Thanks for making the skate park a reality
Dear Dave Novak and Staff,
Congratulations on a job well done. We wanted to thank you for the beautiful dedication service.
Our grandfather loved Forest Park and the way community always felt like family. It’s wonderful to see the community take such pride in the accomplishments of its residents.
You recognized us for donating the cement, but thanks to you and your staff for making the Bud Mohr Skate Park a reality.
After hearing the story about the kids coming to the meeting, designing the park and helping the decision along, it was nice for us to see their smiling faces. Hard work has its own rewards, but making those kids dreams come true was the real gift.
We wanted to thank you and your staff for including us. It was a pleasure to work with you all.
The family of Henry E. “Bud” Mohr
St. Bernardine headline was misleading
I am extremely distressed that you chose to caption Reverend Tom Holmes’ column on the challenges that St. Bernardine School is facing this year with the fatalistic and ambiguous wording that you did. In saying that the school would be open for one more year, the implicit message is that it will only be open for one more year.
While this is a crucial year for the school, there has been no decision made that this will be our last year. In point of fact, there are many positive indications that we will survive this challenge. The return of most of our dedicated faculty, the active outreach of several committees, and the fact that we have never had a solid enrollment of over a hundred students at this time of year in the past, all are being read by me as positive indicators for the future. In addition, it is no small accomplishment that the school survived this past year to remain open for this year.
There is no doubt that we are in a “struggle” but I fear your heading may prove to be the press creating news rather than reporting it. I can only hope that anyone looking for a school reads the whole article, and does not stop with the big print. More to the point, I hope those shopping for a school will call us and take a look at St. Bernardines for themselves.
Thank you for letting me emote about this matter because I am very frustrated at fending off rumors of our demise. Having it hinted at in the local paper at least affords me the opportunity to respond.
Rev. Patrick M. Tucker
St. Bernardine is ‘a gem of a school’
Lately, many doom-and-gloom things have been said in your paper about St. Bernardine School. Yes, we did have a very challenging year. We faced declining enrollment and fiscal uncertainty. We were all wondering if our school would survive the setbacks that presented themselves.
The answer is yes, yes! Our school’s doors will open this next school year and, I believe, many more due to the hard work of many.
St. Bernardine’s faculty and staff are willing to stay the course. They are educated and dedicated. Ninety percent of the faculty are returning because they “love St. Bs” and want to be part of the team that helps the school grow again. If my own position is unaffordable, I will volunteer.
St. B’s is proud to board of strong parental participation. Our parents believe in a great education and provide the backbone of support in all school and church related activity.
Mrs. Eleanor Kraft and Dr. Gerald Lordan, both former principals, have offered their experience and talents. Finally, St. Bernardine was evaluated last March by the Catholic archdiocese. The summary of this evaluation was stated by a committee member: “St. Bernardine is a gem of a school.”
Plan to call the office at (708) 366-6890 for information to enroll your child.
Doolin ‘should be ashamed of himself’
After carefully reading Mr. Doolin’s poorly constructed letter in last week’s Review, I have a question: Where can we go to initiate recall proceedings for a commissioner?
Commissioner Doolin should be ashamed of himself.
Nixon defender needs to get the facts straight
I read with interest and eventually with some amusement Mr. Barbahens comments regarding Jim Murray’s analysis of former President Nixon’s signature. It is entirely possible that there may have been some bias on Dr. Murray’s part, for I know Dr. Murray and I share some of this same bias.
Mr. Barbahen, after reading your letter, I must ask that you also get your facts straight. First of all, Senator Robert Kennedy was assassinated on June 5, 1968. If you have a computer, I invite you to Google Robert Kennedy Assassination. It is right there.
Secondly, though we did eventually withdraw from Vietnam under President Nixon’s stuardship, it wasn’t until he was in office for some four years before this actually happened. It is the opinion of this writer that we might have well stayed in Vietnam for the duration of Nixon’s presidency, had he pursued his original course of action. After all, wasn’t it Nixon who committed us into Cambodia and Laos a couple of years before we began to withdraw in earnest? If you remember, the country was so torn apart by these actions, that scarcely a night went by when the front page stories did not feature a struggle between those in authority and those who wished to make their views known.
In spite of all of that, I have to agree with you that Nixon did indeed have a mandate in 1972. However, one could hardly say he was secure in that mandate. Remember the break in of the Democratic National Headquarters in 1972 prior to the two political conventions where candidates for President were chosen? Remember the cover-up that ensued afterward? Remember the “Whitehouse Enemies list?” And finally, remember how President Nixon’s actions and the investigations which followed paralyzed the country for approximately 1.5 years before he finally admitted to everything?
The sad truth is that President Nixon got much more than he was entitled to, for he was permitted to resign and given a full Presidential Pardon for his actions. That permitted him to enjoy the same benefits had he served his entire presidency.
Where’s the honor in that?
Editors note: Shortly after sending his letter to the editor, Mr. Barbahen sent an e-mail to the Review noting his error in regards to the date of Sen. Robert Kennedy’s assassination, and asking for it to be corrected. We thought we had amended the letter to include the correct date, but were surprised to see that the original version of the letter ended up in the paper. We apologize for the mistake.