Gore not at fault for stocks
To the editor,
I am writing in response to Shane Call's letter on November 30th when Mr. Call placed blame on Al Gore for losses his family is suffering from hi-tech stocks. As a stockbroker and a UA alumni, I wanted to add a little insight. The recent drops in the NASDAQ aren't due to Al Gore or the delay in the election process. What's happening in the tech sector had been in motion long before the election took place. It's a function of overpricing, slowing growth rates in technology and a cooldown in the economy as a whole, with tech giants like Intel, Dell, and Gateway disappointing the markets with lower profit forecasts. The uncertaintly over the election is only a tiny part of what's going on. We could blame Gore for a lot of things, but the drop in technology stocks is not one of them. Oh, and tell your dad to mix in a non-technology stock now and then!
Bret Seeley, Alumni
Gore was real winner
To the editor,
After reading your editorial, I am compelled to reply to your remarks.
Aside from the fact that Gore got the popular votes. I think that you are misinformed with the problems that arose. First, the machine threw out many votes. Then the hand count was stopped because the Secretary of State, who is a Republican looking for a plush job, made sure the votes were not completed. Had they been, you wouldn't be writing this article. Of course, the main purpose is that each citizen has a right to a vote. This is not a contest between Gore and Bush. This is a question of issues that the American people voted on. This is democracy. This is not a Question of "sore loser" or "whining" but what the voter wants. You evidently have been watching a one-sided program or a biased newspaper.
Zitta Lauricella
Family studies senior
McCormick's return brings grief
To the editor,
Ralph David McCormick's co-workers do have a reason to be uncomfortable around him. Probably because they know more facts about this murder than was printed in your article. (Wildcat, Nov. 29.) McCormick confessed to killing his wife when questioned by police detectives. He did this only because he realized it was obvious he would not get away with it. The Wildcat article seems to follow the lead of McCormick's lawyers and UA administration who seek to minimize the horror of the crimes.
McCormick's return to work would be an excellent time to print some articles on domestic violence, including how our society traditionally tries to ignore it. Obviously people associated with the University of Arizona are not immune to this trouble. Maria M. Velasquez was a beautiful, generous person. Her death is a huge loss to me personally. It is a terrible loss to her family and to the Tucson community. To think that her husband is back at his desk three months to the day that he beat her to death with a baseball bat is an indescribable anguish. Please don't collaborate with those who are trying to lessen the impact of McCormick's crimes. It is an insult to the memory of woman who suffered the worst sort of death. Please investigate more about this story. My heart goes out to McCormick's co-workers who are forced to be working with him.
Sarah Forrester
Tucsonan
Former players should be considered
To the editor,
I noticed in both articles in Friday's Wildcat regarding the list of selection "advisers" for a new football coach that there are no players - current of former mentioned. As a past college football player at a different school who went through the same coaching staff transition, I think it is imperative that some recent former and current players (two of each) be put onto this "advisers" selection list with equal voting weight.
The players are going to be the most directly affected by the new coaching selection and have more personally at stake than the administrators or staff on the list. Thanks for listening and good luck in your next choice.
Michael Pate
Optical sciences graduate student
Alumni deserve tickets
To the Editor,
Basketball season is upon us, and undoubetly, so arrives another season of students complaining about the seating arrangements in McKale Center. As an alumnus of the University of Arizona and an occupant of floor seats for all home games, I wish to explain once and for all why Arizona students will never get a student section.
First and foremost, it is a matter of money. The wealthy alumni are the ones who are responsible for the construction and various other improvements around campus. The University of Arizona would not be where it is without the aid of wealthy Alumni. Simply stated, alumni are more deserving of the floor sections because they are worth more to the university.
Secondly, I've seen the sections populated by many students and all are still in plain view of the court. So you aren't all congregated in the same place, that's probably for the best. I've watched numerous NCAA basketball games, Duke for one, where the student section is distructive, disruptive, unruly and chaotic more often than not. We do not want an ambiance like that in McKale. We desire an enjoyable and relaxing opportunity to mingle with those around us. We also enjoy the opportunity to watch the game in peace. I will admit that there are some people who will attend and end up watching very little of the basketball game, but by and large we are all Wildcat fans. We simply choose to cheer quitely.
Finally, the students already have their own section at the football game. What more do you kids want? The way I see it, there's an even trade. Be disruptive and disorderly at the football games, but save your rowdiness for the nosebleed section during basketball season. Case Closed.
Pattie Cates
UA Alumnus
Class of 1942
