Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor,

It was great to see the photos and the article covering the performance of "Naughty Marietta" in last week's Campus Times ["'Naughty Marietta' debuts in Dailey Theater," Nov. 15]. I am sure however, that faculty and students from ULV's 110-plus year history (like Dorothy Dupler, Tom Schultz, Gay Manifold, Steve Engle, Steve Kent, Reed Gratz, Jim Fahringer, Jack Woodruff, Elias Brightbill, Ralph Haugh, Ralph Travis, Jane Dibbell, Craig Suttle, Skip Sams, Beth Pietrzak, Sean Dillon and a thousand more) would be surprised to learn this was "the second collaboration between the two departments." You must have meant either the second between Flaten and Farthing, or the 92nd between the two departments. Open a few yearbooks from the past or see the photos backstage in Dailey Theatre and take a look at the rich history of collaborations between those two departments.

Continue the good work covering these performance departments. They add great richness to your beautiful campus!

Arman Hovanessian
Claremont

Dear Editor,

Admittedly, I am probably one of the few conservatives on campus, but come on, the article "Sadly, the GOP is now in control" [Nov. 15] was embarrassingly narrow-minded! I am all in favor of constructive political discussion, but this article was at best, extremely shallow, and at worst, intellectually dishonest.

While it is an opinion page, the author should at least attempt to support assertions with fact, rather than with sweeping generalizations and theory. The author's references to theoretical feasibility and an absence of checks and balances are simply wrong. Because of the overwhelming liberal stance, would the author raise the same concerns if the balance of power shifted to the left? I fear not.

I am not interested in simply responding with partisan politics, but rather just to ask why a half page was consumed with unoriginal, unsupported and uninspiring clichés. Yes the Republican Party has a majority in the House, Senate and Office of the President, but does the author not have faith in the strength of this nation's democracy?

I wholeheartedly agree that the "balance of power" is a legitimate political issue, but why resort to age-old scare mongering tactics of abortion, death to the environment, and God forbid, giving people who pay taxes more of their money back! Abortion is more of a moral issue than a political one. Sadly fundamentalists on both sides raise this issue in a desperate attempt to scare people and avoid talking about real political issues - see Gray Davis' 2002 reelection campaign.

One of the reasons this nation gained a dominant party in November was that the Democratic Party lost credibility with independent voters who were more interested in everyday issues such as education, disposable income and homeland security, than the scare tactics of the liberal agenda. If the "liberal way of life in the Golden State" is to be touted by the author as such a great achievement, then why has Gray Davis, in my opinion one of the most corrupt governors in U.S. history, filed a budget of $98.6 billion with a $23.6 billion deficit?

As a tax paying resident, and faced with another four-year liberal agenda, am I concerned about the future of California? Yes! But do I believe that democracy is stronger than one party's dominance? Absolutely! Hopefully in 2006, I will cast my vote based on constructive political debate, rather than the uneducated strategy of fear and theory.

Andrew Barton
Director of Development