Sean Hannity: Concorde conservative
Dear Editor:
Re: “Hannity Cancels Appearance” [Oct. 6, 2004].
You report, “Hannity… requested a private jet to fly him to St. Louis for the speech, but then rejected ‘several’ different jets offered by a private donor.”
Ever since I first heard the words “Lamborghini Libertarian,” I’ve been hungering for more witty, alliterative epithets that discount a person’s political views by implying he thinks that he is too important for good old blue-collar modes of transportation. That is exactly what has been missing in this nation’s political discourse. So naturally, when I heard that Sean Hannity is fond of calling Michael Moore a “Limousine Liberal” ÿ[“Hannity to follow Moore at Pageant,” Oct. 1, 2004], I was overjoyed that he was coming to share his views on campus.
What a shame he couldn’t make it!ÿIf only there had been time to find a brand of private jet that he approved of.
-Duncan White
Class of 2007
Crossing the line between interesting and insulting
Dear Editor:
Re: “T.A.’s need to know English” [Oct. 1, 2004].
Never in my five years at Washington University has an op-ed pissed me off as Nick Loyal’s did.
From his poetic rambling, I gather that his point is that T.A.’s should strive to improve their English, as it can create difficulties for students. This is a good point to make. He did not, however, need to do it in such a sarcastic and disrespectful manner.
Calling someone a “jolly little man” crosses the line between humor and insulting condescension. And his comments on the faculty meetings (“Hell, getting a cup of coffee probably involves a work visa, several diplomats and a messenger boy named Diego”) has moved beyond bad taste and treading into dangerous realms of stereotypes and prejudice.
A well-written satirical op-ed can be both entertaining and effective. Loyal’s, with his sneering metaphors and snide asides, was neither. Loyal is lucky to have grown up in an environment where he could develop a strong command of the English language. He should try to use it responsibly.ÿ ÿÿÿÿÿ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
-Vu Le
Class of 2003
How do you substitute ignorance for insensitivity?
Dear Editor:
Just ask Nick Loyal; he knows. ÿIn his article he laments that his math T.A. doesn’t speak English very well.ÿCertainly he has every right to suggest that poorly spoken English generally detracts from the learning experience at Washington University. But he also manages thoughtless callousness.
He remarks, “Sure, [foreign grad student T.A.’s] might not know what a verb is in some of these parts of the world, but hey! They’re good at math, right?” What escapes Mr. Loyal is that grammar structure often varies dramatically across languages, and foreign T.A.’s often have no choice but to think in a language other than English before uttering in English. This explains, for instance, why Chinese people don’t pluralize words or conjugate verb infinitives; these structures just do not exist in that language. Certainly, empathizing with a native Chinese speaker or any other foreigner who must re-wire his thoughts to speak English is not only a good alternative to insensitive whining, but would be commendable.
Alas, Mr. Loyal starts his very own article with the swooping, self-endearing words “There’s something about college that just brings out the best in people.”ÿHard to believe, but the college freshman would be a whole lot smarter if he listened to his own words a little more loyally.
-Chihmao Hsieh
Graduate Student
Olin School of Business
No such thing as a court marriage
Dear Editor:
Re: “Gay marriage: how the debate misses the mark” [Oct. 6, 2004].
I would like to applaud Gregg Keithley on his article and take the argument one step further.
Indeed, it is not the government’s role to define something that is a religious institution. Government only found itself forced to meddle in the marriage issue for such purposes as tax benefits, recognition of what constitutes a household and rights of spouses, but now it has taken over the institution. In reality, a court “marriage” is a misnomer-it is simply the government recognizing a civil union. In fact, the same rights granted by government “marriages” should be granted to all persons who choose to make such a civil union.
Unions should not be limited to persons romantically involved, as long as they have a legitimate case for the union and for those tax benefits, hospital visitation rights, etc. If I want to create a household with my friend and share living expenses with them and if I want him/her to be the person who makes medical decisions for me, who shares custodial rights to my children and who has custodial rights to them should I pass on, a civil union should be available to recognize these choices, irrespective of whether we are romantically involved or not.
I don’t condone gay marriage, but I do recognize people’s rights to make these private lifestyle choices for themselves and strongly disapprove of having government infringe on these religious freedoms.
-David Szwarcsztejn
Class of 2007
Telling it like it is
Dear Editor:
Re: “Insecure voters: put up or shut up” [Oct. 8, 2004].
Thank you, Robbie Gross, for your hard-hitting attack on the pompous, feigned authority of some Wash. U. students. You might suggest that students apply this first-rate education to promote positive change (in any form it may take), instead of using their basic knowledge to criticize others who are, in most cases, much better informed.
-Chesney Fowler
Class of 2005
Defeat Bush by not supporting Nader
Dear Editor:
As a Washington University alum, I am urging all Missouri voters (most certainly including you students who are registered here) to not vote for Nader! You are too intelligent and practical to really believe that there is no difference between Bush and Kerry.
Four more years of Bush will mean the continuation of policies that are destroying the environment, justifiably making America hated around the world, and keeping many Americans from working and/or earning a wage that can support a family.
Certainly you understand that because of Nader four years ago, we were robbed of a chance to (at the very least) prevent the above list from occurring.
“As Missouri goes, so goes America.” Make your vote one that will really count.
-Sara Ross Kupor
Class of 1968