Intellectual property
To the Editor:
It was with some dismay that I read the 29 SEP 03 Question of the Week responses. I am shocked that students at USM would be so cavalier about intellectual property. Taking someone else’s music, without permission, is no different than going into a store and taking merchandise off of the shelf or entering another’s home and taking the stereo. It is theft and it is wrong.
Just because many others do it does not make it right.
It would be interesting to contact the respondents, when and if they produce something, and find out how they would then feel about it being appropriated by someone else. I suspect they would not be very happy.
Perhaps the university should institute a program of ethics education. It appears to be needed.
William C. Monroe
Clinical Counseling, Graduate Student
************************************************
Bush vs, Clinton
In response to the Proud Liberal Political Analyst & Theatre Major letter:
While Dan’s letter states that he is responding to a misinformed argument, he then goes on to say that there was no threat of terrorism from Bin Laden during the Clinton administration. What world is Dan living in?
Placing blame on one President or another is misleading. The fact is, the threat was there, as admitted in many documented speeches made by President Clinton. The difference was that there was no popular will of the people to support the use of ground troops in a pre-emptive strike on a nation where there was circumstantial evidence that they were supporting terrorists.
The Secretary of State, Madeline Albright said after the bombing by Bin Laden of the embassies in Africa, ”For although terror can turn buildings to rubble and laughter to tears, it can never, will never, deter America from its purpose or presence around the globe. That is the best answer we can give to the despicable cowards who did this.”
Words. That was the Clinton administrations best answer to the growing threat of terror. Action has been the Bush administrations answer.
Erik Reynolds
Alumni 1998
*******************************************************
Casino Myths
It’s the myths about a casino that make it sound like a good idea.
Myth #1: The casino will earn hundreds of millions of dollars.
Casinos are being considered in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Americans have limited money to spend at casinos and I don’t see how Sanford, Maine will be the ticket imagined by Think About It.
Myth #2: The casino will generate $100 million in state revenue.
Local and state newspapers have observed that the wording of the casino proposal is designed to prevent the state of Maine from taxing it by any means necessary.
Myth # 3: The casino will put $100 million annually into local businesses.
Connecticut casinos contain complete entertainment services, including lodging, restaurants, golfing and gas stations. Local businesses have not benefited because visitors spend all their money at the casino and then go home. How would a Maine casino be different?
Myth # 4: The casino will generate 10,000 new jobs.
Four thousand is more likely, but they’re not long-term jobs. This country is going through a casino craze, but there will be a backlash within 10 years and casino revenues will suddenly drop. Governments who’ve become dependent on casino money will flounder.
A casino anywhere in Maine, but especially in Sanford, will create additional problems, including gambling addictions, environmental problems, labor market displacement, and traffic. These are problems that local towns lack the funds to manage.
If a casino is such a great idea, then why is the state of Connecticut trying to ban future casinos within its own borders?
James Gorham
Clinical Counseling Graduate Program
*******************************************************
Attn: Mr. Goldstein
To the Editor:
I wasn’t going to even reply to Mr. Goldstein’s lack of education on the topics he tried to rebuke. Sorry, but you are seriously misinformed.
Let’s start at point one: President Bush appointed Ashcroft. I’m sorry if you feel the Patriot Act infringes on your right to privacy. I can live with it. Maybe it will clean our country up. One can only hope.
Point two: Bin Laden was a viable target. How the hell did you miss the bombings of the Trade Towers? His organization is responsible for countless terrorist attacks, well before President Bush Jr. came to office. Clinton had EVERYTHING to do with this. He had the shot and bailed out because he was worried it would hurt his numbers.
Point three: War protestors. While I have no problem with people enjoying their freedom of speech. I DO have problems with those who make accusations against our government without a clue as to what they are talking about.
Saddam killed how many of his own people? Our “Shock and Awe” campaign was directed at the Iraqi military. Collateral damage happens, so yes some civilian targets did get hit. And by the way, Genocide is used when talking about the extinction of an entire race or culture. So if you count Saddam’s troops as a race or culture, then you are right. It was attempted Genocide.
Last Point: Mr. Goldstein’s article about the Liberal Media. Do you actually watch the news? Seriously? Hate to break it to you, but the liberal media is still going strong. What planet are you living on? I think what you are seeing is a growing intolerance of the media’s current barrage of liberal politics. We are no longer allowed to say “One nation, under God” or have memorials on government property because God is mentioned. While I am not religious, I have had it with all this crap. We should be able to say the pledge as it was written. I am no longer allowed to be an American because people like the ACLU won’t let me, because it infringes on someone’s rights. Remember the South Park Christmas Special? The first one………
Jason Libby
English Major
Senior
Proud Navy Veteran and American
******************************************************
Media ownership
To the Editor:
I’ve been watching this back and forth debate on who owns the media (the right or the left). In my opinion neither owns it. While conservatives tend to get an advantage in talk radio and on 24 hour news channels, liberals tend to have an advantage in newspapers and network television. And when it comes to the internet, every political movement under the sun has more than its fair share of outlets.
Personally I think some liberals have become delirious with claims that the Bush administration is out to secretly take out opposing media voices. The only attempts to silence the media I see are by Senators using publicly funded Congressional hearings to harass media owners because of conservative views expressed during their programming.
At the same time there are conservatives out there who tweak out every time they read a liberal editorial and are afraid that two thirds of the Americans reading that editorial will suddenly become mindless liberal drones because of it.
As I said before there is something out there for everybody. My philosophy is just to focus on the debate. Instead of trying to assert that those you disagree with are part of some vast conspiracy on the verge of wiping out everyone who shares your ideology, just say what you feel about the issue and state why you disagree. Or do what I do, find someone you like to discuss and debate issues with and then enjoy a couple beers while doing it (or coffees if underage or in a chem-free dorm).
Matt Mower
2001
********************************************************
Thankful for freedom
To the Editor:
Mr.Libby-Thank you again for stating what needs to be said. Hopefully it will open the eyes of people who can’t see. Our world has been working this way for years and it seems to have worked so far. And whether or not people agree with it, I’m sure they have comfort in knowing that they can voice those opposing opinions of theirs. Great country isn’t it? To be able to hate your country, hate your president, wear what you want, say what you want, and have the future to do whatever you want….try being in the countries where none of these apply. Appreciate it people, and stop being so damn naive.
Courtney Bright
Veteran/US Coast Guard