Letters to the Editor

What You Say

On Abortion

[Cover, "The Terrorist and the Baby-Killer," Doron Taussig, Jan. 31, 2008] is propaganda, not news.[You wrote] "were John the man he wishes to be, he would teach himself arson, then go from one killing factory to the next, setting them aflame."What kind of journalist calls an abortion clinic a killing factory?As a journalist myself, I am outraged and shocked.The fact that any editor would print this as "news" is unbelievable.I am stunned that you would not have better editorial judgment. What a disappointment.

Eric Morgenstein
University City

It's impossible to read "The Terrorist and the Baby-Killer" and assume that the author is giving a third-person account in the voice of John Dunkle. One has to question the intent of the City Paper, a publication that was formerly regarded to be urban-centered and mostly progressive. If City Paper intended to editorialize, why did this irresponsible piece of journalism appear as news on its front page?If the paper has decided not to be a news source, its responsibility is tolet its readers understand that they're reading an opinion piece. Taussig refers toJames Kopp, convicted of the murder of Dr. Barnett Slepian,as an "itinerant baby-saver."He paints a sympathetic portrait of abortion protester Dunkle, who has had a civil action brought against him for posting threats on his Web page against reproductive health care providersand encouraging readersto kill a clinic physician by shooting her in the head, is depicted to be a cheerful, civic-minded "stranger to lawless violence."Erich Schmidt, a pro-choice clinic escort, is described as having anger in his heart without an outlet for it. The author's and editor's blatant and shocking bias is underscored by their lack ofproperly placed quotation marks throughout the article.

The abortion issue is, and will remain,highly polarized. Now we know where Doron Taussig and City Paper stand.

Dayle Steinberg
President and CEO, Planned Parenthood Southeastern Pennsylvania

Good job; a very good read. Only one complaint: I would greatly appreciate it if the stories you guys published didn't make Christians look like crazy fanatics. I know there are plenty of crazy-ass religious fanatics out there (like John), but for every handful of crazy fanatics, there are thousands of devoted Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. I am sure that many pro-life Christians will not turn to a terroristic (and quite frankly, spooky) style approach, but those against religion generally use that angle to spark interest and justify themselves. It is not religion that warps and distorts the mind to create fanatics; it is the mishandling of one's own personal issues and life dilemmas that create their own fanaticism. There are two sides to every coin.

Marcos Rios
Northeast Philadelphia

Wow, City Paper has resorted to shock journalism and finally acted on using fear to get people to read your newspaper.The headline that appears on your paper's front page is appalling. The article was poorly written with an obvious bias.Nice job of staying true to journalistic integrity. Not only do you utilize sensationalism to garner people's attention, but you make John Dunkle appear to be rather normal. Your attempt to humanize someone who is clearly dangerous and has no respect for the law, while making Erich Schmitt appear to be a bumbling recovering alcoholic, is pathetic.

I have less of an issue with the actual article than I do with the headline.I don't feel City Paper needs to engage in supermarket tabloid attention-grabbing to get people to read your newspaper.

Steve Mashington
Art Museum area

Your article does not constitute genuine news reporting by any stretch of the imagination. This piece of sensationalist propaganda is offensive and I am outraged at your decision to put it into print. Specifically, absurd segments include:

—"Were John the man he wishes to be, he would teach himself arson, then go from one killing factory to the next, setting them aflame."

—"I support the use violence to prevent abortion."

—And the part that describes when "Erich got around to asking John something he had never heard before."John," he said, "if someone killed an abortion doctor because you told them to, what would you really think about that?" "I think that'd be great,"John said. Please clean up your act.

Magrielle H. Eisen
Bella Vista

Are you mad? Have you lost all sense of journalistic judgment? To disseminate by giving a sympathetic podium to a person who advocates murder is madness, not journalism:

—"Were John the man he wishes to be, he would teach himself arson, then go from one killing factory to the next, setting them aflame."

—"I support the use of violence to prevent abortion."

—Then, Erich got around to asking John something he never had before. "John," he said, "if someone killed an abortion doctor because you told them to, what would you really think about that?" "I think that'd be great," John said.

The patients who go in for abortion procedures are exercising their legal rights and the physicians conducting the procedures their professional responsibility. To promote such a voice is to incite violence, a serious breach of professional integrity on your part.

Helen Webb
Via E-mail

It is inarguably provocative when Taussig quotes John Dunkle as saying, "I think that'd be great," when asked about the murdering of an abortion doctor. However, Taussig is acting civically irresponsible when he opines Dunkle would be "the man he wishes to be," when Mr. Dunkle goes "from one killing factory to the next, setting them aflame." It is important to quote directly from Dunkle on his opinions of arson; otherwise, it is as if Taussig were advocating the torching of women's health-care providers as a way of fulfilling Dunkle's wishes.

Michael Ryan
Via E-mail

"The Terrorist and the Baby-Killer" has everything Americans want from news today: human interest, sensationalism, pedaling soft news and over-simplifying national debate in something like, aw shucks, two old fogies who meet over coffee. Taussig writes the story of an unexpected friendship between two older men who found their life's calling around abortion clinics: one, helping frightened and vulnerable women and girls get inside; the other, a member of the mob who tries to block their entrance.

