What values?
To the Editor:
First, let me say that I am not a liberal nor a conservative. I actually hold fast to many of the values that the Republican party supposedly espouses, such as individual responsibility, limited government, fiscal responsibility, etc. It’s because of this that I feel I need to write this letter.
It really bothers me how blindly supposed Republicans are supporting the Bush Administration. Bush is not espousing ANY of the party’s values, putting both the Republican party, in my eyes, as well as the White House to shame.
On the point of individual responsibility, we’ve already seen what happened after the evidence for the Iraq war turned out to be all based on forged documents and a plagiarized college student’s essay (written BEFORE the first Iraq war). The Buck was passed many times, and it seems that nobody has taken the blame for it. To go back further, let’s talk about 9/11. When an airliner goes off course, it’s standard procedure for the FAA to make contact to ask them what the problem is, so as to avoid midair collision with other aircraft in the area. If they cannot make contact, it is also standard procedure to scramble fighter jets to asses the situation within 10 minutes or less. More than 30 minutes went by before the call was even made. If this was due to incompetence, then somebody should have been demoted, or just completely dismissed for their flagrant disregard for National Security. Instead, no punitive measure has been taken, and in a few instances, like the memo regarding the attacks that never made it’s way out of the FBI, the person responsible for that FUBAR has been given a promotion.
On the point of limited government, the Bush Administration has expanded government power to snoop in our homes, to detain people without warrant, and to try people by military tribunal, a system in which the verdict is final, there is no jury of peers, and there is no appeals system. Rather inconvenient if they decide to sentence you to death for political dissent. (Which as defined by the USAPATRIOT act, falls under the term “terrorism,” which IS an offense punishable by death, and actually strips you of your citizen status, putting you instead into the fictional category of “militant combatant.”) With total disregard to the fourth amendment, the government can search and seize whatever they want from your house, be it your computer, telephone conversations, you yourself… or your arms. Without the fourth amendment, the first and second amendments are meaningless. This is dangerous. What if the government changes hands to somebody who turns out to be worse than Bush? There is an enormous potential for abuse and may possibly be the beginning of the end for our great free nation.
On the point of fiscal responsibility, the Bush administration assumes that it can cut taxes, and increase spending and everything will be fine. He’s increased spending on military, homeland security and dumped tons of money into the hole that he created in Iraq. He’s promised us that he’ll leave no child left behind, but there is no funding for any of his programs. If I were doing the same thing with my credit card as he’s doing with our tax dollars, I’d end up in jail. If I charged up my credit cards, took out loans and spent tons of money I don’t have, I’d end up so far in debt that I’d get their car repossessed, lose my house and end up on the street — or on a CCCS commercial.
Well, here’s the thing: there is no repo-man or debt assistance services in global politics. I am afraid that like post-cold war Russia, we will fall into an impoverished, second world status.
It truly worries me that Bush is blindly backed by supposed Republicans, and I ask that people start thinking about what being an American really means, for the good of themselves and for the good of this nation. Don’t ever follow the values of any party. Find your own values, and let the candidates come to you. Or if everyone sucks, run for office yourself. Otherwise, you may end up getting lied to or lying to yourself.
Asher Platts
32nd Student Senate
********************************************************
Looking beyond the students
To the Editor:
The letter “C- for chemistry” was really refreshing to read. I have long since felt that way and thought I was the only one out there who noticed this. But the author has neglected to reach beyond the chemistry department, even though when I took general chem. last semester we had a 30 point scale on a test to off-set the horrendous grades. You see this trend all over campus. I was told in my math class (college algebra) that “the university expects half of you to drop after the first test, and of you who remain, half will fail the course.” My roommate had similar experiences more than once in her classes. The question is not how hard the particular students are working here, but the failure rate of some seemingly general courses. It is really sickening to think that half the people who register for a course that is required as a 100 level prerequisite are doomed to pay for the cost again. And the really interesting thing is that we as students who take those courses are told that we just didn’t work hard enough or it is just hard material, but rarely is the teaching style evaluated. We often forget that we are here in college to learn new information, not to prove our knowledge. There has to be a reason it’s so hard to pass these courses that is being overlooked. It is granted that people will fail courses, but when the numbers reach 50 percent and is accepted as OK by the campus in a 100 level course, there are some really ethical issues there. This is not quantum physics. These are courses that are supposed to be designed for the people who have not been exposed to the subject. I am very glad that someone brought that issue to the table.
Danielle Waleik
Physical Therapy
********************************************************
Beer run anyone?
To th Editor:
Will someone please take Dan Goldstein’s soapbox away? Or at least,
instruct him on a form of wit that does not ride on lackluster observations and sexual allusions to Walter Cronkite?
While I ordinarily sympathize with being “one of the few habitually sober students on campus,” Goldstein’s pompous rant on college drinking (“Something drunken this way stumbles,” Nov. 10) sounds more like the bitter ramblings of someone who has never been invited to a frat party.
Someone buy the boy a beer!
Lindsey Driscoll
********************************************************
Smoking section? Right this way…
To the Editor:
I think it is necessary for someone to address the huffiness among the smoking community at USM. This realization dawned on me a few days ago, when it occurred to me that I have made a habit of exiting Luther Bonney Hall via the back door in order to avoid inhaling the imminent cigarette smoke that lurks just beyond the front doors. Ahhh yes, you say, but the designated smoking areas to the rescue! Well, it would be one thing if these designated smoking areas were respected by the smoking community, but every single day outside of Luther Bonney Hall, I can say confidently that if I desire to inhale a lovely concoction of aldicarb, chlorpyrifos, and dichloropropene, I don’t even need to suck on a cigarette. All I have to do is open those doors and take a deep breath. Unfortunately, many of the smokers ignore the hideous yellow markers decorating the landscape of campus and decide to sit on the wall 10 feet from the building for a puff. It’s an excellent first step of USM to implement the everyone-be-happy smoking policy, giving smokers a designated smoking area. However, it needs to be enforced by the authorities, and more importantly respected by the smokers.
The article in the last edition of The Free Press was so ridiculous it was humorous. One student was quoted as saying “the University is violating the rights of smokers” and he “prefers to have those designated areas inside the buildings.” I’m sure I have some fellow non-smokers backing me on this when I say that once a room or car is smoked in, the stench is there eternally. Pardon me for opposing your request, but I embrace the freedom of being assured that my health is not deteriorating simply by attending class. If I want to smell like an ashtray, I’ll stand outside Luther Bonney for a few minutes.
I also found it entertaining that this same student points out that “it is getting colder and colder every day, and it is not fair that we have to stand outside and get frozen in order to smoke.” Hmmm…. Here’s an idea. Get a sweater, and a hat, and maybe mittens. In fact, invest in all you need in order to breathe in those fumes, but just do it in the designated areas outside from now on, please.
I am all for the rights of smokers. However, I do not place the comfort of the smokers above the health of myself and the public.
Susie Tofani
Third Year Linguistics Major