EDITORIAL & OPINIONS
Re: "What you see is what you get," Sep. 26, 2003
To the Editor:
Defeatism runs rampant on this campus and contributes to a
sense of powerlessness. I read Mark Polishuk's column declaring
he plans to vote Liberal despite preferring the New Democratic
Party because he felt the latter had "No Damn hoPe" of winning.
A little digging proves otherwise.
So Mark and other misguided strategic voters, here's the scoop.
This riding, London North Centre, has been won twice in the
last four provincial elections by the NDP. In the two elections
the Progressive Conservatives have won, the NDP came in a close
second. For example, the last election numbers broke down like
this: PC 18,400, NDP 16,600 (and get ready for this Mark) Liberal
9,500. So, the numbers point to the fact that if you're tired
of the PC post-secondary agenda then your best chance to unseat
Dianne Cunningham (PC Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities)
- the person who is directly responsible for your tuition fees
going through the roof - you would best be advised to vote
NDP on Oct. 2.
As for strategic voting in general, I feel you should always
vote for the party that best represents your politics, not
for the 'best of the worst.' The Greens, for example, would
be much stronger off next time around if their numbers continued
to go up, even if they didn't win a seat. This would also provide
a stronger argument for proportional representation.
Ph.D. Candidate VI
Dept. Physics and Astronomy
Show me the money
To the Editor:
I would like to thank the University Students' Council for
organizing the All Candidates Debate meeting Wednesday afternoon.
I asked Dianne Cunningham, Minister for Training, Universities
and Colleges, why tuition deregulation has occurred for professional
programs, specifically business and law. She responded the
increase was a required investment into the competitiveness
of those faculties.
This past year, the faculty of law tuition increased by 14.7
per cent „ accordingly, the faculty's budget decreased by approximately
2 per cent.
Notwithstanding student aid, if the money is not being re-invested
to the faculty, what is the policy objective of deregulation?
If the answer is to make up for funding cuts of post-secondary
education, then shame on her.
HBA, Law II
Re: "J-Lo and Tiffany: criminals of fashion," Sep 24,
To the Editor:
Hi Julie, I am sorry to hear that you feel Tiffany girls are
such an eyesore to your life. Yes, there is a lot of Tiffany's
jewelry and a lot of blondes, but there are a lot of girls
who are from Toronto private schools.
What you failed to say is there are also dozens of equally
disturbing "fashion criminals" as you call them: the flannel
pants-Birkenstock nightmare-pucca shell-wearing students with
blonde highlights. Some would argue that is more of a crime.
But can we even call it that? What we wear is a representation
of who we are and how we feel, so why are you so quick to judge?
You are right, the Tiffany's bracelets are as ubiquitous as
the dog tags of Vietnam. But did you know that little piece
of identity ranges from $200 to $2,000 depending on the metal
and engraving? Perhaps it was a present from their affluent
families; maybe they picked it up on a Visa spending spree,
Maybe they, like the soldiers, are similarly fighting a war
too. This battle occurs every weekend at The Drink, GT's and
Jim Bob Ray's. Their makeup is their war paint, their cleavage
Unless you are a grassroots girl who shops at Goodwill, you
too fall into the category you love to criticize.
Speaker not an academic scholar
To the Editor:
After hearing Dr. Norman Finkelstein speak on the origins
of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I came to a new understanding
of the definition "historical revisionism."
In what he called a "simple problem," Finkelstein categorically
blamed Israelis for the situation in the Middle East. He had
the audacity to call the wars of 1948 and 1967 ã two wars in
which Israel was forced to defend its existence from an onslaught
of several belligerent Arab states ã "colonialist wars" aimed
at expanding Israel.
Not once did he make any significant reference to Palestinian
terrorism, an incontrovertible hindrance to peace and the trigger
of so many hard-line Israeli policies. He instead made the
depraved claim Israeli leaders welcome terrorist attacks, which
they use as justification for military incursions.
Finkelstein is no scholar. His idea of garnering support from
the audience consisted of using ad hominems against individuals
in the crowd and pro-Israel academics.
When I asked him a question, a Rabbi was whispering in my
ear as Finkelstein responded. Finkelstein paused to tell me
that "maybe you should think for yourself before asking questions." After
this low blow, he subsequently diverted his answer away from
While I strongly support academic debate, I have no respect
for people like Finkelstein, a propagandist who earns a living
under the false pretense of being an academic.
Co-Chair, Israel Action Committee