I 4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, November 20, 2002 OP/ED c be 3k+bi1un imIi 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 letters@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JON SCHWARTZ Editor in Chief JOHANNA HANINK Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. . NOTABLE QUOTABLE That's like asking someone to first vote for censorship, and then figure out later what is censored. With all due respect, I find that statement unhelpful." - Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz on a proposed speech code that would ban "offensive" language from the classroom, as quoted in yesterday's Boston Globe. SAM BUTLER THE SOAPBox 'a &R B0 AZOE~os or MS> eue -i Y1 veaet Stupid advertisements tell truth about greedy JESS PISKOR Ts SPACE NcxT FOR SALE look at The Econo- well-groomed man in his mid-sixties, shar- begun to re-evaluate. Because it is so easy mist as a pretty ing some time with his grandson on the to think of better examples of government authoritative news edge of their swimming pool with a plate of waste and because it is expensive to adver- magazine. Sure it's what I assume to be fine caviar but could tise in The Economist, I can only assume British. Yes, it's rather just as easily be Oreo cookies. that this ad was very well thought out and conservative in its out- This struck me as an exceptionally stupid tested and targeted towards a very specific look. Of course it's ad and I spent the good part of a day showing audience. Clearly, judging from the picture sometimes overly sar- it to people, expecting them to burst out and its anti-social program stance this ad is castic. But it's widely laughing. I mean, it's ridiculous. First of all, meant to appeal to the extremely rich. Evi- respected and when I it clearly means to contrast wasteful govern- dently, this company feels it can best read it, though I often disagree, I feel it ment spending with spending "your" money attract customers by reminding them that gives me a good idea of what the movers on better things, like family. But their exam- they are wasting their "hard-earned and shakers of the world are thinking. Its ples are pretty dumb. Health care? Reform- money" by helping others. audience is undoubtedly the world's politi- ing education? Saving the environment? It doesn't even go into specifics. In my cally knowledgeable and wealthy. Looking These seem like pretty worthwhile things to naivete I assumed that pretty much every- at its pages, from the tone of the articles to me. If you sat me down and asked me my top one would like to see the environment the advertisements, I can learn not only five priorities for my tax dollars, these three saved and wanted better high schools for about the world, but also the worldview of would all be on the list. their children. Yes, we might argue about the people reading this magazine. I guess Compounding the stupidity of this ad is the way to do it, but I always thought peo- in some sense I look at The Economist as a that it would have been so much easier to ple would like for everyone to have access sort of control group for moderate free- find real examples of government waste. to a hospital bed. But obviously not. market conservatives. Reading The Econo- Even crazy pro-tax pro-social program lib- Apparently, there are people so in love mist can be a sort of sociological journey erals like me can find plenty of places with their money that any of "their" tax into the minds of the world's elite. where the government wastes money. dollars going towards cleaning up oil spills Last week I came across the following Beyond obvious and cliched references to is an affront to their "hard-work." advertisement on page 19 of the Nov. 9 edi- $400 screwdrivers and ignoring common- If this ad were honest it would say: "On tion. It was for something called iShares, place arguments for wasteful spending put one hand THE GOVERNMENT can use put out by Barclays Global Investors. It was forth by liberals like defense spending and YOUR TAX DOLLARS to help those in a full page ad, the top of which read: "On corporate welfare, I can think of plenty need. On the other hand DOESN'T IT one hand THE GOVERNMENT uses examples of waste in the government that FEEL BETTER TO BE A GREEDY ASS- YOUR TAX DOLLARS to improve health everyone could agree on. Things like a HOLE and spend that money on yourself? care, reform education and protect the envi- doubling in the president's salary; millions The goal of iShares is to keep your money ronment. On the other hand KEEPING of dollars spent researching shrimp farm- exactly where it belongs - clenched in YOUR MONEY IN YOUR POCKET isn't ing in Arizona; $20 billion in pork barrel your uncaring fist." half bad (emphasis theirs)." It then contin- spending in the past year alone. The sad thing is, people would still line ues, "To help ensure your hard-earned But the more I thought about it, the less up around the block to buy into it. money stays exactly where it belongs, con- funny the ad became. Previously, I had sider the advantages of iShares?" The ad given this company the benefit of the Jess Piskor can be reached also prominently features a picture of a doubt that they were stupid. But I have atjpiskor@umich.edu. