4A - The Michigan Daily - Thursday, October 5, 2006 DONN M. FRESARD EMILYJEFFREY BLOOMER Editor in Chief CHRISTOPHER ZBROZEK MEnagEY EdOOMR Editorial Page Editors Managing Editor EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 413 E. HURON ANN ARBOR, MI 48104 tothedaily@michigandaily.com "M T HE D)AILY Crying wolf Blogs an imperfect tool to spread news, gossip OPINION NOTABLE QUOTABLE ' We are all dreamers, and part of that dream is to find life some- where." - Scientist Mario Livio of the Space Telescope Science Institute, on the identiication of 16 planets in the Milky Way, as reported today in The Washington Post. JACK DOHERING ', t!rla~ LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Send all letters to the editor to tothedaily@michigandaily.com. ou would think Justin Zatkoff, the Oakland University student who nearly died for the Republican cause last week, would deserve a round of applause for taking one in the eye for all the conservatives being discriminated against out there. He really would deserve applause - had he nearly died, had he been the victim of a politically motivated hate crime, had there been a trend of vio- lence against Republicans. The real story of Zatkoff, the executive director of the Michigan Federation of College Repub- licans with a nasty black eye, is far less glamorous than what originally appeared on the Internet. He got drunk, his friend punched him in the eye, and his buddies told others it was done by "liberal thugs." The story is amusing, if only due to schadenfreude. But the hate crime that wasn't demonstrates more than one kid's foolishness: It also reveals the how blogs have developed the ability to instantly spread news and gossip far faster, in some cases, than the truth can travel. Blogs have turned any commuter with a camera into a reporter, any insomniac into a pundit. Every word or idea is instantly made public, uncensored, unedited - and unverified. This democratization of media has been effective in bringing issues and scandals to the forefront that otherwise might not fit on the limited pages of a news- paper or condensed into the evening news. Blogs have given the individual the ability to rant about his leaders or his dog's weird habits to a potentially limitless audience. But blogs, as they are now, cannot whol- ly replace traditional media. As Zatkoff's story illustrates, blogs may shine in their ability to transmit information rapidly, but they lag in accountability and often in accuracy. Zatkoff's misfortune first appeared on the college Republican blog Truth Caucus, when it posted a report from a reader that there was "quite a bit of speculation that he was targeted by leftist groups:" It was soon picked up by the popular Washington blog Wonkette, which reported that "a source close to Justin" said he was attacked by By Any Means Necessary or a "homosexual rights group." And so on. The Ann Arbor News and The Michigan Daily later pub- lished the police report, but the rumor that Zatkoff was brutally beaten at a party last month by "liberal thugs" had already done its damage. In part, the willingness of readers to accept Zatkoff's claim that he was vic- tim of a political hate crime drew on a widely held view that Republicans are a targeted minority, particularly in liberal cities like Ann Arbor. Last year's Conser- vative Coming Out Day was a testament to this sentiment of victimization on cam- pus. Although Zatkoff's shiner had noth- ing to do with his political beliefs, people believed his story because it fit well into the pre-established mold that liberals were out to get him. Following its appear- ance on Truth Caucus, the state chair of the Michigan College Republicans sent out a statement warning fellow Republi- cans to "travel in groups when possible, especially until the elections are over." There were no "militant leftist groups" out to set Zatkoff straight that night. Nor did the pro-affirmative action group BAMN have any intention of acting lit- erally on its name. As blogs mature, it seems likely that cases like Zatkoff's will become less frequent. For now, Zatkoff's 15 minutes of fame has just proved to be. another unsuccessful attempt of playing poor, abused rightist. VIEWPOINT An open letter to Senator Stabenow BY GARY GRACA Three weeks ago, you stood on a stage in front of the Harlan Hatcher Graduate Library with the other five Democratic female U.S. Senators and made a powerful appeal to a crowd of University students. As I stood in the crowd that Sunday afternoon, I listened to you emphasize how much you cared about Michi- gan - its jobs, its students, its elderly and its soldiers. By the end, you had me convinced that you were a genuinely compassionate person. No