Coulter generalizes Muslims as murderers
I was killing time in the bookstore today and decided to leaf through Ann Coulter's new book, "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)" to get a good idea of what she will be talking about in her speech on campus next week.
I was appalled at the level of hatred and racism she displayed toward Muslims. She generalized all Muslims as snarling, vicious murderers who want nothing more than to come and slaughter all of us in our sleep.
She referred to Nigeria as a "pissant country" and wondered when they would drag themselves out of the 13th century.
And let's not forget about her now infamous suggestion that we should (in reference to the Sept 11, 2001 hijackers) "Invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them all to Christianity." Her conservative "patriotism" is nothing more than thinly disguised racism and hatred toward Islam and the Muslim community.
I encourage everyone to protest the College Republicans' "balanced" speaker, but let's not ruin their event like they tried to ruin ours the other night.
Not surprising that Costa quit team
It is awful to hear that Costa quit. But I think I can understand why he made this choice. I'm sure there is a lot behind this decision, and I think he thinks this is the best. I don't think he regrets his choice.
He has been thrown around for many years, and I think the coaches don't realize his talents. I'm sure most of us think he is not someone to be on the sidelines. And the coaches agree as well. Stoops and Mack. Yet, he doesn't play that much.
He played a whole 20-30 seconds this season thus far. Costa also had to deal with the problem with Mack.
He played relatively well and then all of a sudden he was cut. So, in conclusion, I think I can understand, and hope that it worked out for the best. Hopefully he decides to stay next semester here at the UA.
Linda Kim Theobauld
pre-physiological sciences sophomore
Leave analysis of debates to readers
I would like to know why your staff feels the need to tell us all who is the winner and loser of presidential debates.
Anyone who watches can decide for themselves who won. Anyone who did not watch should be informed of what the issues were and the candidates' responses, not what you think about their comments. Journalists are supposed to provide information for readers to form opinions, not form opinions and present them to readers as information.
From now on, leave your opinion out of the news and just tell us what the candidates are saying.
You might think Kerry "seemed" presidential, but that's not what I'm basing my vote on; I want to vote for the candidate who has the better plans, whomever that may be.
Bush annihilated Kerry in final debate
Please enlighten me how someone can conclude after watching the debate last night that Sen. John Kerry actually won. The only thing Kerry proved is that he is not committed to making a difference in this nation. Bush annihilated Kerry in every aspect of his being.
Kerry should be ashamed of the fight he put up last night against the president because it was enough to lose him the presidency - if he ever had a chance at it. Kerry continuously brought up that he was working with Sen. John McCain and how together they were going to make a difference.
May I just say that our president brought up an amazing point? If McCain is as pro-Kerry as he made him out to be, why is McCain going to vote for Bush?
It is also true that Kerry answered the questions on abortion, gay marriage and health care with completely unorganized and hypocritical viewpoints.
The president made it very apparent that Kerry did not know what he was talking about, especially when he put Kerry's ideals on the "pay as you go" budget cuts next to his plan for health care.
Together they contradict one another and therefore do not make sense.
In addition, when Kerry responded to the abortion and gay marriage questions, he shot himself in the foot by making himself look like he did not have the morals and religious values he claims to have.
So once again I am asking you, how can anyone who watched the debate believe that Kerry won that debate? The answer is: they can't.
broadcast journalism sophomore
Moore fails audience at McKale speech
I went to see Michael Moore speak on Monday and was rather disgusted by the behavior of the College Republicans. I don't like people screaming at me and waving moronic signs like the one that said, "The Real Terrorist is Michael Moore."
I don't care what side of the political fence you are on, that statement is just plain ignorant and an offense to those who had family at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001 (like myself). I also think that most people can agree that their behavior inside the stadium was embarrassing to us all.
However, there were not entirely wrong in their position,;they just went about expressing it poorly. Michael Moore is not a documentary filmmaker, he is propagandist filmmaker. He is Leni Riefenstahl without the talent.
I am not sure where columnist Keren Raz gets the idea that every fact in his films is "backed up with hard evidence." A few minutes of research would prove her wrong. The most famous example being in "Bowling for Columbine." Remember the bit where he went into the bank offering free shotguns to anyone who opens a new account? The offer never existed - it was staged! Speeches made by Charlton Heston months apart from each other were spliced together to appear as if it was one continuous speech.
In "Farenheit 9/11" Moore asserts that Osama bin Laden's family members were secretly ushered out of the country while all air traffic was grounded. It would seem that the 9/11 Commission had a different finding. Funny, that wasn't in the film.
I also find it hard to believe that Michael Moore will be any less of a thorn in John Kerry's side. Does anyone remember any large scale attacks on Clinton? Yes, I know, the oral sex is not that big a deal. Except for the fact that it was occurring while he signed the "Defense Of Marriage Act" into law.
So, for many that is a real betrayal to the people who helped get him into office in the first place. George W. Bush is a business for Michael Moore - he will only stand to gain more money and notoriety if Bush is re-elected. I'm not a Republican (they don't want people like me in their country, let alone their party), and I'm not a Democrat. I just believe that the best arguments made are truthful, and in that respect Michael Moore has failed the people he claims he wants to help.
molecular and cellular biology senior
Coulter 'hates' liberal college students
The UA College Republicans have once again shown their true colors by inviting and helping to fund Ann Coulter speak at the UA. They claim they needed to take matters into their own hands to bring balance to the political discourse at the UA, because they feel that when ASUA had David Hardy, co-author of "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man," speak to students, it didn't actually qualify as a legitimate alternative view to the one expressed by Michael Moore.
So, in order to bring balance (which, according to the UACR, apparently means a 2:1 ratio of conservative to liberal speakers) they've decided to invite Ann Coulter.
Ann Coulter is one of the most inflammatory and bigoted figures in the news. Just take a look at a few of her quotes, as they speak for themselves. When speaking about Muslims shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, she declared, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." If there were any who doubted her hatred of Muslims after that comment, she would make sure to set the record straight Sept. 11, 2003, when she said, "It's always so comforting when Muslims cite the precise verse from the Quran that tells them killing is wrong. Don't all empathetic human beings understand that instinctively? What if they lost their Quran that day and couldn't remember?"
Aside from the fact that the messages behind these statements contradict each other, it is clear that she has nothing but disdain for those of the Muslim faith, to the point where she views them as subhuman.
Coulter especially hates liberal college students, as shown in her address to the Conservative Political Action Conference: "When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty.
We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors." How anyone can support someone with views like that is beyond me.
College Republicans, promoting an extremist bigot that advocates the intimidation and physical extermination of her political opposition shows us that you truly are not compassionate conservatives.
biochemistry and molecular biophysics sophomore