Letters to the Editor (Editorial Policies)
Posted on September 14, 2006

Webb’s Harrisonburg visit disappoints

As a politically interested student, I enjoy attending events held by both Democrats and Republicans. I have my bias and it always leans to the conservative side, but I respect both sides enough to hear everyone out. However, after attending the Webb event this past Saturday at Jess’ Lunch, I was left with a sense that he is an unprepared candidate.   

A potential candidate should have poise, command a sense that the future is full of great prospects, and always be an enthusiastic speaker. Webb looked like he felt nervous; he implied a bleak future where even if he were elected, he wouldn’t be able to affect change, and the speech was less than uplifting.

I was particularly displeased by his weak positions on the War on Terror. Belief there will ever be unity in the debate on how and where to fight the War on Terror is not a plan, it is pure lunacy. Webb’s further blunder of speaking on solving social ills using government power without discussing how he could fund these new government programs shows me he is an unprepared candidate. I was left thoroughly unimpressed.

Sen. Allen is still my choice to continue representing Virginia. His common-sense Jeffersonian virtues speak well to the community values that personify Virginia for me.

Jarrett Ray, junior political science and philosophy major

Allen deserves more than ad hominem response

In Leela Pereira’s recent article regarding Sen. George Allen, she compared Allen with some of this summer’s more noteworthy media starlets such as French soccer player Zinedine Zidane. In any case, the irony of Pereira’s ad hominem attack on Allen while condemning him for name calling apparently escapes the author. This is especially surprising, since as a senior history major, she should have been taught in HIST 395 about common argument fallacies, including ad hominem attacks.

In regards to Pereira’s broad interpretation about Allen’s immigration comments, she should be very familiar with immigration issues, being of Indian descent and a history major. After all, throughout India’s history, the sub-continent has absorbed multiple migrations of people from Central Asia, the Middle East and Europe. These migrations/invasions often brought great suffering to the Indian people and always marked the beginning of new and important chapters of Indian history. Thus, modern American concerns over immigrations have some legitimacy — sentiments Pereira should be able to identify with.

The most galling aspect of Pereira’s article is when she compares Allen to a child playing in a sandbox. To accuse a U.S. senator — a government official elected by the collective will of the commonwealth — of childlike behavior shows a distressing contempt for the honor of the office of Congress. This goes not just for Allen, but also for all U.S. representatives. If Americans stop respecting our elected officials, they really will become no better than the media starlets whom Pereira finds so abhorrent to her adult-in-training sensibilities.

Michael Yarborough, junior history and philosophy major

Confederate flag not a symbol of hate

In Ms. Pereira’s article from the Sept. 11 issue of The Breeze, the association made between the Confederate battle flag and racism demonstrates a disappointing disregard for American history. The Confederate battle flag is a symbol of proud Southern heritage stemming from the South’s tradition of military chivalry and honor. The Civil War was fought over secession, not slavery. Knowing that most Southerners were too poor to afford slaves, a confused Union soldier once asked a captured Confederate why he was fighting. His response was “because you’re here.” The Confederate battle flag did not become a symbol of the Ku Klux Klan until the 1950s. The Christian cross, however, was adopted by the KKK long before. Just last week, The Washington Times reported a KKK gathering in Pennsylvania (a Northern state, to the layman) was protested by a group of Confederate descendants demanding the removal of the flag. In the House of Representatives, 96 Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, compared to only 34 Republicans.

Instead of trying to smear Republican Sen. Allen as “racist” and “intolerant,” maybe the opposing parties should actually come up with a better solution to the millions of illegal immigrants who enter our country each year. In the words of Thomas Sowell, “The beauty of doing nothing is that you can do it perfectly. Only when you do something is it almost impossible to do it without mistakes. Therefore, people who are contributing nothing to society except their constant criticisms can feel both intellectually and morally superior.”

Nathaniel Clarkson and Anderson Braswell, senior economics/geography and accounting majors