The piece begins telling John Dunkle's part of the story. Interestingly enough, these parts of the piece seem like John could have written them himself. Taussig calls those imprisoned for killings or bombings associated with abortion clinics or doctors "martyrs" and refers to the clinics as "killing factories," without employing quotes or irony. In fact, Taussig drops these terms — baby-killer, genocide, the "terminat[ion] of children" — with such nonchalance, the effect becomes chilling. Am I reading a local paper or the newsletter of Eric Rudolph?

Next the piece switches over to Erich's "voice," where it takes a far less sympathetic tone. We learn that he is recovering alcoholic, whereas John is "fond of jokes and stories." They are painted as eccentric equals in a national debate brought to the personal level. Yet one man stalked an abortion doctor until she was so afraid of being killed she quit her practice. The other escorts women past him and his kind. Which makes me wonder: Does every debate have two sides that deserve equal airtime and equal credibility? Can they be reconciled adorably over coffee? You could almost imagine a similar piece written by about two men in say, 1870: the "Carpet-Bagger and Lyncher," where it doesn't really matter what either man's beliefs are, just that they are passionately devoted to them!

Not every debate has two sides. Not every argument is valid just because someone believes it fervently. Stalking cannot be justified because of the Bible. Religion cannot be used as a catch-all to defend whatever weird actions may pop into your head. You cannot simplify a complex and painful decision to "Don't kill your son! Don't kill your daughter!" Nor can it be simplified and condensed into a human interest story that pans out like the world's creepiest Norman Rockwell painting.

Taussig has reduced the debate to two stereotypes: emotional vs. intellectual, no religion vs. religion, "man of letters" versus "man of action." Taussig has reduced the debates to jingoism, playing on the same manipulative terms misused by anti-choice advocates. But does all this matter in the end if the story has a moral? After all, Taussig sums up his whole piece for us in the most Rockwellian way he possibly can: John Dunkle doesn't want to kill his friend Erich. But he doesn't not want to kill him either. Don't we all want to grab hands and start singing kumbaya?

Marshall Bright
University of Pennsylvania

Doron Taussig responds:

It's disappointing to me that anyone would read "The Terrorist and the Baby-Killer" as an endorsement of John Dunkle's views, or as having an anti-choice agenda. The story does use phrases like "killing factory" and "itinerant baby-saver" without quotation marks, but only in sections written from Dunkle's perspective; at other points, abortion clinics are called abortion clinics, and at one point, John's behavior is even described as "barbaric." I take comfort in the fact that most readers seemed to appreciate this; otherwise, we would have received many, many more angry letters.

As for the concern that the story grants a platform to someone who doesn't deserve one, I would argue that the objective here was not to publicize John's ideas, but to acknowledge the existence of people like him, and to try to understand them. I won't make any apologies for humanizing John Dunkle — he is, after all, a human.

[Slant, "Beating Vince," Robert Cappella, Jan. 24, 2007] criticized Democrat Anne Dicker for not being a "real candidate" and claimed that she lacks the experience and resume to represent Philadelphia's 1st Senate District. Dicker worked as an executive in the private sector for 10 years prior to her recent run for state representative in the 175th District. Unfortunately, Dicker did not win her primary race but she did — even though she is not "real" enough for Cappella — defeat the Fumo machine's candidate.

Dicker has spent the past five years building a local network of progressive organizers and field workers. The organization she helped create, Philly for Change, aided the recent electoral victories of Democrats like Bob Casey, Joe Sestak and Patrick Murphy. Dicker has the brains and savvy to ably serve Philadelphia as a state senator. She has the guts and the courage to run against an incumbent who represents all that is wrong with Philly politics.

Meanwhile, people like Cappella whine from the sidelines and hide behind weasel words like "some wonder" to imply that Dicker is actually a tool of Fumo. I think Cappella would benefit from some advice I learned in the Air Force, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way!"

Steve Hach
Fishtown

If there are other Philadelphians who are better prepared and better financed to challenge Vince Fumo, we would like to know where they are hiding. Anne Dicker is a "real candidate" who has courageously stood up alone to fight Mr. Fumo for his seat in the State Senate.Many of us in the district believe that she is exactly the candidate who can do it. State Sen. Fumo is emblematic of the corrupted pay-to-play culture that is a blight on Philadelphia.Anne Dicker is squeaky clean.She is committed to transparency in government and exemplifies honesty and integrity. She supports a traditional liberal Democratic agenda which is pro-labor, pro-affirmative action, pro-choice and pro-reform in education, housing, welfare and health care.She is a strong advocate of social justice.

She is a founder of Philly for Change, and yes, she has been an outspoken critic of placing casinos in neighborhoods since this became an issue. Fumo, who is now talking about resiting the casinos, is the very one who penned the legislation that brought them here in the first place.And, let's face it, Mr. Fumo is going to trial this year, and even if elected might not be around to serve out another term.Then we'd be stuck with another crony successor which is precisely what we do not want.

