Students need to relax and enjoy columnist’s humor
In response to Anjali Saraf’s Wednesday letter: I think Saraf missed the entire point of Mike Sherman’s Tuesday column. Sherman is what many would describe as a “comedian” or “satirist.” This means he makes fun of people. That educated and caring majority Saraf preached so mightily about in his letter was laughing uproariously at his column while you were busy sharpening your pencil and being insulted.
Do me and the rest of this beautiful campus a favor and lighten up. Of course Northwestern has ambitious, kind, studious individuals, but that doesn’t mean we can’t laugh at ourselves. And besides, as painful as it may seem after spending all that cash to get in here, the author really does have a point. A valid one.
Read the column again. Try to laugh. It’s a joke and you didn’t get it.
Brian Davis
Weinberg freshman
Columnist’s disrespect for the U.S. shows ignorance
I usually ignore the Forum section of The Daily and when I do read it I forgive its occasional idiocy. But I was struck by the overall offensiveness of Kristina Francisco’s Wednesday column, which effectively spits on the very flag for which many of us would gladly die.
While this is nothing new in the world of journalism, Francisco seems to be digging for examples. Her cynicism stems from events that took place before she was born. Even her concessions to the United States involve World War II and the First Amendment. Apparently, the United States has done nothing to sway her opinion since the late 1950s.
The column conveniently turns a blind eye on the billions of dollars of U.S. aid that is sent around the world and the government’s commitment to international peace-keeping missions. And let’s not forget about the Peace Corps, the U.S. Agency for International Development, etc. Perhaps, since these examples involve recent events, they are outside the scope of Francisco’s column.
Francisco is not an idealist who is becoming a cynic: She’s an ignorant citizen taking potshots at one of few governments that allows her to do so. The knock on President Bush was a nice touch. Perhaps the effect of the recent elections was lost on her.
I believe in the First Amendment, which allows anyone to state an opinion about the government. But Francisco’s tone was a disgrace to the country that allows her to parade her ignorance so freely.
I have an idea: Stop shooting your mouth off, return to Hawaii and stick your head back in the sand. And take Michael Jackson with you.
Ryan Schneider
McCormick senior
Writer might want to attend speech before criticizing it
Aaron Ament’s Wednesday letter was probably the most ignorant and uneducated piece I’ve ever read. He attempts to point out flaws in Robert Novak’s arguments — even though he admits he did not attend Novak’s speech. Since he did not take the time to discover Novak’s opinions for himself, I’ll clarify areas about which Ament is clearly confused.
Novak’s criticism of Bush’s vocabulary was a minor criticism among all the praise of his leadership qualities — anyone who went to the speech would have known this.
As for the media’s ostensible liberal bias, Novak never “whined.” He simply stated that most members of the media are liberal, so a slight bias is to be expected. It’s not malicious, it’s a fact of life. Novak made interesting points about how journalism is less appealing to conservatives. And the funeral of Paul Wellstone specifically was mentioned to help Novak prove his points.
I’d be happy to have an intellectual debate on these issues with anyone who listened to Novak talk. They know what they are talking about because they got their information firsthand instead of relying on The Daily’s fair and balanced coverage.
Anthony Natale
McCormick junior
