Editorial board "coffee break" shows laziness
\nI was going to write a lengthy letter to the editor detailing the fact that not only has the IDS opinion page never been worse in my four year college career than it is now, but that the blurb of an editorial "Grounds for Debate" (Dec. 5) is possibly a new low for the IDS. But then I guess in the face of all the controversy, misinformation, hatred, war, peace, political banter, government corruption, human-rights violations all over the world and laziness amongst the IDS opinions staff, I got fed up and decided to take a coffee break. Forty-two word blurbs should be reserved for bus plunge stories, not staff editorials.\nTrevor Alexander\nSenior
IDS should take leave of absence
\nBravo IDS, best work yet!\nIn response to the editorial "Grounds for Debate," I could not have been more pleased than when I read on Dec. 5, 2006 that the IDS editorial board decided to take a coffee break. I am sure it must be difficult solving all of IU's problems, let alone the entire world's, from the comfy confines of Ernie Pyle Hall. You guys and gals deserve the break... you work so hard as it is. But why stop at just the editorial board? I propose that it may be a good idea for the entire Indiana Daily Student staff (minus a few legitimate journalists) to take a break: indefinitely.\nThe truth is, editorial board, that I, as well as many other students, think your writing and opinions are the most pompous, out-of-touch garbage printed on this campus. As you all opine from your high horses writing that everything (IUSA, Students Against Terrorism, the IU Administration, Ruckus, your classes, your professors, the trustees, undergraduate students) is worthless, you fail to see any good happening on this campus at all. It is not surprising many of you wished for a break. All that bitching would make me tired as well.\nAll the best,\nGarrett Scharton\nSenior\nChief of External Affairs, IUSA
Stewart's banter exposes him as windbag
\nIn regards to "The 'as if' style" Dec. 4:\nBrian Stewart correctly identifies a major problem in public debate today as too governed by "contemptible poseurs and windbags." Yet, no one is better described by Stewart's own definition than himself.\nWho does he hold up as a definition of a man who aids public debate for the "public good?" None but that king of polemical rants, Bill O'Reilly. What "service" does Mr. O'Reilly provide exactly?\nThe "character" that Stewart so nobly enshrines is conspicuously absent in his patronizing columns. Like Polonius, he expounds the "empty and idle platitudes" that he so detests. "Think for yourself," "character," "words pale before deeds." Thank God we have Stewart to tell us that actions speak louder than words.\nHe gives us all kindly patronizing advice about how we should "earn the title of citizen." I choose to act "as if" I've already earned that right, by being born in this country, paying my taxes and voting in elections. Why should we earn what is already ours? Or more importantly, why does Stewart hold it above us that he has earned the right any more than the rest of us?\nStewart imagines himself an iconoclast who stands up to the establishment, but it's his brand of pseudo-intellectual polemic that rules the sphere of debate these days. When he asks how debate has fallen this far, maybe he should be asking himself.\nTim Speicher\nSenior
Bus drivers being mistreated
\nI am responding to the article of Nov. 28, titled "Bus drivers unhappy with campaign to hire student employees." The petition delivered to human resources was in response to the treatment of the drivers by the new operations manager, Perry Maull, and his disregard for the transportation needs of the students. \nAssistant Director of Transportation Services, Kent McDaniel, stated that having more student drivers could be a cost-saver because they won't have to pay overtime. He attributed drivers' complaints to them not being willing to work when the bus service needs them most. The fact of the matter is that many of us are far enough down the seniority list that we work a shift lasting nine to 11 and a half hours, four days a week, thereby eliminating our ability to work the open evening shifts that begin before ours are over and would fill the needs of the service and give us overtime. Many of the drivers who do work five eight--to nine--hour days per week do work a lot of those open short evening shifts. The open weekend shifts are distributed among drivers based on seniority on a sign-up list for extra work. \nHe then goes on to say that they can't hire enough people to fill the shifts, however, there are applications on file. As for his comment in the article that "not everybody's getting 40 hours, but if they wanted to work more, it might be inconvenient hours for them" the latter part of that statement is addressed above. With regard to the first part, only the four report drivers are sometimes left working less than 40 hours but frequently work overtime and must often work short shifts broken up over a very long day. These drivers had regular routes that they drove prior to Oct. 1, when service was indeed cut. Keep in mind that most of us are hourly with no benefits, working only seven months of the year. We enjoy the job of driving the buses and interacting with the students, but we are not here to be abused or mistreated. \nTerri Mahoney\nDriver, Campus Bus Service
