To the editors:
Your article about Edwin Eisendrath’s family tree in a recent Reader [February 16] was one of the most insightful articles I have read, in this paper, in a long time.
Imagine my surprise and even disappointment, when after reading every word and line of that rather lengthy work, I came away with a somewhat puzzled feeling.
It is not because it (the article) was dull or trite, not at all, it is because I was left with many more questions than when I started. For example, who is Keith Rudman, or where does Jerry Lehrman hang out on weekends, who’s the one winning at poker games–and most importantly–why is Mr. Yates running?
“Why is this man running?” Well, I have always believed that one of our democratic privileges nay responsibilities of any citizen, is to express his or her views and convictions. It is our right, after all. Edwin, for good reasons, chose to express his through the political process. Rather than waiting for Mr. Yates to retire or die–thus allowing others to run; Edwin obviously feels that the ninth congressional district cannot wait around for an 80 year old man to decide when he’s had enough.
A healthy ambition is a virtue, rather than a vice, at least in my book. However, one seems to think exactly the opposite, while reading your article.
As for the race itself, I hardly got any information at all. The very colorful account of the candidates’ characteristics and quirks made it all of soap opera and not, as I expected, an issue oriented essay.
Mr. Joravsky–thank you.
We now know Edwin Eisendrath’s friends and relatives. Will you please tell us more–their zodiac signs, women they see . . . ; as for Edwin and why he is running, please–Edwin is obviously much better equipped at answering that question by his deeds and principles than you attempted to do on his behalf in this semi-biography.
N. Marine Dr.