longer were you just Senator Stabenow, but Aunt Debbie, the one who understands everyone's problems. And you had my vote. But you must have left your conscience in Ann Arbor that afternoon, because last Thursday when you were on Capital Hill, it was nowhere to be found. By voting in favor of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, you revealed an appalling side of you beyond the trustworthy fagade presented in campaign rheto- ric. Not only does this bill set a terrifying precedent for the treatment of soldiers - ours included - but it tramples on the checks and balances of our Constitu- tion. As a former supporter, I feel betrayed. I can't help but feel that this is either an opportunist ploy before the midterm elections or a pronouncement of your hypocritical stance on human rights and civil liber- ties. I don't know which is worse. From its beginning, the bill has been an elec- tion-year stunt for the Bush Administration and the Republican Party to appear tough on terrorism and strong on national security. Just consider the timing: This last month's rush to bring this detainee bill to the President's desk comes months after the Supreme Court's decision in Ham- dan v. Rumsfeld, and also only days after the President moved 13 high-profile al-Qaida prisoners to Guanti- namo Bay, giving the illusion of urgency. The truth is that only 6 percent of the detainees at Guantdnamo were captured on the battlefield, only 8 percent were al-Qaida affiliates, and only 10 of the roughly 600 detainees have been charged with crimes. Certainly, this is not an issue of national security. These prison- ers don't represent a threat to America; by and large, they are merely innocent civilians captured on pure suspicion and now denied the right to challenge their detainment. Although this bill is notan issue ofnational security, it is an issue of another kind of security - job security. With midterm elections approaching, deplorable poli- ticians facing re-election have tugged at Americans' heartstrings, using fear to garner poll support. Unfor- tunately, you are one of these politicians. By voting in favor of several of the failed amendments prior to the final bill, you can allege that you supported habeas corpus and human rights while your final vote reflects your strong stance on terrorism. I can only hope that Michiganders are not ignorant enough to support your two-sided politics. More importantly, the issue of humane treat- ment of prisoners requires a great deal of reflec- tion and discussion - yet it has received neither in Congress. The result is a new policy of minimal adherence to the Geneva Convention. This bill not only prohibits detainees from challenging their imprisonment in court - effectively keeping the issue out of the judicial system - but it allows the president to decide the "meaning and application" of the Geneva Convention, giving him the power to define torture. With this immense executive power, the current administration will guarantee the Central Intelligence Agency the use of the same techniques - water-boarding, sleep depri- vation and personal humiliation - that it has been using. This sends the message that these methods are acceptable for use on their soldiers and so are also fair game to inflict on our soldiers. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, for your strong stance on terrorism. It sends a powerful message of American power to the world - our power to defy human rights under the veil of the war on terror. I hope it pulls in big support from fearful constituents. But remember that along the way you have abandoned your commitment to protecting the disadvantaged and abandoned everything that you spoke about so eloquently that afternoon in Ann Arbor. Graca is an LSA freshman and a member of the Daily's editorial board. He can be reached at gmgraca@umich.edu. MCRI will not hinder affirmative action programs TO THE DAILY: Emily Beam's cryptic message that when MCRI passes the so-called Rich White Man will be the only "deserving" group (The myth of a colorblind meritocracy, 10/04/2006) would be entirely true had she not forgotten one thing: affirmative action. Affirmative action, as it was originally intended to be, meant programs that protect people and ensure fair treatment regardless of race, sex or national origin. MCRI's passage will do nothing to hinder these affirmative action programs. So why should someone like me (a female engineer who knows about racism and sexism all too well) vote yes on Proposal 2? If not for individual liberty, if not to weaken the government's control over our lives, if not because it's wrong to judge a person based on a group that society has lumped him or her into - then