Wrestler deserves little sympathy
\nI read the Dec. 5 IDS article about Eric Cameron falling from the third story of the Walnut Center parking garage ("Student-wrestler in intensive care after 3-story plummet"), and I find it very hard to sympathize with him. The article made it very evident that he and his friends were harassing those people, and who knows what would have happened if they were not accompanied by a guy who would stand up to a few thugs for them. For a man to harass a woman and then hit her because he was denied is unacceptable. This behavior cannot be tolerated. I am not going to say it was karma that made him jump over the ledge. That is not for me to judge. However, I abhor the idea of living in a society where drunken idiots think it is OK to harass and hit women "because they were drunk."\nLarry C. Bates\nSenior
The war that isn't
\nWill someone please let me know how it is, exactly, that you wage a war on terror? Last I checked, terror is an idea, not a country. You can't invade terror. You can't bomb terror. You can't even occupy terror. No one, to my knowledge, has ever pointed a gun at and then shot terror.\nYou know what happened?\nSomeone sucker-punched us while we weren't looking, and now we're on some global wild goose chase for the person responsible. The inherent problem is that we can't pin it on any particular place or person. It was a terrorist attack. By the very nature of it, there is no real region-wide entity behind it -- just a group of hacked-off radicals who acted upon some fanatical belief that the West is wrong.\nBelieve me: If there was someone I could put a gun to and end all the terror in the world with one well-placed shot, I'd empty a full magazine in a barrage that turned what used to be a head into red mist. We're fighting an idea, and unless we take over the entire world (probably not a good idea) and begin policing it as we see fit, we're never going to get rid of it. There will always be fanatics out there -- crazy, deluded, screwed-in-the-brain-pan fanatics who deserve to be put down like a dog gone rabid.\nWhat do we do, then? I have no idea. I just don't think our occupation of Iraq should be labeled a "War on Terror." Call it what it is, and let the chips fall where they may. We went in on unfinished business. It's great that a tyrant is finally being tried and executed for the crimes he's committed. I think we should have gone in sooner, actually. I just happen to think we should have been calling this "Desert Storm 2" all along. I imagine people would be far more accepting then. At least then we'd know when we won.\nMichael Horsley\nFreshman
IU basketball needs seating upgrade
\nFor the past four years, I have attended every IU basketball and football game. This is something not many students can say on this campus. I have one request for how we can improve the athletics program here at IU. It has to do with student basketball seating. I am not going to say we need to create a student section like everyone else wants, or that we need to build a new facility which a majority of people want.\nI simply want first-come, first-serve seating for students at basketball games.\nIt is embarrassing to be one of 10 to 15 people in the student seating as each game begins. This would absolutely not happen at any other big-time basketball school.\nWe need to adopt a program like Michigan State uses. I attended one game there last year with some friends and had the great opportunity of sitting in the "Izzone." We had to arrive an hour early to have a prayer of not getting stuck in the balcony student seats. By the way, it was not an important game, either; it was an exhibition game. This is because it is based on first-come, first-serve general admission seating.\nThis idea would also create the need for changes in how we receive tickets. Michigan State gives the tickets to the students as they come to the game. The ticket that is given to each student is the best available seat. This ensures they do not have a couple of empty seats between groups, as we would have at an event like Midnight Madness, where we allow people to come in and sit on a first-come, first-serve basis.\nThis would help foster the environment we need to create a "real home court advantage." Students who care the most will have the best seats, and all students will have an incentive to arrive early to the games instead of strolling in before halftime.\nI believe this solves many of our problems we are currently having with IU basketball. We desperately need a change like this.\nScott Manning\nGraduate student
Smoking-ban proposal backed \nby facts
