To the Editor:

 Uncategorized
Dec 092004
 
Authors:

I wanted to be the first "Republican" to thank you (Vince Adams) for your heartfelt letter; however, I do believe that some issues need to be cleared up. First of all, comparing President Bush to Lyndon Johnson is like comparing apples to oranges. Johnson played a critical role in this nation and what he did has shaped our country today. Johnson pulled our troops out of Vietnam, which caused great disappointment and regret among our troops. The troops who died died for nothing as far as Johnson was concerned. The war in Iraq is similar, but Bush obviously strongly supports our troops and is focused on a better Iraq and bettering the Iraqi people. Sen. John Kerry, on the other hand, would have been another Johnson.

Secondly, scientific breakthroughs such as stem cell research are being done today and huge things are coming from it, and Bush is in full support of it. What he doesn't support is innocent fetuses being aborted for the sole purpose of research. However, abortion is another controversial subject that should be left for another day. And, all I have to say about the "gay community" is Kerry doesn't support it either, and if he did, he would change his mind tomorrow.

Finally, the issue of "God being forced down your throat" never happened. Our country's foundation is based along the sayings of our forefathers: "In God we trust" and "One nation under God." Why should we change what our forefathers wrote and believed when they were fighting for our freedom and for this country?

Bush is a moral, honorable, honest person and if that concerns people, I am not sure what type of president you are looking for.

Bush is not "attacking you and your buddies," Mr. Adams, and I will apologize if other Republicans are. But, the issue isn't Bush; it is that your man, Kerry, didn't win. I think it might help you to get your facts straight before trying to compare your apples with oranges.

Andrea Matich

Senior, business marketing

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

To the Editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Dec 092004
 
Authors:

Big surprise – oil contract goes to Bush's former company. Really it's not all about the oil, it's about democracy and freedom right?

I can't imagine that George Bush would send American troops to a foreign nation for his selfish oil interests, can you? That's just not the kind of thing he would do … or is it?

Harken Energy, the Texas-based company that bought George Bush's failing oil company, Arbusto, and gave him a spot on its board of directors, has recently signed a contract for oil exploration and production in Colombia.

How has President Bush been involved in this? In his first term Bush gave Colombia half a billion dollars a year. In addition he has given Colombia almost $100 million in counterterrorism.

So what's wrong with that? Funny how it works – the aid given to Colombia comes with stipulation to "restructure" their state-owned oil entities, providing favorable investment conditions for foreign oil companies. It works a lot better when you can just pay the government to open its country up to your oil companies. That way you don't have to have a dirty war, like the one in, say, Iraq.

And here is the interesting part. You see the Colombian people understand that they are being robbed of their wealth, so the U.S. Army Special Forces troops have been deployed to protect – you guessed it – a major oil pipeline.

So with some American troops for security and some money, Mr. Bush's Harken Energy now owns Colombian oil. But this is completely unrelated to Iraq, right? Iraq is the second largest source of oil in the world, but over there it's all about freedom.

 

Chris Carlson

Fort Collins resident and CSU alumnus

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

To the Editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Dec 092004
 
Authors:

Wednesday's Collegian article discussing how political organizations were moving on following the 2004 election was very interesting. One phrase in the article jumped out at me … "academic freedom," which is apparently a key element of the CSU College Republicans' current agenda. I struggled to wrap my head around this newspeak, and finally ended up googling it just to see what freedoms I've been missing. What I discovered was the Students for Academic Freedom Web site, www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org

Apparently, "academic freedom" is how Republicans have chosen to frame their agenda of pushing Republican ideology into academia. The Academic Bill of Rights is designed to give the poor, disenfranchised Republicans a chance at their dream job of teaching, as well as the massive salaries that go along with it. The call for "free inquiry and free speech within the academic community" seems particularly amusing here at CSU, where we've had a sociology professor run off campus for exercising his freedom of speech. I'm sure the Students for Academic Freedom lodged many complaints about that injustice.

Anyone who believes, as the authors of the Academic Bill of Rights seem to, that "pluralism, diversity, opportunity, critical intelligence, openness and fairness" are the "cornerstones of American society" definitely has a right to complain about having received a poor education. While these are certainly things that we in America pay a lot of lip service to, anyone who actually believes that these ideals have manifested themselves in our society to any great extent is in dire need of a competent U.S. history course.

Thomas Miller

Senior, history and anthropology

 Posted by at 5:00 pm