4A - The Michigan Daily - Thursday, September 25, 2003
OP/ED
ale £tkum Thzwi
420 MAYNARD STREET
ANN ARBOR, MI 48109
letters@michigandaily.com
EDITED AND MANAGED BY
STUDENTS AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
SINCE 1890
LouIE MEIZLISH
Editor in Chief
AUBREY HENRETTY
ZAC PESKOWITZ
Editorial Page Editors
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
The entire population
of the active force of the
Marine Corps and the
reserve force of the
Marine Corps, and the
Army and the National
Guard and Reserves will
be looked at."
- Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, vice
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Wednesday, discussing the need for more
troops in Iraq, as reported by CNN.
STEVE COTNER AND JOEL HOARD OPERATION PUSSYCAT
"And also I'm against heavy
assault weapons, and also
to close the loophole, and
" - all those things."
Listen, Political Arnold.
I am from the future.
I have been sent by
Future Gray Davis
to terminate you.
UNA
w"
r
i , 'Alt
..r
s
fir.
I
0
But...
"I'm the Party Pooper!"
"Boys have a penis?"
"Hasta la vista? ...
... Baby?"
Voters!
Future Gray Davis
is urging you to vote
"NO" on the recall!
Or else Political Arnold
will be terminated!
Gen. Wesley Clark has greener grass
LAUREN STRAYER IN THE AciVEl VOICE
'11 admit it. Until
last week, I was
shamelessly
detached from the race
for the Democratic pres-
idential nomination. I
had little enthusiasm for
any of the campaign
punditry and even less
interest in deciding
which of the nine candi-
dates would get my vote. Sure, I read a few
articles here and there, and dutifully listened
to NPR's 10-part series on all the presidential
candidates-including Bush-but I was
largely and unapologetically apathetic. My
excuse? Retired Gen. Wesley Clark.
I spent most of the summer romanticiz-
ing the lefty former NATO supreme allied
commander and the strength of any campaign
he might run. I proudly wore my "Draft
Clark" button and studied his impressive
resume. His military career as a four-star
general, his Rhodes Scholarship and his ties
to the Clinton administration had me ready to
write his inauguration speech. I was ready to
graduate early, move to Iowa and join his
campaign - but he wasn't running.
Like many Democrats depressed by the
lackluster slate of presidential candidates, I
was afraid President Bush might be unstop-
pable. Hoping to avoid the disillusion and
disappointment I felt after the 2000 elections,
I perversely took comfort in my apathy and
in Clark's hesitancy to run. I thought that if I
didn't invest myself in any one of the
declared candidates and kept my faith in the
good general, I'd be guiltless if Bush won a
second term. I'd be able to say: "I was for
Clark but he was too decent to run. It's not
my fault your candidate couldn't beat Bush."
I only realized the ugliness of this anticipato-
ry deflection when Clark finally announced
his candidacy last week.
Initially, I was thrilled that Clark had joined
the race for the Democratic presidential nomi-
nation, but soon thereafter I found myself slip-
ping into my previous state of apathy. I was
struck by my hypocrisy - how could I ignore
the race now that my favorite candidate was
running when I had based my previous indiffer-
ence on his absence? My fear of another Demo-
cratic loss to Bush was leading me to join that
huge percentage of illogical Americans who do
not exercise their right to vote, but still com-
plain when the nation isn't running as they see
fit. I was willing to forgo political debate and
discussion because I believed the influence of
the current administration might be greater than
the power of elections. Somehow I forgot that
even Bush has to answer to the voters. And it's
those same voters who have an exciting alterna-
tive in Clark.
Before Clark became an official candi-
date, political pundits wondered if he were a
classic case of the greener grass being on the
other side. Would his ideal collection of
qualities fall apart under the heavy scrutiny
of the campaign trail? I'm betting they will
not. Clark exemplifies an unparalleled com-
bination of social conscience, patriotism and
expertise. He easily outshines his fellow can-
didates - including Bush.
In this time of relative international and
political instability, Clark's military experience
gives him advantages that none of his fellow
candidates can claim. No matter how often
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) begins a sentence
with "When I returned from Vietnam," Clark's
34 years of military service will always surpass
Kerry's feeble attempt to seem the military-
minded Democrat. Similarly, former Vermont
Gov. Howard Dean's attempt to be the most
liberal of all the candidates without raising the
typical alarmist labels falls short in the face of
Clark's easy social progressivism. It's hard to
say a four-star general is a morally corrupt
bleeding heart. Even Bush's military acumen is
questionable when compared to Clark's - the
former proves his might with a superficial
Navy jet landing, the latter with his resume.
While Clark's detractors point out that he
has little Washington experience and that he
has begun his campaign too late, all is not lost. I
imagine that Clark's NATO experience gave
him a good taste of the political wrangling
common in Washington. Moreover, aren't
Americans always complaining about career
politicians? As for the late-starting campaign,
the Draft Clark camp has been up and running
for several months and Clark has some name
recognition from his NATO work and his more
recent commentary on the recent Iraq War.
Plus, another Arkansas Democrat didn't declare
his candidacy until even later in 1991 and still
won the presidency.
All in all, I'm not apathetic and it's because
Clark actually has greener grass.