maybe just for a little personal dignity. Heather Wittaniemi Engineering sophomore Post WWII affirmative action helped immigrants move up TO THE DAILY: This week's Statement features an article by Prof. Carl Cohen (Why racial preferences are a product of white guilt, 10/04/2006), who deplores that the guilt that white people feel for oppressing blacks keeps them from making logical and ethical decisions when it comes to issues concerning race. I don't dis- agree with Cohen on this matter, but I believe that "white guilt," in fact, is not such a bad thing. Though most might not realize it now, many of our ancestors whom we think of as being patently "white" - particularly Jews, Irish and Southern and Eastern Europeans - used to be considered by other Americans as inferior, nonwhite minorities. This belief did not simply fade with time. Rather, the guilt that white Americans felt after the Holo- caust made anti-Semitism and anti-European racism condemnable and socially unacceptable. Post-WWII affirmative action programs, such as the Serviceman's Readjustment Act of 1944, helped give immigrants' children the opportunity to be treated as equals. Also known as the GI Bill, the act provided educational training, job benefits and hous- ing loans to returning veterans. College enrollment skyrocketed and housing loans allowed lower-class; urban families to move to the suburbs and have a chance at a better life. Today Jews, Irish, Poles, Ital- ians and others who were treated as minorities are just as white as the next person. Because of govern- ment-sponsored affirmative action programs, we got our chance for upward mobility. Now don't other minorities deserve that opportunity? Carilyn Miller LSA sophomore Guilt is a necessary evil in promoting diversity and equality TO THE DAILY: Prof. Carl Cohen's article (Why racial preferences are a product of white guilt, 10/04/2006) is an intel- ligent exposure of white racial paranoia. Whites, holding positions of power, feel responsible to make up for racial discrimination; the system "uses and abuses" them to give preference to minorities. "White guilt," he writes, "remains the central nerve of rela- tions between blacks and whites," and he is entirely correct. So what? Describing the system does not allow one to jump immediately to condemning it. I agree that guilt is "bad," a negative thing - but aren't there more important issues than the psychology of white people? For example: The Joint Center for Political and Eco- nomic Studies found in 2002 that non-Hispanic whites have a7 percent probability of living in poverty, while 23 percent of blacks live below the poverty line. Doesn't the fact these guilt-stricken people in positions of power who overextend themselves to be "politically correct" - university presidents, Supreme Court jus- tices, politicians - are overwhelmingly white mean something? I feel justifiably guilty. If in defending affirmative action and racial pref- erences we attempt to assuage historical guilt, then our guilt is a necessary evil. Let's not give up the ongoing fight against pervasive status quo racism. Some things are more important than "civic equal- ity" or "feelings" - namely diversity, equality (in the full and true sense of the word, not in its naively colorblind and symbolic form) and change. Love your brother and sister! Equality and justice for all! Vote no on Proposal 2! Gabriel Tourek LSA freshman Don't forget about gender implications of Prop 2 TO THE DAILY: I am writing in response to Prof. Carl Cohen's long letter to the campus community (Why racial prefer- ences are a product of white guilt, 10/04/2006), which spoke to the white guilt underlying affirmative action programs. First, a correction I feel bound to make: Proposal 2 on the November ballot in Michigan most certainly does ban the use of affirmative action pro- grams - in state and local governments and in the public universities and colleges of the state. But I have another response, in which I ask that we not forget that Proposal 2 is not about just race or eth- nicity - but also about gender. As a working-class female who attended the University in the 1970s and again in the 1980s, I most certainly benefited from affirmative action and related programs. My parents did not attend college and urged me to work full-time and attend a local community college in the evening. My high school training was, in fact, in secretarial skills. Fortunately, I was admitted to the University and provided scholarship funding from the state of Mich- igan despite the lack of enthusiasm at home. I'm not certain that would happen under Proposal 2. When I returned for an MBA six years after finishing my LSA degree, I was honored with a