On Thursday in the Collegian, an editorial was published by a

group of professors educating students on the fact that it is

Republicans that are the reason for funding problems in higher

education. I hope their academic work is not as poor. They claim

that the 2002 gaining of control the Colorado Legislature by

Republicans caused higher education to suffer. Republicans are the

villains that “do not support higher education in Colorado.

Democrats do.”

What they fail to mention is that Democrats only controlled the

Senate for two years. Previous to that, the Republicans held

control of the Senate for 40 years. Similarly, the Republicans have

controlled the House for 29 years. So, for two years the Democrats

controlled the State Senate, prior to a 25-year control by

Republicans of both the House and Senate. It was during these years

that CSU grew into the institution it is today. If Republicans

truly hated higher education then we would not have seen the boom

that occurred in during the 90s where funding increased 70 percent

and former CSU President Al Yates received so much praise.

The truth of the matter is that 2002 saw a major state budget

shortage due to decreased tourism following Sept. 11, 2001,

decreased capital gains tax revenues and a general downturn in the

economy nationwide. Restrictions by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights

and mandatory increases in education along with Medicaid spending

have caused the remaining 34 percent of the budget to be squeezed

between higher education, corrections and human services. Attempts

by both parties to fix the problem have been blocked by the other.

A single party is not solely to blame.

Jacob Seybert

Second Bachelor’s Candidate

Last Thursday I went to visit my grandparents. Both of them

graduated from four-year universities and have post-bachelor work

under their belts. So, you would assume that they are smart and

“educated,” about politics and worldly issues. However, I failed to

mention that they are closed-minded. We started talking about

politics, which didn’t bother me one bit, until they started to

criticize me and my education. All of their arguments were

one-sided and based on one news source. When they asked me where I

heard what they called “bologna” I told them that I had gotten my

information from various sources ranging from multiple newspapers,

TV stations, Web sites and alternative news sources; and that I

made my decision and own opinion after evaluating many sources.

In Monday’s opinion article by the Collegian staff, there was

something that boggled my mind: the fact that the Collegian

criticized celebrities for having their own opinions. The fact that

the staff brought up the lack of education of an individual as a

basis of not being qualified as to having an opinion is absurd.

Anyone is qualified to have an opinion, especially in our country.

However, education or not, opinion or fact, people should take

everything with a “grain of salt” because most of the time, so

called information is not absolute. I encourage everyone to listen

to and read as many sources as possible, then form your own

opinion. Humans are not robots, so make an educated and

well-rounded decision. VOTE, but not just to vote, vote to make a

difference and make an educated decision; after all, this is not an

exam, there is no right or wrong answer, just a right or wrong way

to formulate an answer. Be Smart.

Nicole C. Lecheler

Senior, liberal arts & media studies

I am writing in response to Kenneth Zetye’s article, “‘Moore’

Fallacies,” in Friday’s paper regarding the flaws in Michael

Moore’s work. I am concerned because the bulk of the information

and “facts” in the article are cited as coming from the Internet. I

certainly hope the journalists that I trust aren’t getting the

majority of their information for their news stories from the

Internet. I think it’s safe to say that it is common knowledge that

the Internet is one of the least credible sources of any

information. Anyone involved in the media should know that and

should avoid exposing their audience to such unreliable

information. Zetye’s decision to rely so heavily on online sources

reflects poorly on the Collegian staff and the newspaper as a

whole. Zetye’s expression of his dislike for Moore would have been

far more effective if he would have stated his own opinion rather

than fill up the page with erroneous “facts.”

I suggest checking one’s own sources, especially when pointing

the finger at someone for using fallacious arguments. Zetye’s

article managed to employ the same fact-skewing tactics that he

accuses Moore of using in his movies and books. The students at CSU

deserve to read articles in the Collegian that are based on

credible sources.

Emily Wiseman

Senior, natural resource recreation and tourism major