\nThis letter is in response to the Nov. 27 staff editorial, "Smoke and mirrors." \nThis article, based upon one man's opinion and not a single piece of verifiable scientific evidence, makes the claim that there is no evidence to support the assertion that outdoor secondhand smoke poses serious health risks. Any of hundreds of studies, which can be accessed by anyone, were ignored in the previous publication. \nThe opinion of Simon Chapman, an Australian sociologist cited by the IDS editorial, has been widely discredited in the scientific community. It was helpful to look further than his opinion given in the March 2000 edition of the British Medical Journal — his comment was in some of the top hits when googling "outdoor smoking ban."\nThe authors of this article further misrepresented and grossly simplified this topic by comparing secondhand smoke to the pollution from a car's exhaust. The first difference is obvious: Cars have greater than 80 percent of their chief toxin, CO, removed by catalytic converters, while sidestream smoke is completely unfiltered.\nThe second difference is equally obvious when minimal research is conducted: Car exhaust contains none of the radioisotopes, fine particles (PM 2.5), Ammonia, Acetone, Arsenic and some 4,000 more chemicals that are found in cigarette smoke. Further, a 1990 risk analysis shows that nonsmoking adults are at a 57 times higher risk for lung cancer due to secondhand smoke than from all other EPA-recognized air pollutants combined (including car exhaust). And this is just a brief look at pulmonary effects without even considering cardiovascular dangers.\nThe Students' Smokefree Coalition and our predecessors at IUPUI have done plentiful research, and we did not submit our proposal to Dr. Herbert without citing ample evidence.\nDonnie Morgan, President \nBryce Wininger, Vice President \nStudents' Smokefree Coalition
'IU Factbook?' lacks journalistic skill
\nI'm deeply saddened by the monstrosity that adorned the front of the Opinion section Wednesday Nov. 29. Upon first glance (perhaps due to the misleading "IU Factbook?" title), the piece seemed like it might be a legitimate attempt at journalism. It could have been a quick and fun piece about common myths at IU. It would have been informative, accurate and would have served some greater good to the audience. After all, IU's School of Journalism is one of the nation's best. Shouldn't we hold it to a higher standard than the average college newspaper? \nWe can proudly tout the various works of our distinguished staff and alumni: professor Steve Raymer's photography in National Geographic magazine, professor Owen Johnson's extensive work on our beloved "mascot" Ernie Pyle, professor Steve Higgs' creation of the Bloomington Alternative newspaper and the countless others on the faculty who have greatly contributed to the field of journalism academia. To name them all would probably consume the entire paper (which would put it to much greater use than the aforementioned article).\nUnfortunately, the IDS failed. The story failed to meet the most basic tenets of journalism, specifically newsworthiness. Instead of fulfilling its journalistic purpose, the IDS decided to let columnist Scott Leadingham make a fool not only of himself but of the IDS.\nWas it a slow news day for the IDS? Is there nothing in the world that any opinion-desk writer, or any other desk writer for that matter, wanted to discuss? With all the news going on, be it local, national or international, the most newsworthy story the IDS could come up with for the front page of the Opinion section was "IU Factbook?"\nWhere is the staff living? Under a rock?\nJennifer D. Norris\nSenior
Sexist accusation a one-sided account
\nRegarding Nov. 29's "Mailbox":\nThere are many apparently absurd, misguided and stunningly one-sided arguments in Benjamin Feddersen's contribution to our shallow IDS paper. The fact that you state men are more objectified than women with poorly argued evidence illustrates not only your less-than-sympathetic view regarding feminine degradation, but a non-realistic (albeit nearly insight-free) perspective of the nation at large. Additionally, your argument would prove stronger if you didn't make the claim that more men are struggling from anorexia in an attempt to look like the barrel-chested Vin Diesel. To my limited knowledge, people suffering from anorexia lose an unhealthy amount of weight instead of acquiring enough muscle mass to seem barrel-chested.\nMore accurately, you could have commented on an increase in pressure for men to bulk up by way of protein instead of claiming men are anorexic to look like our pal Vinny. But to claim that men are more objectified than women seems ludicrous. Certainly you can see that movies geared toward specifically male high school to college-age students all highlight women's breasts instead of male penises. Meanwhile, are we able to agree that the majority of porn is geared toward the male population? (I won't cite that as an argument with no evidence to back it up, so it's more just something to think about.) You are right though. Men are objectified. But is that really what your letter was about? Or was it really a subject (a feminist's gripe against a male-dominated society) of which you were sick of hearing, with the secondary motive of poking fun of our beloved (albeit shallow) IDS. You fall victim to your own argument of being one-sided. You concede no sympathy to women's plight and insist that men have it harder.\nIf Ms. Manchir made manifest a one-sided feminist argument, you seem to make manifest the one-sided "masculinist" argument. As history has taught us, rarely do these extremes ever reconcile.\nNice try putting your argument out there, Benjamin, but better luck next time.\nAndrew Comeau\nStudent
Bhopal tragedy anniversary reminds of DOW's neglect
