|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
||||||||
          |
Letters to the EditorEditor,
Political spin control reached a new low in the Turnstile column, “Democrats set precedent,” in yesterday’s ••Post.•• Now it is unpatriotic and selfish for a candidate to challenge the “declared” outcome of an obviously flawed election?
The election process is supposed to determine the will of the people, or at least the will of the people who bother to turn out to vote. When voters are turned away from the polls because the machines don’t work, because the poll workers didn’t get the word that hours had been extended or because the voters are black, the “declared” outcome may not represent the will of the voters. When whole batches of votes are left uncounted or are taken home because officials don’t know what to do with them or are counted incorrectly by the machines that are supposed to read them, a candidate may reasonably wonder about the accuracy of the declared outcome.
Mistakes happen
even in elections. When the mistakes seem to be random, there may
be no cause to challenge the declared outcome. When the mistakes seem
to work more against one side than the other, however, a challenge may
be warranted. In fact, if the voters are to continue to have confidence
in the process, a challenge may be necessary. I did not vote
for Al Gore and have no reason to defend him, but calling him “selfish”
for challenging the outcome of the presidential election in Florida is
absolutely ridiculous. The nation needed to know what happened there. We
still need to know. I am intrigued
that the author only mentioned examples of Democrats who challenged elections. Thus
only Democrats were found to be selfish. I don’t suppose any Republicans
have ever challenged an election. Letter ignored life’s realityEditor, After reading yesterday’s letter to the editor, “Liberal view morally right,” I decided that the author needed a bit of enlightenment on this subject. The reason most professors are liberal is because they have hidden in school their whole lives and, much like the author, have no clue as to what real life is about. It is very easy to stand in front of a room of impressionable minds and preach idealistic theories about the way the world should be. Unfortunately the rest of the world does not have the luxury of earning their livelihood through lecturing others on things they have never experienced for themselves. While the author is making the assumption that “the most intelligent people in this country” are liberal professors, I would like to remind him that “intelligence” is a variable term. Therefore, the author is willing to agree that those who memorize information and form skewed opinions from inside their protective unchallenged teaching positions are the “intelligent majority” of this country. What good is an education if you cannot handle yourself in a “real world” situation or ever experience the hardships that come with actually working for a living. I feel that if the author ever grows up and enters the “reality” of life, then his current dreamy, liberal, bleeding-heart opinions will quickly heal into a realistic, conservative, accurate view. My wish is that more students would have an informed opinion. The raise in tuition is due to a cut in government funding. The over-crowding of classes is due to the liberal idea that everyone deserves a college education. In reality, standards for college entrance and retainment should be drastically raised. College is not for everyone. It is a shame that those who do not belong in higher education take up space and funding for those who really do belong. There cannot be a solution unless the problem is understood. I agree that students should make their voice heard. Just make sure that that voice is motivated by facts, not emotion. — Erika Wadlinger eryckah21@aol.com |