• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Bush supporters ignore our evils

President Bush’s State of the Union speech was nothing but arrogant. His vision is definitely short sighted as he threatens the entire world with his “Star Wars” game (“Address focuses on terrorism,” Daily Bruin, News, Jan 30).

The problem with Bush’s plans is that we’re not playing a game – North Korea, Iraq, Iran and many other countries will join to fight his arrogant threats. Bush is forcing other nations to start building war armaments, such as biological and nuclear weapons, to defend themselves against his “war on terrorism.”

When he has countless giant corporations, such as Enron, Global Technologies, Toys ’R Us and K-Mart filing for bankruptcy because of low standards in management, greedy, “unethical dealings” and a bad economy, it is totally irresponsible of Bush to be threatening the entire world with his twisted ideas of “an axis of evil.”

Bush, and the millions who support him, should start doing some thinking. This man preaches for “no killing of unborn babies” yet he stands so ready to kill tens of thousands of individuals in foreign lands under the pretense of terrorism?

The statement, “If you want peace, work for justice,” has never been so clear. President Bush and all his supporters should focus on working for justice, since the culprit of all evil resides here, not abroad. Let’s “unite” and start cleaning our own actions, then we will never have to worry about the“axis of evil.”

Gloria Dittmer Administrative analyst Chancellor’s Office

Cheap housing not ‘student right’

I can’t believe how insulting Evan Okamura’s proposition is to Westwood property owners (“Access must include affordable housing,” Viewpoint, Jan. 30). Okamura believes that we ought to force property owners to lower rent costs when they are only setting their prices to fit the market. The government does not pay these owners anything in terms of updating their apartments, placing ads in newspapers, or hiring managers to lease apartments.

Westwood property owners are not “exploiting” students; students are free to live elsewhere and commute. There are many affordable apartments in Los Angeles – if one bothered to look. No one said Westwood would be a cheap place to live when students applied for admission.

Forcing rent control will not only harm property owners, it will also harm students: the shortage will be much worse if the prices are lower than the market would naturally create. Perhaps this is one reason areas that impose rent control now have Soviet-style “waiting lists.” Let’s remember that capitalism creates surpluses, but this socialist-imposed system will only result in mass-waiting lists, more students in Palms and surrounding areas, and causing those other areas’ prices to jump even higher due to increased demand.

One day I’d like to be a property owner renting to individuals, and the last thing I’d want are student groups whining about their supposed rights when they ignore one of the most sacred ones: the right to property.

Michael Gordon Fourth-year Political science

Liberals go too far, forget tolerance

It is astonishing how quickly a conservative speaker can be turned into a “right wing demagogue” by a member of the supposedly tolerant left. Lital Spiegel’s submission, “Intimidation efforts of Horowitz, D’Souza fail” (Daily Bruin, Viewpoint, Jan. 29) is dripping with the kind of dogmatism and name-calling that calls into question the left’s open-mindedness.

Examples of this skewed mentality are abundant in Spiegel’s article. For instance, while Spiegel is enraged that Horowitz referred to Marxist protesters as “fascists” during the “Rally For America,” Spiegel has no problem labeling Horowitz a “racist” and an “apologist for slavery.”

In another fit of name-calling, Spiegel refers to conservative speaker Dinesh D’ Souza as “sinister.” I can assure you that these men are neither pro-slavery or sinister – they are conservative. But for some liberals, perhaps conservative means the same thing as “pro-slavery” and “sinister.” The characterization of Horowitz’s rally as a “witch-hunt targeting foreign students, immigrants and black people” certainly makes one question whether some liberals know the difference.

Horowitz’s conservative view did nothing but add to the diversity of opinion found at this university. Yet instead of celebrating this kind of diversity, some liberals find the need to not only protest the occasion but discredit the conservative message with unfounded cries of “racism” and “intimidation.”

In actuality, the most pervasive form of intimidation found on this campus is the extreme left’s willingness to call an individual a racist if he or she openly espouses a conservative ideology. For a left-wing that prides itself on unwavering tolerance and understanding, it is disheartening to see that some liberals do not practice what they preach.

Ian Eisner Third-year Political science

Comments

Post a comment