If you want a challenge, then take harder
classes
David Burke chastises the university for not offering more
challenging lower division political science courses and GE science
courses, while ignoring the abundance of more difficult courses
available for him to take (“UCLA
needs to make courses more difficult” Viewpoint, March
6).
In Burke’s particular situation, he chose to take MCD Bio
40 and Atmospheric Sciences 3. That is to say, he chose to take
non-challenging physical and life science courses. He then turns
and criticizes the university for even making those choices
available to him, saying that the classes are simply too easy. This
is downright dumb. If he chose easy courses, why would he expect
anything more? Perhaps Burke would have felt more at home in
Chemistry 20 or Life Science 2. Few students walk away from those
courses decrying their simplicity.
The difficulty is here at UCLA, it’s just not ubiquitous.
If your academic journey is too easy, take some harder classes and
don’t make it seem as though you had no choice in the
matter.
Brian Hurley Biochemistry and Neuroscience
Liberalism doesn’t equate
open-mindedness
In the column “Liberals
have open minds in common“ (Viewpoint, March 6), Jennifer
Shane makes many statements that don’t hold water. Those
trapped in the disgustingly liberal political science department at
UCLA should first, realize that they are being spoon-fed what to
think, and second, venture out and absorb the less (but still)
liberal parts of campus.
What I find most amusing is the notion that liberalism equates
open-mindedness. This may be true in theory, but not in practice.
Liberal by definition is broad-minded, open-minded and tolerant. In
essence, in order to be truly liberal, i.e. open-minded and
tolerant, you must accept all views including the conservative
ones.
Today “liberalism” has been contorted to mean
nothing more than anti-conservative, what I like to call blind
liberalism or “pseudo-liberal.” This is blatantly
obvious every time a “liberal” shoots down a
conservative. They are nothing more than hypocrites going against
their own ideology of open-mindedness.
Shane, in true pseudo-liberal fashion, makes a disconcerting
comment claiming that the intelligent professors are liberal. Maybe
she only considers those she agrees with as intelligent, but as the
cliché goes: Those who can, do, and those who can’t,
teach, so being a professor is hardly a sign. I consider the good
professors to be the ones who are really liberal and open-minded,
those who do not allow their personal views to distort the facts
they are responsible to teach, not the pseudo-liberals that have
taken over our campus.
Daniel Geoulla, Fourth-year Sociology and
History
Shane’s submission broadcasts how closed-minded
she is
After reading the submission, or more appropriately, the
obscenity titled “Liberals
have open minds in common,” (Viewpoint, March 6) it is
hard to know where to begin.
Perhaps it is best to start with the accusation that Uncle Sam
is a “dictator” who enjoys “bombing starving
children in the desert.” That’s a nice way to honor the
soldiers who have given their lives trying to prevent the
occurrence of another Sept. 11. Or maybe we should examine
Shane’s insights into astronomy… I always believed that the
moon revolved around the earth, but as a conservative graduate
student, what would I know?
Throughout the entire submission, the only thing she
demonstrates is that the phrase “open-minded liberal”
is a contradiction in terms. Her blind hatred for the Republican
Party and all things conservative only goes to show how
closed-minded she really is.
Last, her allegation that liberals are smarter than
conservatives is absurd. Last time I checked, there weren’t a
whole lot of conservatives frequenting the check-cashing stores and
welfare lines. Those places are reserved solely for the elite,
liberal members of our society, as I’m sure she’ll find
out.
Robert Cumberland Third-year Graduate Student
Chemistry
DB overreacts to paper delivery in residence
halls
The current situation involving the daily delivery of the Wall
Street Journal, USA Today and the Daily News to campus dorms at a
cost added to on-campus housing fees is an interesting one
(“Students
must vote down OCHC plan“ Viewpoint, March 6).
I believe the Daily Bruin has grossly overreacted to the
perceived threat that the daily delivery of these newspapers will
erode readership and therefore lead to lower advertising revenues.
The newspaper industry, as a whole, is suffering from these
problems while the cost of newspapers has risen astronomically. In
many areas, newspapers have revised themselves in order to remain
successful and the Daily Bruin could do the same. Is there a need
to offer international and national news in your publication,
offered by AP, when students can purchase the L.A. Times or access
any newspaper by using the Internet?
The Daily Bruin is a fine newspaper, but perhaps focusing on the
UCLA community and tapping into what’s obviously your
advantage is what can, in the long term, ensure continued success.
You don’t compete against the Wall Street Journal. You
compete against all media. And no other media knows the UCLA
community as well as you do.
Adam Jacobson
arzana, Calif.