READ THE POPE

The bile-filled attack on Pope John II by writer Michael Bronski in your August 9-15 issue (“Pope on a slope”) may charitably be described as infantile. That expression includes such sub-categories as “thoughtless,” “inaccurate,” and “lacking in any historical or analytical insight.”

Personally, as the son and grandson of Lutheran clergymen (though not now a particularly practicing Protestant or Catholic) I can hardly defend the Pope in a knee-jerk fashion. But Bronski so misses his concern, and concerns, and does so in a bombastic and venomous way, that one must plead with him to actually read and assimilate something of what the Pope says.

For example, in his recent Toronto speech to youth:

“Is it enough to rely on the technological revolution now taking place, which seems to respond only to criteria of productivity and efficiency, without reference to the individual’s spiritual dimension or to any universally shared ethical values? . . . On what foundations, on what certainties, should we build our lives and the life of the community to which we belong?”

Bronski’s Phoenix diatribe has the flavor not only of venom but also of artificiality and addiction to short-range “political” perspectives in societies increasingly addicted to “impulses of instinct, . . . short-lived sensations . . . passing fads,” to quote the same recent papal speech. One can only hope (without encouragement from the tone or content of Bronski’s unpleasant and obtuse raving) that he can grasp something of what Pope John II means.

Prof. George K. Romoser

Eliot

MISSED GROOVE

Josh Rogers’s cover story in your August 2 edition (“Vinyl History) on the glory days of Portland record stores brought back strong memories of long hours spent with great music and unique personalities. One of my favorite haunts was Opus One, which was all that you said it was, and more. And that “more” was often the product of Mike Tewhey, Glen Tracy’s partner, whom you failed to mention. So, just as some would enter that subterranean lair to listen to Coltrane, Ayler, and Beefheart with Glen, others would make the trip to groove on Roxy Music, the Clash, or Mikey Dread with Mike. Like the bracketing legends of Ruthie Baker and Jim Pinfold, Mike and Glen truly “lived for the music.” Their presence is missed, but not forgotten.

Paul Maddrell

Cape Elizabeth

LET’S REVOLT

I read Jess Kilby’s rather well written article on Maine’s property-tax problem (“A Taxing Situation,” August 16) once, twice, and then again. Something was wrong. Oh, I’m not writing of the bizarre idea that Speaker Saxl might in some weird way be onto a potential solution to our problems (after all, he and his happy band of tax and spenders created the problem). That was too silly an idea for comment. No, I finally figured it out. It took three readings to realize that the writer was still buying the utterly discredited idea that we have a revenue shortfall. You know the argument. If we just tinker with our extensive and burdensome tax laws a smidgen, why, all will be solved. How amusing!

Of course our tax problems are caused by our spending habits. If you or I spent at twice the rate we increased our earnings, it would be off to bankruptcy court. When the state does it, it’s off to the taxpayer with another scheme to “reform” our tax laws. As reform always results in more revenues being generated (solving the revenue shortfall), reform also always results in tax increases. As proof of my contention, I offer Speaker Saxl’s comments on PBS’s Capitol Connection about his new reform board. He praised Governor Curtis saying he was perfect for the board as he was governor when we had our last major tax “reform.” He sort of forgot to say that the “reform” was the creation of the beloved Maine Income Tax.

Come on, fess up, isn’t it really time for that long overdue tax revolt?

Jim Verdolini, Casco Bay Weekly political columnist

Portland

AN INVITE

I was interested in reading the recent letter (“How ’Bout Us Dems?” 8/16/02) from Senator Anne Rand because I like and respect her. For that reason, I invite Anne to break her Democratic addiction and join the Greens or at least help us build a new third party of people who care about other people, not the corporations who own both major parties.

Nowhere in Senator Rand’s letter does she dare mention the national Democratic Party. No wonder. What did eight years of Democrats in power do for working and poor people? NAFTA, spearheaded by Democrats, exported jobs overseas. Clinton “ended welfare as we know it,” officially ending one of the few “Democratic” achievements. Clinton-Gore locked up more people in history, extending the daily prison count in the United States to two million people. Their virulent “war on drugs” and support of executions makes us a laughing stock in Europe and elsewhere in the world. They, too, are the war overseas party. As I write, Gephardt and Lieberman are proposing war in Iraq. Only Brent Scowcroft and a few Republicans may delay it. And while the Democrats seem to not like pharmaceutical companies, they love realtors and developers, Wall Street money, and other sources of their million-dollar campaigns. The Democrats outraised the Republicans in corporate dollars in the last campaign. Let’s be real.

Anne, the Democrats have been running for 65 years on the fumes of the New Deal. Younger people, anyway, don’t buy it any longer. If there are to be new positive developments — particularly for the large percentage of the population who are not affluent — we need a new party and dedicated and sincere people like you.

David Wagner

Portland