Democratic Problems

AFTER reading Niall O’Dowd’s piece on abortion and the Democratic Party in last week’s issue, it is nice to know that the problems that President John F. Kennedy had on Catholic issues are still alive and well in the present Democratic Party.

During questioning of a judicial nominee, Mr. Pryor, Senator Charles Schumer said as Pryor was a Catholic he would be guided by his Catholic teachings and upbringing, and that was not acceptable to him. 

Where was the outrage of the liberal media on that, or by those staunch Catholics Edward Kennedy, Chris Dodd and Patrick Leahy on the panel? It came only from two Republicans on the panel, Senator Rick Santorum, a Catholic, and Senator Orrin Hatch, a Mormon.

These Democratic senators disqualified another nominee because they said she was too extreme because she upheld a state law requiring parental notification when minors have abortions. That same minor cannot have an aspirin at school without parental notification.

Any parent would like to talk to their own daughter before making such an traumatic decision, but Schumer, Kennedy, Dodd and Leahy know what’s best for your child. I presume they would rather their own daughters to have an abortion without talking to the parents. 

These liberals know that the only way they can get their agenda through is by stacking the courts with liberal judges who will do their bidding as their agenda would be laughed at by the majority of Americans. 

What was once a great party is now the party that stands for partial birth abortion which sucks a innocent baby’s brain out. But the Democrats are mortified when a convicted murderer is put to death because it is cruel and inhumane.

Where are their priorities? Whose is to blame? We are, because we voted them in. 

Mike Sheehy

Yonkers, New York

Who’s With Who?

DO you remember what the former Irish prime minister John Bruton said about the Bonnie Prince Charles during his royal visit to the Emerald Isle? Did they spend much quality time together? Were they alone? 

Is there any truth to the rumor that Charles will attempt to usurp the throne and rule as both king and queen? And what of Camilla? Will she now seek solace in the arms of co-spurnee Celia Larkin? Inquiring minds want to know.

Dennis Mangless

Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin

Show Respect

IF “Page 2” editor Debbie McGoldrick has actually ever been in Eire, and has knowledge of the Abbey Players, Irish cinema and legitimate stage acting and Andrew Scott’s credits, please excuse my disdain. But I feel my disdain is deserved, after reading the article “Irish Oscars Salute Unknowns” in the November 5-11 issue.

Exhibiting a personal preference for Colin Farrell and his prominent flair for the adolescent is an American given right.

What I am disturbed about is Ms. McGoldrick’s dismissal of Irish opinion about Andrew Scott’s acting credentials, and most recent film role, known to her or not. Best actor winner Mr. Scott is obviously more respected and appreciated by Irish theatrical critics, and since it was their award to give, that’s it, isn’t it!

Delia Campbell

Matawan, New Jersey

Sick, Sick Joke

HAVING read Niall O’Dowd’s column on the paper Home & Away in the November 12-18 issue, and the letters in response last week, I would like to offer my views on the aforementioned publication.

I agree with O’Dowd that in this day and age racist and gay-bashing jokes are and should be taboo, but I am a little disappointed that a man of his undoubted integrity should pay heed to a publication that is nothing short of garbage.

I do not drink myself and rarely do I even enter a hostelry that serves alcohol, so I wasn’t aware that Home & Away existed until a friend asked me if I had seen the “joke” in it about a year or so back. I said I hadn’t, so he insisted I find a copy and read it. 

He seemed genuinely enraged, so I went to find the paper. Upon opening the “jokes” page, I knew exactly what he was talking about.

You see, one of my closest friends moved to Chicago a few years back as his job necessitated it. I was upset, but my young son Kenneth was inconsolable. Kenneth and my Chicago-bound friend’s son had become best buddies, so he was understandably heartbroken when the family moved away.

We visited a couple of times to and fro, but then a few years back we received the heartbreaking news that Kenneth’s best friend – let’s call him Joe – had been diagnosed with Leukemia. For the past couple of years Joe has gone through chemotherapy and now the parents wait in hope for a bone marrow transplant.

We have tried to explain the best we can to Kenneth, but it’s tough for him to fully understand it or the changes he has seen in his best buddy.

What has all this to do with Home & Away, I hear you ask. The “joke” that my friend was referring to in the first place touched on the subject of Leukemia. It told of a kid telling another kid about the couple of gifts he received for Christmas.

The second kid, when asked, runs through a huge array of wonderful presents that he received, to which the first kid responds, “Yeah, well I’m not dying of Leukemia.”

What more can I say? All I could do was hope Joe’s parents wouldn’t happen upon a copy and was relieved when I heard that the paper had a circulation of only 3,000 or so.

I scanned through the rest of the paper and felt a little better, as its content told me that very few people of anything approaching average intelligence would bother with it.

Tom Redmond

Woodside, New York

Saying No to Spain

AFTER reading John Spain’s column “Trimble Was Right to Say No,” (October 29-November 4), the first question I would like to ask is if there is a real columnist by the name of John Spain, or is it a pen name for the Rev. Ian Paisley? That’s exactly who Spain sounds like.

Trimble has said no again. When we get closer to the goal, Trimble always moves the posts. This shows that decommissioning always was a red herring.

Spain agrees with Trimble that the decommissioning act was not transparent enough to convince Unionists. Is it not clear to any reasonably intelligent person that when high-ranking military officials such as General John de Chastelain’s team take several hours to inspect weapons to see if they were operable, this means that obviously a huge amount were decommissioned?

If the IRA discloses what was destroyed it would probably cause a split in the Republican movement, causing a substantial number of their volunteers to campaign for a return to war. There has to be a middle ground, and Tuesday, October 21, 2003 should have been it.

I don’t see Spain asking about Loyalist decommissioning. Maybe that’s because the IRA have a larger arsenal, but are the Loyalist guns not as deadly?

After all, between 1966-1999 the IRA were responsible for 1,771 deaths. The Loyalists were responsible for 1,050 deaths. This is not including the RUC/British Army. Maybe innocent Catholic lives don’t count as far as Spain is concerned.

Spain says the IRA’s statement wasn’t clear enough for Unionists or for people in the south either. It’s time he did research. 

In the words of former Ulster Unionist Party Assembly member Dermot Nesbitt, “We now have the Republican movement pursuing peacefully its political objectives. I fully understand that Republicans will not, nor would I expect them to say the war is over, but that statement is grammatically saying the war is over.”

Spain also makes a point that Trimble was right to say no on behalf of the vast majority of Irish people north and south of the border. Let’s wait for the Northern election results to see if that is true.

Colin Burke

Bronx, New York