Arizona Daily Wildcat advertising info
UA news
world news
cat calls
police beat
photo features

UA Football
restaurant, bar and party guide
Write a letter to the Editor

Contact the Daily Wildcat staff

Send feedback to the web designers

Arizona Student Media info...

Daily Wildcat staff alumni...

TV3 - student tv...

KAMP - student radio...

Wildcat Online Banner

Letters to the Editor

Tuesday October 23, 2001

Sports reporters half-witted, staff picks appalling

Normally flipping to the sports section of the Daily Wildcat is a waste of time, but it is a part of my daily lunch routine just for the jocularity. My favorite weekly feature comes out on Fridays, when each of the "brilliant" sports reporters makes their picks for the weekend's college football games.

Wow, do these guys have a future! Yeah right. Does the Daily Wildcat have stringent requirements when hiring sports reporters, or can anyone who knows the rules of football sign on? If that's the case, be sure to consider Dick Tomey's resume - I hear he's still unemployed these days.

To get down to the point, Friday's picks were even more appalling than usual. The half-witted sports reporters picked huge blowouts in the Arizona at Washington game. How do they come up with these numbers? Do they take their most recent test scores and use those? Anyone who knows Pac-10 football realizes that U of A always plays the UW tough when they travel up to Husky Stadium, regardless of how the team has done in previous games, and this weekend was certainly no exception.

Perhaps playing in front of 75,000 rabid fans elevates the team's effort a little. Who knows. What I do know is that your sports desk should be ashamed of itself for gross incompetence, and the next time you're looking for the weekend's predictions, take a survey on the Mall. I guarantee you'll get better results than from the guys you actually pay to do it.

Josh Surridge

molecular & cellular biology and mathematics junior

No need to attack abortion clinics

In principle, I agree with Sheila Bapat, demanding that violence against pro-abortionist facilities and their employees stop. However, unlike Sheila who is very pro-choice, I am very pro-life. Killing or injuring pro-abortionists does not help the cause of ending or severely restricting abortion practices. In fact, it only makes pro-life advocates look hypocritical and cruel.

If you truly feel abortion is wrong, then counter the pro-abortionists with facts (if you are a left-winger, I am sure you are just scratching your head thinking, "Facts, what are those?"). We all know that the life inside the mother's womb is viciously ended by the abortion procedure. But what the left wing just doesn't get is the procedure they think helps women can actually be quite risky and in some cases fatal.

For instance, statistics have proven that women who have had an abortion are nearly five times more likely to become a substance abuser. Dr. J.C. Willke and research done by three other parties have found that women who have abortions are also at a greater risk of breast cancer later on in life. Over 800,000 women abort their first pregnancy each year. Dr. Willke's research suggests that out of these, 10 percent, or 80,000, would have developed breast cancer. But, because of their abortions, the number of breast cancer cases will increase to 120,000.

Of these extra 40,000 cases, 25 percent, or 10,000 additional women, will die of breast cancer every year. Finally, a new study done in Finland found that women who have abortions are approximately five times more likely to die in the following year than women who carry their pregnancies to term. This obviously makes abortions more dangerous to women's health than natural childbirth! More studies will continue to come out in the future, and I firmly believe that the cruel abortion practices taking place in America do not need to be violently attacked nor do pro-abortionists need to be killed because abortion itself has successfully created its own demise.

Charles A. Peterson

history sophomore

Mt. Graham protest coverage biased

The demonstration on Friday was about (Christopher) Columbus and the havoc his legacy continues to wreak on indigenous cultures, specifically the telescopes desecrating the sacred site and fragile environment of Mt. Graham. I've been disgusted by mainstream media's thin coverage of this fact and failure to elaborate on the experience of the arrested demonstrators. For instance, media mentions the slight injuries supposedly inflicted on an officer but ignores the fact that many of the arrested had shoulder and arm pains that continued through the following day as a result of being cuffed for six hours or longer. The fact that many of the demonstrators were also denied food, water or use of a bathroom for at least five hours has also been overlooked.

What I have seen in the media is a gross juxtaposition of the image of Native American demonstrators and the "sharpened" poles. This is a blatantly racist depiction harking back to the stereotype of the savage Indian. It is obvious that the poles were only used for displaying banners and were never handled in a harmful manner.

I'd like to thank (Wildcat columnist Jessica) Lee for her commentary. At least someone is willing to share another perspective of the story.

Amy Hagemeier

studio arts junior


advertising info

Webmaster -
© Copyright 2001 - The Arizona Daily Wildcat - Arizona Student Media