Scarpinato column offensive, inaccurate

There were many things I found objectionable about Daniel Scarpinato's characterization of Refuse and Resist's "Airing the UA's Dirty Laundry Forum," but there's one sentence that I think is particularly egregious: "· those are issues that take time, effort and constructive compromise to address, something for which activists don't have the patience or longtime commitment."

Daniel, surely you know that Students Against Sweatshops spent five years working on apparel issues and is currently in the second year of working on opposing the private prison industry ÷ while continuing work on some apparel issues.

As a long-time SAS member, I take personal offense at the notion that we lack patience and commitment.

Rachel Wilson
law student
Students Against Sweatshops member

Prisons don't impact real criminal problem

In a recent opinions column, Daniel Scarpinato asked what's so wrong with building prisons. I'm surprised he could seriously ask that question. Prisons do not solve our crime problems or instill respect for the law in their occupants. The majority of our quite large prison population is composed of non-violent drug offenders. We spend somewhere around 20-40 thousand dollars per year to keep a drug offender in prison. Treatment would cost less than a few thousand dollars per year, yet the majority of prisoners who request drug treatment cannot get it due to insufficient funding. This seems highly illogical, since treatment programs have been shown to reduce recidivism from 67 percent to 13 percent.

The problem goes beyond the fact that treatment is not available for drug abusers. There is a big difference between use and abuse. This is most obvious when considering alcohol, one of the few semi-legal recreational drugs. Many people use alcohol responsibly to relax and have fun. Many others become alcoholics and/or engage in binge drinking. Abusers harm themselves and can cause problems for society. Users are generally responsible and productive citizens who would react negatively if forced into a treatment program (or prison) they didn't need. The same is true for users/abusers of illicit drugs. Our legal system has yet to make the distinction between these groups however. Until it does, we will continue buying new prisons without really impacting the criminal problem.

Kris Brown
electrical engineering senior

Forum only meant to provide information

As one of the organizers of last week's "Dirty Laundry" forum, I was a little surprised to read the opinion piece by Dan Scarpinato that criticized the "extreme ideological rhetoric" of the forum. As I thought back on it, here are the main points I remember the speakers making at the forum: that the university should heed students, environmentalists and Native American groups who oppose telescopes on Mt. Graham; that the university should publicly oppose the ban on teaching and performing abortions at UMC; that the university should not use tuition dollars to pay off debts to a company that funds private prisons; that UAPD should have more oversight and that police officers implicated in racist attacks against UA students and faculty should be fired; that the university should be run in a more democratic manner and that the fact that the university is increasingly authoritarian and less democratic happens in the context of an increasingly authoritarian, less democratic national political culture.

Of course, not everyone will agree with all of those points ÷ and not everyone has to agree. The whole point of the forum was to provide information and spark discussion about issues that have not been addressed by the administration or that have not been covered well by the Wildcat. But those ideas could only be called "extreme" by someone like the author of this opinion piece, who thinks that the biggest problems with the university are that it gives financial aid to needy students and doesn't hire enough conservative faculty.

I believe that most people on campus feel otherwise.

Jesse Saba Kirchner
senior majoring in linguistics and Chinese

Wildcat coverage bias for campus groups

The Wildcat has shown bias in its coverage of student activist groups. On Sept. 24, the Wildcat published a positive human-interest article that attempted to cover the UA College Republicans. This is a right-wing political activist group, but instead of tough questions about hot issues or even voices from a variety of members and those who disagree with their views, the Wildcat discussed the personal life and academic achievements of one of its organizers.

The Wildcat portrayed the College Republicans simply as a bunch of friendly UA students who hang out on the Mall supporting a benign cause. Last Thursday, the Wildcat did a report on APJME, a leftist political activist group. This article included many voices both from members of the group and those in opposition to its views, as any fair article should. The Wildcat did not publish any articles about the forum last Thursday presented by several leftist activist groups, even though these groups are addressing issues directly related to the UA. Instead, an op-ed appeared today in which Daniel Scarpinato admits he knows little about these issues, but clearly denounces these students' views based on nothing more than his own opinion. By only allowing an ill-informed columnist's view to be published about this event and these "radical left" activist groups, the Wildcat is failing in its mission "to disseminate news to the community and to encourage an exchange of ideas." The Wildcat may dismiss radical activists now, but those who fought to abolish slavery and end discrimination against minorities were also dismissed as radical activists in their time. Important social changes do not come from those who wave flags and promote the status quo; they come from those who dare to challenge the status quo. Their voices are important, too.

Carrie Brown
Near Eastern studies graduate student

UA needs coach who Îbleeds red and blue'

Have you been down Sixth Avenue lately? If you have, then you've probably noticed the great big footballs on the sidewalk near the stadium.

Yup. Right there at Cherry Avenue are two of the biggest balls you've ever seen. I figure that John Mackovic must have left town without them. They can only belong to him, because only a man with balls that big would actually accept the $900,000 buyout. After the record he left us, it would take someone with stones the size of Volkswagens to accept another dime.

I only hope Mr. Livengood and his crew have learned a good lesson ÷ that you just can't throw money and big contracts at a problem to solve it. We need someone who has shown he'll do what's best for his team and not just for himself. We need a man who still remembers what it's like to be a player and an All-American. We need recruiting power and, most importantly, we need a man who bleeds Wildcat red and blue.

In case you haven't figured it out ÷ that man is Ricky Hunley.

Michael Badowski
microbiology and immunology graduate student

Ending of Midnight Madness Îdespicable'

First came the "Zona Zoo" scam. Then the Mackovic fiasco. Now it's the death knell of Midnight Madness. Allow me to be the first to say this is despicable. I have been at this school for four years now, and have been an avid supporter of the men's basketball program. I was at the Final Four in 2000 and in the thick of the ticket mob that ensued last year. I have enjoyed everything about UA basketball. But now one of the great college traditions here at the university is being ended to make room for a "practice." Excuse me for being a little bitter, but I have a feeling that Madness was cancelled due to other reasons. It's a shame that these freshmen have yet another thing taken away from them.

October 18? Saturday? 1 p.m.? How can any student expect to combat the onslaught of T-locks and blue hairs that will undoubtedly flood McKale Center in their attempt to get something for "free"? This was not an event for families ÷ it was for the students. Most of these kids won't even get an opportunity to see this team now. Tom Arnold won't come now. No TV shows will be here. No one will care. There will be no fun. What are you going to call it now? One O'Clock Craziness? Doesn't quite have the same ring.

Is this what has become of our school? Is the sole purpose of the athletics department to cater to the needs of those who do not attend this university? I wish this school would realize how much they have ruined things here at Arizona by ruining school spirit and tradition.

Please correct this callous decision and give these poor freshmen their night back.

Norman Mauroner
agri-business management senior

Madness suppose to encourage UA spirit

The fact that the Arizona coaches and basketball team have decided to switch Midnight Madness to "Afternoon Madness" is extremely weak. Granted, I will still probably go and I will definitely sit there and enjoy watching my college basketball team, but that's not the point. The point is the principle behind the thing. Midnight Madness was for the students. It was different. It was the closest thing the UA had to any kind of tradition or something the student body could actually get excited over. Arizona basketball, in general, is probably the one thing that, whether you're a granola, intellectual, jock or greek, it doesn't really matter because we are all there for one thing: to root on the Wildcats. So I just want to give a big old "LAME" shout out to the Arizona coaches and team for thinking that "getting in one more day of well-rested practice" is more important than getting the fans hyped up and getting this season started on the right foot.

Laura Hewitt
senior majoring in English