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 0 The Sports Monday column 'didn't live up to Daily's sports standards' TO THE DAILY: For the most part, I am a big fan of the Daily's sports section. The writers are usu- ally accurate and their opinions mostly reasonable. However, Steve Jackson's col- umn, Henson's baseball stock plummets to all-time low, (11/18/02) didn't live up to the Daily's sports standards. Does Steve Jackson think that he knows more than the Yankee scouts - the same Yankee scouts that discovered Jeter, Pettite, and Soriano? As much as I hate to say anything good about the men in pinstripes, their scouts are the best in the business. And they all say Henson is going to be good. Here's why: from the time he quit play- ing high school baseball in the late spring of 1998, he didn't seriously play organized ball again (besides a few weeks with Yan- kees and Reds farm clubs) until he left Michigan football in the winter of 2001. So he went from hitting the hell out of the ball in high school, to two years of foot- ball, to playing with a AAA ball club! Nobody could make that transition! In 1998 he was facing kids like me that were lucky if they threw a pitch 80 mph, then he took two years out for Michigan football, and now he's supposed to jump back into baseball against many pitchers that will be playing in the majors two or three years from now. That's too much to ask of anybody! Steve Jackson's argument about Michael Jordan is ridiculous. Jordan didn't average a home run per every 6.9 at bats with only 48 K's in four full years of high school varsity baseball. Jordan was never an amazing baseball player while Henson was arguably the best high school baseball player ever. As senior he batted .605 with 83 runs, 83 RBI, 18 doubles, 22 HR, 47 walks, 17-for-17 in stolen bases and just nine strikeouts. Nine. I had that in one double-header! Twice! Jackson's other argument about Josh Booty and Chad Hutchinson are equally impotent. For every Booty there's a Todd Helton (quarterback, University of Ten- nessee), for every Hutchinson there's a Tom Glavine (fourth round selection, Los Angele Kina of the National Hockev three more years of organized baseball than Henson under his belt, why is it acceptable that he struggle with AA base- ball, but Henson is expected to be the All- American that he was in high school? Because hitting baseballs is really tough, that's why. Finally, Jackson forgets that Henson is still only 22 years old. This isn't the NBA that we are talking about - 22 is just a baby for pro baseball. The best third base- man in baseball today - Troy Glaus, hit .218 with I home run in 165 at bats when he was 22. Give the kid time! All that being said. I will never forgive Drew Henson for lying to us about staying for his senior year and for abandoning Michigan's football team. I would like nothing more than to see his baseball career end via a fastball to the shin. I'd pay good money to see that. DAVE BEUTEL LSA Senior Hoard's Dave Matthews Band review 'worst piece of journalism ever' TO THE DAILY: This letter is in response to Joel Hoard's review of Dave Matthews Band latest live release, Live at Folsom Field. Hoard's review ranks as the absolute worst piece of journalism I have ever seen. The review gives the impression that Dave Matthews is a semi-talented songwriter, average performer and has an annoying personality. All of these statements are false. While I can concede that this release is from one of the weaker tour years for DMB, it still has a ton of notable high- lights of which Hoard mentions as the "uh, classics." On this disc are quality renditions of "JTR" (a previously unre- leased track from the Lillywhite ses- sions), "Big Eyed Fish," "Bartender," "Two Step" and "Ants Marching." Apparently for Hoard, "none of those are good either." Also Hoard fails to mention that as opposed to shortening the set, this "com- petent" performer played past the local curfew and incurred a fine all for the enjoyment of the crowd. What Hard hasdcn in this article is cap-donning" guys. This review is crap, and I suggest the Daily try and find some- one who can put some bias aside and write a fair review. DAN BERNTHAL LSA senior DM 'review 'utterly insulting,' exhibits lack of integrity To THE DAILY: After reading the review of "Dave Matthews Band - Live at Folsom Field," I was thoroughly disgusted by the lack of integrity of the Daily's music reviews. Joel Hoard eloquently writes, "DMB fans are irritating. (They are) tight-clothed females ages 16 to 22 and their baseball cap-donning boyfriends." He says they are "nauseating." The only other fans Hoard can think of who "can possibly find Dave's shtick endearing or humor- ous" are "wannabe hippies, and Christian teens who wanna rock but not so hard as to upset their parents." A critic's job is to critique the work of an artist - not those who appreciate it. Being quite a DMB fan myself, I am utterly insulted by the lack of decency Hoard possesses. I think it is incredible that such a respectable newspaper would publish such garbage. A good critic does not base his review merely on his own preferences, but on the quality of the work as a whole. If it is a pop album Hoard is critiquing, for instance, he should remember that whether or not he likes the album is not the question. The question is whether or not the album has merit in the pop music world. The same principle should have been followed when Hoard attempted to critique Dave Matthews Band's "Live at Folsom Field." Hoard also lacks the ability to back up his opinions with any sort of reasonable argument. Perhaps his only support is the phrase, "it isn't any good," which he read- ily uses three times. His only complaint of any substance is that "the jams are mind-numbingly long," to which one could reply that this length is one of the Dave Matthews Band's many charms. This brings me back to the mark of a good critic. Obviously, Hoard has not done his research Fans of the hand live for the 0 14 ...m , Vl% - - - -- - --- d