe I don't want to know. Take one day at a time.
MAGGIE STEVENS
ROANOKE
by CNB