0
Strayer can be reached
at lstrayer@umich.edu.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Hanink is off-base, meetings,
lounges open to everyone
To THE DAILY:
I think it is interesting that the Daily printed
Jim Trout's letter ('Double standards' favoring
minorities unfair to majority, 09/23/03), regarding
Johanna Hanink's column ('Members-only' diver-
sity, 09/22/03), as his comments about his visit
to the University with his son dangerously intro-
duces, if not perpetuates, the idea that the
African-American lounges are restricted to
blacks only. Though (hopefully) all of the upper-
classmen of the University know that Trout's
son didn't know what the bloody hell he was
talking about when he made that glaring, obvi-
ously uneducated mistake in telling that to his
dad, I can still imagine some encouragable
freshman with a snot bubble coming out of his
nose reading the response and jumping to that
ridiculous conclusion that there would actually
be a lounge in a University reserved exclusively
for one ethnicity.
Almost more dangerous was the error that
Hanink makes in the column itself. She speaks
of the "minorities only" meeting that took
place last fall term in the wake of the Daily
boycott, but she was very off-base with her
factual information. Had Hanink even attempt-
ed to attend the meeting herself, she would
have learned not only was it not restricted to
minorities, but that she would have been in
good company with other white representa-
tives of the Daily! She cites an e-mail as
advertising it as "minorities only," though I
and no one else I have spoken to received an
e-mail with that specific wording, and
Hanink's journalistic background should allow
her to know better than to anonymously cite
any e-mails as reference points.
I doubt this letter will make it in the paper,
but, not for lack of trying, some very important
facts needed to be cleared up in this mess of
crass assumptions.
DUSTIN J. SEIBERT
LSA senior
Wagner's argument flawed,
Israel a Jewish theocracy that
deprives Palestinians of rights
democracy in the Middle East. There cannot be
democracy without equal rights for all who live
here, Arab as well as Jew."
Referring to Israel's 36 year occupation of
3.6 million Palestinians, Burg further stated,
"Traveling on the fast highway that skirts barely
a half-mile west of the Palestinian roadblocks,
it's hard to comprehend the humiliating experi-
ence of the despised Arab who must creep for
hours along the pocked, blockaded roads
assigned to him. One road for the occupier, one
road for the occupied."
Of the 5 million Palestinians under Israeli
control, only 30 percent have the right to vote.
Of that minority, not a single indigenous, non-
Jewish Palestinian enjoys full benefits or equali-
ty under the law. This "democracy" certainly
should not be lauded as Wagner suggests.
- Rather, a growing number of academics, schol-
ars, and South African anti-apartheid heroes
have correctly characterized this as apartheid,
and a plausible course of action then would be
divestment.
HASSAN ABRAHAM
LSA junior
Vice Chair, Students Allied for
Freedom and Equality
Word snob bashes fellow
word snob's use of fascist' in
battle of literary proportions
To THE DAILY:
I can't express how happy I am see to that
some at the Daily are very picky about the
meanings of the words they use (People who use
words they don't know are (not) ironic fascists,
09/23/03). It's been a major gripe of mine for
many years. Unfortunately Aubrey Henretty
could not quite divorce the political implications
of words from what they actually mean.
She regrets that the "War on Iraq" became
the "War in Iraq" in the first days of the conflict.
Perhaps the preposition changed because now
the war had moved into Iraq. "In," in this case, is
more descriptive. Though I'm sure Henretty
would have preferred "War Against Iraq," as
would I, but the words are correct, and "on" is
such an awkward phasing.
She provides many examples of how not to
use the word "fascist," but unfortunately hers
falls short as well. "...there's a real fascist push-
ing unconstitutional legislation through Con-
gress." Not to defend Attorney General John
Ashcroft, or get into a monologue about which
elements of 1930s fascism define the word, but
there are enough people in this world to whom
weekend, (DPS arrests suspect in knife incident,
09/24/03). I am glad to see that the Ann
Arbor Police Department, along with the
Department of Public Safety are stepping up
to the plate. I personally find that the home-
less people are extremely threatening.
Whether they try to be or not, I would
prefer to be left alone, rather than be accost-
ed on the street on my way to class. It really
surprises me when I go there, to see the
amount of homeless people that freely hang
around the campus.
I think that the homeless people would
not feel so threatened by the students if
they just did not talk to them. I don't see a
need for comments to be thrown around on
the street. I often fear for my safety when I
am around these people, and as a student
here at the University, I should not have to
feel that way. I am not trying to make any
generalizations about homeless people, I
am just very leery of their presence here on
campus. It is always unfortunate that
something less than satisfactory has to
occur for some action to be taken. Maybe
now, everyone will realize that there is a
large problem on this campus and some-
thing has to be done about it. There has to
be some way that the University communi-
ty can live simultaneously with homeless
people and the situation is safe and secure
for both sides.
LESLIE RoTT
Rackham
First-come,first-serve voucher
system at Michigan Stadium
would make for a lively crowd
To THE DAILY:
From what was described in Monday's
analysis of Saturday's football game
against Oregon, a first-come first-serve
voucher system for student seating sounds
much more conducive for a lively crowd
than our current system based on credits
earned. Why should drunken sorority
seniors be ushered to the front row when
they show up a half hour late (if they both-
er to show up at all)? A credit system is
perfect for course selection, but should
have no bearing on where you sit during
football games. The people who care about
the team deserve good seats.
The current system is also flawed
because it isolates incoming freshmen who
don't know anyone to sign up for tickets
TO THE DAILY:
In his letter (Divesting from Israel contrary to
U.S. policies supporting democracy in Middle East,
:I fnfr ~ i~ he .fl r t iime ~m s ct onfltedi.
-nt a~na sacred ne s.:T1
I