Share

Opinion

Letters from Readers

|

Government should subsidize art as a civilizing influence

Re: "Daily Outrage: Subsidizing the high cost of high art," Aug. 20

Your "Daily Outrage" feature rarely outrages, but carping about the millions of National Endowment for the Arts dollars going for ballet because only 3.9 percent of adults attend goes too far. Subsidies for high art are anything but new. Monarchs and nobles usually maintained in-house artists to compose new works. High art is a civilizing influence on a society which the government should encourage. Otherwise, crass but popular and profitable pop art such as rap and rock would run society straight to ruin.

The wars to bring democracy that modern conservatives desire are not far removed from rap and rock, both being Dionysian. Whereas well-ordered, restrained, isolationist, traditional conservatism is more akin to Apollonian high art forms, including ballet.

Only a few pages away,

Dino Drudi

Alexandria

Judge's legal blunders are too long to list

Re: "California's bumbler in a black robe," editorial, Aug. 17

The lack of judicial impartiality is of concern in the recent federal court battle on California's much-maligned Proposition 8. Judge Walker barred Imperial County (which opposes same-sex marriage) while empowering San Francisco to become a litigant against it. Walker's judgment became even more tenuous and uncertain as he endeavored to shield it from judicial review with spurious allegations that proponents of Prop 8 lack standing.

Among the numerous additional taints to this ruling is the judge's appalling "finding" that the virtual universal acknowledgment that marriage of persons of the opposite sexes was "never part of the historical core of the institution of marriage" -- despite the massive and exhaustive historical and documentary evidence demonstrating precisely the opposite.

Judge Walker's legal blunders are too copious to catalog here, but their flagrancies preordain this adjudication towards reversal.

Tony Favero

Half Moon Bay, Calif.

O'Malley had his chance -- and blew it

In 2007, Bob Ehrlich's final year as governor, Maryland had almost $1 billion in surplus funds. Today, Maryland's finances are in jeopardy. Even though taxes have gone through the roof, we are $8 billion in the hole because over the past four years, Gov. Martin O'Malley spent $23 billion more than Ehrlich did.

Because of O'Malley's 20 percent sales tax increase, people and small businesses are leaving Montgomery County. In fact, according to state analysts, this tax has negatively affected more Marylanders who make $20,000 per year than those who make $70,000. That's wrong. Ehrlich promised to repeal O'Malley's tax increase.

O'Malley had his chance and he blew it. It's time to move Maryland beyond a tax-and-spend governing philosophy that has produced harmful results.

Al Eisner

Silver Spring

View article comments Leave a comment