Those of us who elected Mayor Nutter are crying out for change. We want someone new, someone who comes from outside the tangled web of Philadelphia politics.We have chosen Dicker because she is young and courageous.She is honest, energetic and enthusiastic.She knows how to organize on a grassroots level. She is ambitious and she is smart. Instead of dissing her candidacy, our press should be getting to know her and helping her to gain the recognition that she needs.

We will not resign ourselves to four more years of government as usual. Let's give Anne a chance, and see what she can do. We owe it to ourselves, our district, city and state.

Andrea G. Preis and Ramona Johnson
Queen Village

Tummy Aches

In response to your well-written article about the server's point of view [Slant, "Notice Served," Nadia Stadnycki, Jan. 31, 2008], let me give you a little feedback from the diner's point of view.

Last Sunday, I entertained a group of six, including two who had come from out of town just for this evening, at one of Philly's favorite [restaurants]. I wanted to show my guests, who don't get to dine in the city very often, how much fun and how delicious Center City dining can be. The service on the front end was extremely professional and polite and we were seated on time. However, the waiters were clearing the appetizer course before all diners were finished, and three waiters were actually standing behind the diners with the main course while the final diner was still working on her appetizer! This is fine dining? Or was it the bum's rush? It was after 9 and there was no other seating, so why rush us through the meal? I have never seen this happen in a restaurant of any caliber, and especially not in a restaurant like [this one]. Finally, as we enjoyed our conversation after coffee and dessert, a waiter cracked open a bottle of the Vox water and poured a round without asking whether anyone wanted another bottle, and I noticed that it was added to the bottom of the tab. At $7.50 a bottle, why pad the tab? There was no need to add a single dollar to the 20 percent gratuity that was charged because the service did not reflect an additional dollar.

Finally, no one informed us that the parking voucher was available or that the valet parkers do not honor the voucher. The next time I attend a dinner at Restaurant Week I will be mindful of the lack of good service and be sure to tell the manager immediately.

Robert Sless
Via E-mail

On a Good Roll

Great story on Mr. [Roger] Lloyd and Carman Gardens Roller Skating Rink [Cover, "Rolling Holy," J.F. Pirro, Jan 10, 2008], I have passed through his rink many, many times, being a former lead member of the Wizards On Wheels who has traveled across the U.S. and overseas. It is very nice to see some light shine on such a caring man who has not sold out, and has put God first above all else.

Clyde "Ice" McCoy
South Philadelphia

Back and Forth

Before accusing other people of committing "logical fallacies," perhaps Andrew E. Mathis should examine some of his own statements [Feedback, "What If We Go East," Jan. 24, 2008]. If there are 2,000 skinheads in Pennsylvania, and a smaller number in other northern states, does that mean that skinheads represent a statistically significant portion of Pennsylvania's total population? Maybe not, but this is the kind of elementary distinction that seems to be beyond the abilities of "Professor" Mathis.

Michael Washburn
Philadelphia

His Aim, Untrue?

[News, "Philly on the Potomac," Paul Fain, Jan. 31, 2008] about Allyson Schwartz's efforts to stimulate the economy was hilarious. Fain must not know that Schwartz was one of the Democrats who voted for Orwellian-named "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act." This bill makes it extremely difficult for consumers to get bankruptcy protection from their credit card debts, while at the same time allowing credit cards to charge interest rates formerly known as "usury." Unfortunately, Schwartz and her friends in the banking industry didn't count on a housing downturn, and the results have been predictable: instead of walking away from their credit card debts, people are walking away from their mortgages instead. So instead of defaulting on a credit card debt of $2,000 or so, consumers are defaulting on mortgage debt averaging $300,000 (going rate for a house, April 2007). Nice going, Allyson! Given Schwartz's short-sighted vote, the last thing she should be involved in is a plan to stimulate the economy.

Furthermore, the plan agreed to by the House will not work: a handout of $300-$600 will not go into the economy. Not when Americans are paying an average of $6,000 in debt. Not with fuel oil and gasoline costing about $3.15/gallon. Not when Americans, whose jobs have been shipped off to Mexico, China, and India over the past 20 years of Bush-Clinton-Bush are forced to rely on those high-interest credit cards to stretch their paychecks. Not with health care costs through the roof and an ongoing war sucking up money and resources.

If Schwartz was serious about stimulating the economy, she'd be busy working to repeal the bad bill she helped pass in 2005. But Schwartz is a member of the New Democrats, which never met a corporate handout it didn't like. So don't expect much more than your $300 pittance, which Senator Casey's office told me will be treated as taxable income.

Brendan Skwire
Southwest Philadelphia

He's Got Hugo's Back

Hugo Chavez is not, as you say, "a dictator" [News, "Heeding Oil," A.D. Amorosi, Jan. 31, 2008] He was democratically elected. And saying he "savaged his people" is simply untrue. Your gross mischaracterization of President Chavez is completely inappropriate.

Jeff Muckensturm
Via E-mail