Nurses support UPTE cause I wish to correct
some statements that were made in last week’s article
“UC med centers
may not be prepared for health disaster“ (Daily Bruin,
News, Oct. 17). It was implied through a misquote that I agree that
the UCLA Medical Center is safely staffed to handle a public health
emergency. This misquote was used to undermine UPTE’s
position that the Medical Center needs to take steps to improve its
readiness by improving wages and staffing for its employees. I want
to make clear that the California Nurses Association stands by UPTE
and its members efforts to secure a fair and just contract. In no
way should my assertion that RNs will work hard in a health
emergency be interpreted as contradicting UPTE’s position
that the medical center needs to do more for all of its employees.
Furthermore, as the paper of record for thousands of UCLA students
and employees, the Daily Bruin’s staff should be ever
diligent to confirm quotes before they run in print. When pressed
about the readiness of nurses if an emergency situation happens, I
did respond by saying nurses have call lists in place; some units
have babysitting lists and other procedures in case many nurses are
needed at once. Ask each individual CNA or UPTE member if they are
ready to help and they will say yes. Is UCLA as an institution
ready to respond? If management’s unwillingness to accept
that people are paid inadequately, and that short staffing even
exists is any indications of their preparedness, then I say UCLA is
not ready. It is unfortunate that you chose not only to misquote me
once, but then used it again to support your ill-conceived
editorial (“UPTE’s public claims mislead, are
unjust,” Daily Bruin, Viewpoint, Oct. 18). It is clear that
you did not talk to any people who actually do the health care work
at UCLA. You instead chose management’s version. You claimed
“it is unreasonable to expect the Medical Center, or any
hospital to be staffed for an attack they cannot predict.”
Fine, but would you agree that is reasonable for the hospital to
pay competitive wages and staff the institution properly,
regardless of the situation?
Kristin Eldridge California Nurses Association Labor
Representative
Vossoughi’s view valiant ““ and
silly In response to Shirin Vossoughi’s column,
“Marketing war
““ should you buy it?“ (Daily Bruin, Viewpoint, Oct.
30): Shirin Vossoughi, when a virus hijacks one of your cells and
begins making copies of its own DNA, do you try to read through the
propaganda of your emotions and the propaganda of pain that tells
you the virus is “bad?” Do you shed tears of sorrow as
your body expels the innocent virus struggling to make its way in
the world? If you do, you are a just person ““ who is destined
for a short life.
Derk Lupinek Class of 1996
Hargis shouldn’t force his opinions In
his letter “db/articles.asp?ID=16971>Editorial lacking in
proof, substance” (Daily Bruin, Viewpoint, Oct. 26), library
assistant Jonnie Hargis states that UCLA suspended him for
“Thought Crimes.” But I don’t think the
university was really interested in what he thought. The issue was
what he said and the circumstances under which he said it. While
UCLA, as a public entity, may very well be legally prevented from
regulating speech anywhere on campus, there is nevertheless a
fundamental difference between someone expressing himself on Bruin
Walk, where we are free to stay and listen or walk away, and
someone expressing himself in the workplace. People should have a
right to speak, but they shouldn’t be able to force others to
listen. And so I find it interesting that even as Mr. Hargis
trumpets his own right to free speech, he also faults the
university for failing to protect him from “personal
harassment in the workplace.” I have to wonder, did that
harassment include words that he didn’t want to listen to? As
for the question of Israel, Mr. Hargis reveals his lack of
objectivity by saying that his characterization of Israel as a
racist, apartheid state has been confirmed not only by the U.N.,
NGOs, etc., but by “the world as a whole.” Such
thoughtless use of hyperbole, as well as the confrontational tone
throughout his letter, does point out one of the benefits of
allowing unregulated free speech: some people do a better job of
discrediting their opinions through their own words than anyone
else ever could.
Chris Norlin Class of 1988
Anti-gay feelings lack suitable logic I am
writing in response to Monday’s Viewpoint submission,
“db/articles.asp?ID=17000>Depiction of homosexuality
unnecessary” (Daily Bruin, Oct. 29). I would like to invite
Donte Dollar-Wright to produce any evidence to support his
assertion that homosexuality is “at best” a biological
anomaly. The only expert Dollar-Wright quotes in his article is
Eminem, who I do not consider a reliable scholar on biology or any
other science. Like many people who claim to have moral
sensibilities, Dollar-Wright can simultaneously be offended by
articles and depictions of homosexuality while embracing a
misogynistic and violent artist who is not even intelligent enough
to defend his art. According to this article, if a person is not a
“normal homo sapient who can procreate,” then there are
no moral grounds to oppose those who express hatred of that person.
Well, I fathered a child in a previous heterosexual relationship so
I am a normal homo sapient who can procreate. I now identify myself
as homosexual, but because I have demonstrated my procreative
ability, I am “normal” by Dollar-Wright’s twisted
logic. Any man who claims to be heterosexual but has not fathered a
child is now under notice that he may be targeted for hatred by
Dollar-Wright. Of course, Dollar-Wright leads off and finishes his
article with a call for decency. The substance of his article is
how much homosexuals deserve the hatred that is directed at them,
but he wants us to believe that he is protecting UCLA students from
offensive material … while quoting Eminem. How sad.
John Pipan Graduate student Computer
science