scholarship from the Center for the Education of Women. My parents proudly joined me for the fantastic, warm and encouraging ceremony that CEW held. It was a deeply meaningful event, and the financial support made it possible to stay in the full-time day program at the Business School. It is entirely possible that if Proposal 2 passes, programs like CEW will no longer exist. Programs that reach out to women and girls - about math and science and engineering, or any nontradi- tional career or academic choice - may well be illegal under a constitutional amendment that bans all programs that stem from affirmative action or preferential treatment. A public entity - a grade school, high school, township, college or univer- sity - would no longer be allowed to undertake efforts to encourage diversity or to reach out to underserved or underrepresented people in our state. What a loss that would be - not because we are all guilty of racism or sexism, or because our grandparents were, but because we are all stronger when we reach across boundaries, when we encounter people not like ourselves, when we stretch ourselves to achieve something we had not perhaps imagined possible. I am not ashamed or angry to be a woman - nor am I guilty about our collective history. But I do want to work and live in a place that includes people of all kinds. I hope that is not taken from us by a bad con- stitutional amendment. Maureen S. Martin The letter writer is an alumna and a staff member with the Office of University Development. Solidarity among groups was present on the Diag last week TO THE DAILY: Based on the headline Groups vie for attention on Diag crowded with protest (09/28/2006), the writer does not know the meaning of "solidarity" There's no mention of this theme in the article, except in an organizer's letter to the editor (News article misrepresents Solidarity Day's pur- pose, 10/03/2006): "The organizations on the Diag were unified in their messages and their causes - acknowl- edging the humanity of all people, a central theme that was deliberately decided on." Solidarity is defined on OED.com as: "perfect coin- cidence of (or between) interests". There is solidarity between people of Middle East, South Asian and Latin American heritage. Solidarity between these groups and the College Democrats, solidarity against preachers of hate like Venyah, solidarity against idiotic Republicans like Wilkins, solidarity against polemics, demagogues, intolerance and injustice. On the Diag I said, "yester- day there was a dynamic but today there are just people standing around" (On Diag, more hate, 09/27/2006). I mean dynamic: dynamic relations, "forming parts of one connected experience" - not merely standing but standing together! Michael Kozlowski LSA senior Girls don't buy sunglasses to shade their image TO THE DAILY: If James Somers is so bothered by an accessory that does not cater entirely to his sex (Girls wearing big sun- glasses aren't hot and show weakness, 10/03/2006), I sug- gest he take his business degree and enter the fashion industry, where he will learn quite quickly that if women dress for people besides themselves, they are dressing to compete with other women. Very few trends in women's fashion are designed for the pleasure of men. When Courreges brought the mini-skirt to runways in 1965, he intended to help women lead modern, active lives - not to create cheap entertainment for college men sitting through econometrics lectures. Whatever enjoyment heterosexual men may receive from the thrill of an exposed leg or an artificially enlarged breast is not the intent of the designer (no matter how much separation is between the runway piece and the actual garment worn by an average college student), and probably not even the intent of the woman herself. Sexual- ity in fashion is about self-expression and perhaps power, in the ability to change one's look at will. This is distantly followed by power over other women, which is still more important than power over men, and even that is not necessarily with the intent of attracting them. I don't know a woman who purchased her large sunglasses in order to hide certain features; in fact, I would argue that few women wearing these "big tinted eye-boxes" actually have (or think they have) unsightly attributes to conceal. Finally, if Somers would care to enlighten us as to how liner, mascara and eye shadow have truly contributed to the betterment of society for "hundreds of years:' I would be greatly obliged. Anne Ebbers LSA junior 11 I ERIN RUSSELL JoY I" We tQTY sea y sMAII, tO TI 1t 1,5 thr <4JVO -MC rrC-0 CHIT. Ar$ "Uca / HEYI09VIOU$LY, A HC-APINC S GC ;z-_ 4 00 1; HSjO IV, GNEep.Cf v I 4 I .& 0 -.A I, -,, - -., &A"a-A