In an editorial Monday, the Daily Bruin wrote about how Students
First! should reach out to the groups that endorsed and campaigned
for its opponents (“USAC must look past differences to reach
goals”).
But judging recent comments from SF! leaders, no one should
expect any change from a slate that has riddled its 10-year
existence with corruption, political maneuvering and aversion to
treating outside groups fairly.
Some might be familiar with the election day chants last
Thursday coming from SF!: “Shame on you, shame on you,”
and “Whose university? Our university.”
Granted, some of the chants and comments were a warranted
response to a group of non-candidates who sported vulgar anti-SF!
shirts which were uncalled for.
But the comments made by outgoing SF! President Anica McKesey,
directed at presidential candidate Josh Lawson right after it was
announced he had lost to the SF! candidate, were intolerable.
As a parting shot, she called Lawson a “bitch,”
revealing the utter disrespect SF! members have for those who
disagree with them, and screams of “Yeah!
Motherfuckers!” manifested a complete lack of class.
These comments are not isolated incidents.
SF!’s refusal to take down a Web site full of negative
stereotypes and insults toward the Greek system show its vitriol
extends beyond its immediate political opponents.
But for the last two elections, SF! has claimed to be morally
superior to its competitors because it had not produced an official
“friends and enemies” list, unlike the Students United
for Reform and Equality president last year.
But this claim is invalidated by comments posted on the blog of
outgoing SF! Facilities Commissioner Tutram Nguyen, as of Monday
evening, that confirmed what many of those involved in student
government already knew. Descriptions of “MISTER F*CK-FACE
LAWSON” with the Equal Access Coalition being
“Josh’s evil slate” are only outdone by passages
celebrating that “Mr. Evil, and his crony Vanneesdork is
OUTTA council. MOFO, that’s RITE!”
When one peruses previous entries referring to Lawson,
describing him as a “bullshiting, shit-talking, fake,
two-faced, homophobic bigot ass-hole for your next
president!” or a “consertave (sic) jerk that falsely
spews rhetoric of equality ““ that asshole,” one sees
such entries are not simply emotional responses but rather
expressions of immense hatred.
If you thought Lawson was the sole recipient of such choice
attacks from Nguyen, think again. We are told how “I hate the
Daily Bruin (even though they endorsed me last year ““ their
people still suck poo).”
Regarding those “back-stabbing bastards” ““ the
Bruin Democrats who endorsed Lawson in the runoff ““ we are
told “they have made it on to (sic) my shit list.”
Republicans don’t fare any better as they place
“right above the newly situated Bruin Democrats on my
shit-list.”
These incidents reveal how the politics of the Undergraduate
Students Association Council work while giving an insight into how
SF! views its colleagues. Most disturbingly, the aforementioned
member sat on the Budget Review Committee, courtesy of the
aforementioned president. Lawson and the many student groups relied
upon her to receive fair base budget funding.
If no one was willing to believe that politics played a role in
the allotment of the budget process, think again. Compare the
dollars doled out to groups who endorsed SF! to the amounts
received by groups that didn’t endorse SF!. These
disproportionate allocations ““ on top of such public
disrespect ““ are clear indicators that SF! is corrupt and
unapologetic.
While SF! has done things benefiting UCLA, its lack of a moral
direction on the most important USAC issues shows it has no plans
to change its well-documented habits.
With such “˜understanding’ and
“˜inclusive’ representatives, perhaps Lawson was too
good for USAC as he never once stooped to its level. Regardless of
whether you agree with his beliefs, Lawson’s term in office
has revealed an honorable, genuine individual strong enough to
stand up to corruption and dedicated enough to keep going ““
even when SF! refused to work with him.
The Bruin may want USAC to resemble a “Barney and
Friends” episode, but in reality, from the moment anyone
dares to raise questions about SF!’s corruption, he or she
becomes a permanent fixture on the SF! “shit-list.”
There is only one word which can adequately sum up these
shameful and inexcusable comments: hypocrisy. Such attitudes often
result in another thing: corruption.
Any way you see it, these examples are sad reminders of how USAC
remains a body for the few at the expense of the many.
Marian is a second-year political science and history
student.