To the Editor:

In this week’s issue of “Sex in the Suburbs,” Martini Amour listed the celebrities she would like to ‘have.’ One of the “celebrities” listed is John F. Kennedy, Jr. “Sex in the Suburbs” is an attempt at a funny column, which time and time again fails, and to minimize the life of this man down to a ‘Celebrities to-do’ because of his hair is disgusting. While I understand The Chronicle serves also to entertain, there is nothing entertaining about listing a person who has died as a desired celebrity. If this column’s job is to be a public diary for Martini Amour, congratulations, mission accomplished. However, if the column’s purpose is to put a funny and interesting spin on sexual issues, you have failed. Miserably. The front of The Chronicle says ‘Keeping the University informed since 1935.’ Well, now I’m informed of Martini Amour’s pathetic, unrealistic love interests and next week I get to find out which guys on campus she hopes to get drunk and hook up at a party with, in her column ‘The Bachelors of the University.’ Thanks once again for keeping me informed Chronicle.

Sincerely,

Joseph WrightSenior

——————————————————————————–

To the Editor:

In an article on the draft in the Oct. 7 issue of The Chronicle, incorrectly quoted Alyce Burton, a spokesperson for the National Selective Service, as stating in November 2003 that, “The administration thinks the war is becoming more unpopular and costly than anticipated. There may come a day they won’t be able to conduct their policies with an all-voluntary Army.” In fact this quote is actually from a history professor at the University of Illinois in the Nov. 19. 2003 issue of the Daily Illini, an independent student newspaper (www.illinimedia.com/di/nov03/nov19/news/stories/news_story01.shtml). I received a confirmatory e-mail from Richard S. Flahavan, Associate Director of Public Affairs for the Selective Service: “Thank you for taking the time to follow up on the misapplication of a quote in the article. This isn’t the first time that we at Selective Service have had our statements taken out of context and spun into something else. While we hoped that President Bush’s and Secretary Rumsfeld’s repeated statements that there is no need for a military draft would suffice, this is not the case on the Internet and on email.” Finally the draft bill mentioned in your article (HR-163) was voted down 402-2 in the House on Oct. 5. Even the sponsor, Charles Rangel (D-NY), voted against it.

Sincerely,

Peter DanielAssociate ProfessorDepartment of Biology

——————————————————————————–

To the Editor:

“It seems no publicity is worse than bad publicity.” These were words from Eric van den Berg’s highly misleading article “College Republicans lead the Right Wingers” from the Oct. 14 edition of The Chronicle. As a member of the College Republicans, I guess I should be thanking Eric then, for writing an article that was incredibly biased and completely mocking the organization, and basically, being the definition of bad publicity. Instead though, I am going to attempt to correct Eric’s mistakes by explaining the true nature of the club.

The appearance given to the College Republicans in the article is that we are a small group of intolerant fools who are further right than the most conservative Senator in Washington, and shun anyone who isn’t as conservative as we are. This is ludicrous. Our membership is larger than most other clubs on campus, and within this membership, there are a wide array of points of views ranging from far right, to slightly left of center. In fact, I’d say that the majority of members are moderates. Even in the Executive Board, there isn’t one dominant mindset. We have members that are openly pro-choice, pro-gay, and atheist! To say we all have the same opinions is a stereotype and is no better than saying something as ridiculous as Jews are greedy and all Italians are in the Mafia.

With open arms we welcome moderates and right-wingers to the club and urge them to participate and state their opinions. We wont judge you because of your political beliefs; everyone is entitled to their own political opinions and we respect that. This goes for organizations like SAI as well. We don’t agree with them, but we will never say they don’t have the right to believe what they do.

Moving on to Eric’s use of quotes. I was at the same meeting that Eric was at, and every quote he used was taken completely out of context. Certain things he quoted (such as that infamous drunk line) were said as obvious jokes, and had no basis in actual truth. The nerve that Eric has to take these quotes out of context and use them as a definition of the club is unbelievable. There were far better (and more serious) quotes said at the meeting, and Eric’s choice of these instead is enough proof that this article’s main focus is to be anti-Republican.

This wasn’t the only article that had gross falsehoods about the College Republicans in the OcT. 14 edition of The Chronicle (now labeled the “Anti-Republican Edition”). In fact, this is the second instance this year that a Chronicle article has come out as anti-Republican and made use of wrong information (“Squad Speaks” by David Robbins from the Sept. 16 edition had skewed facts about the number of people present at the God Squad event and further went on to editorialize about the reasons for that turnout.). This is just bad journalism from The Chronicle. For future reference, please just report the facts, because right now, I’m getting better information from Dan Rather than from this paper.

Sincerely, William B. Florio Treasurer of College Republicans