\nOne Mississippi, bam! Two Mississippi, bam! Three Mississippi, bam! That is how fast people died 22 years ago in Bhopal, India, during the worst industrial accident in the world. Deadly MIC gas leaked from Union Carbide's factory and spread silently through the populated city of Bhopal at the dawn of Dec. 3, 1984. Children, pregnant women, frail seniors and healthy men -- over 3,000 in all -- died the first day. Twenty thousand more have succumbed since and over 100,000 remain affected.\nMIC was non-discriminatory and took all in its wake. The same cannot be said of Carbide, now fully owned by Dow Chemical. Failing safety measures in the factory caused the accident, but the settlement reached with the Indian government was a farce. On average, it paid about $500 to each victim. Comparatively, the Exxon-Valdez oil spill in Alaska spent $2,000 on each seal affected. This smacks of environmental racism! Carbide scampered out of India without full clean-up of tons of toxic chemicals remaining at the factory. There lies the second tragedy. These concoctions have polluted the ground water and, combined with gas exposure, caused birth deformities in children. Talk about a ticking time bomb in the heart of a city!\nThe survivors have shown patience and resilience in fighting for their rights. Their demands of Dow Chemical are few and just: Clean up the site, provide medical care to the affected, provide livelihood to the disabled and stand trial. That thousands should die and Union Carbide abscond from the law is a blot on the democracies of India and the USA. Dow Chemical has an inadequate fig leaf to cover their negligence. Even that is blown away by Amnesty International's 2002 report that does a comprehensive review of ground zero and finds Dow accountable. Nine U.S. congressmen, the European Union, Greenpeace, Amnesty International and city governments in San Francisco, Seattle and Cambridge cannot all be wrong.\nBhopali's fight for justice is a poignant reminder that we need to be vigilant for transgressions by corporations and lawmakers.\nRemember, remember, the 3rd of December,\nMIC, negligence, and rot,\nI see of no need why Dow Chemical's greed, \nShould ever be forgot.\nYogesh L. Simmhan\nDoctoral student
Bus statistics contrary to McDaniel's statements
\nRegarding "Bus drivers unhappy with campaign to hire student employees," Nov. 28:\nAssistant Director of Transportation Services Kent McDaniel says that service has actually improved this year, that buses have not been cut and that more trips per day are being provided. His reference to less recovery time applies to the B route, which has been gutted as compared to last year. Those drivers are forced to work up to 11 1/2 hours with only eight minutes of recovery time between runs -- often losing that because of heavy loads or traffic. They have no lunch break or time to stretch their legs, and they often have little opportunity to use the restroom. \nHere is a breakdown of the actual changes to service that have taken place. Last year's schedule had 459 weekday trips a day on all routes, while this year's current schedule has 410 trips -- 49 fewer than last year. On the A route, last year's schedule had 131 trips a day. Now it has 123 trips, eight fewer than last year. On the B route, last year there were 118 trips per day. Now there are 106 trips, 12 fewer than last year. On Friday that number is reduced by 11 because the fifth bus doesn't run. On the X route, last year there were 166 trips. Now there are 137 trips, 29 fewer than last. \nAs for the number of buses, last year there were 22 running each day. Now there are 20, except on Friday, when there are 19. This means there are seven buses Monday through Thursday and eight on Friday held as spares.\nFinally, let's look at ridership. Last year between July 1 and Nov. 29, Campus Bus carried 1,158,353 passengers. This year for the same period we carried 1,373,716 passengers, an increase of about 18 percent despite a decrease in the number of trips by roughly 10 percent.\nNow you all know why there are huge numbers of students standing at stops while bus after bus passes them by, especially during peak times like double dismissal. This new, improved service that the students are charged a mandatory fee each semester for is actually a more crowded and stressful situation than in previous years. \nGwenna Polley\nDriver, Campus Bus Service
Community should conserve energy during winter
\nOne month into the winter heating season, your home heating bill may be lower than last year. But a word of caution: Despite recent downward trends in wholesale natural gas costs, consumers may not always experience lower bills.\nGas utilities are encouraged to "hedge" portions of their wholesale gas purchases -- including buying gas months in advance of when customers use it. The purpose of hedging is to protect consumers from price volatility but not necessarily guarantee the lowest gas prices. Utilities pass wholesale gas costs through to consumers on a dollar-for-dollar basis subject to regulatory review; without price hedging, consumers would be vulnerable to a very volatile wholesale gas market -- like the one we experienced after last year's hurricanes.\nAll consumers should continue to conserve energy whenever possible because reducing long-term demand for natural gas may put downward pressure on wholesale prices. In the meantime, budget billing -- available from most gas and electric utilities -- is a simple, effective way to take the monthly sting out of winter bills.\nSusan L. Macey\nIndiana Utility Consumer Counselor
