Forget about SG; join UT Watch
What do you call a student member of the Board of Regents who doesn't carry voting power? An audience member with a better seat.
SG: Wake up. The regents know many members of UT Watch by name because they already attend these meetings and sign up ahead of time to share their opinions with them. What's the difference in Rep. Patrick Rose's bill (inexcusably heralded by SG President Omar Ochoa as a "worthy compromise") and the status quo?
When UT Watch decried the illegality of the monstrous infrastructure fee, SG instead focused efforts on a student regent. When UT Watch decried the removal of tuition-setting power from the Legislature and instead into the hands of the unelected regents, SG kept concentrating on putting a student on the board. Now, our tuition is exorbitant, and we have no student regent.
The worst part is a student regent would not have stopped the fee or tuition deregulation anyhow. It would have turned all 9-0 votes into 9-1 votes (assuming the gubernatorial pick actually represented students).
Here's my vote: that we stop letting SG think they represent us, and instead we all join UT Watch (or other groups) and learn to organize together for our own collective behalf.
- Jordan Buckley, Sociology senior, Former SG representative
Liberals proved Coulter's point
Anne Coulter has made a living saying that any liberal when faced with logic or reason will be reduced to childish sniveling, name calling and statements equivalent to "you're mean."
True to form, lefties at her speech Tuesday night came out and proved her point. During the opening minutes of her speech, one man stood up, said, "How can you say that?" and ran out crying. This was possibly the most salient liberal argument of the night.
During the question-and-answer portion of the event, one man made farting noises as she attempted to respond to his question; several flipped her off and ran from the microphone, and one man shouted obscenities and ran away high stepping and making masturbatory gestures. This of course, was dignified by cheers, applause and high fives down the isles by fellow liberals.
Does anyone else get it? You reduced yourselves to exactly what she said you would. If there are a few intelligent, coherent liberals on this campus, you were done a great disservice last night.
- Kipp Marshall, Sociology senior
Who's more vulgar?
As a UT alum and former Daily Texan columnist, I was quite upset to read about events surrounding the Ann Coulter visit to the UT campus. However, I was more put off by James Burnham's column ridiculing the protesters at the Coulter event.
To Burnham, Coulter is an "entertainer," but the protesters are "wacky." Burnham cannot have it both ways. If Coulter is entertaining to some, then perhaps Ajai Raj's antics are entertaining to others.
Personally, I do not care for either Coulter's or Raj's sense of humor, if it can be called that. But the question must be asked: Which is more vulgar? Raj's reference to sodomy, or Coulter's call at the speech, as reported in The Daily Texan, to incite oppression against those who disagree with her point of view?
On the vulgarity scale, Coulter wins hands down. And yet, the University sanctioned Coulter's statements by arresting Raj, letting Coulter speak, and allowing her to hide behind the moniker of "entertainer." For shame.
- Stephen Thibodeau, UT alumnus
Raj got what he deserved
This is not an attempt to defend Ann Coulter or any of her views, which are generally extremist and inflammatory and not at all in line with either of our personal views. However, what Ajai Raj did during her Q&A session was simply unacceptable, no matter what political disagreements he might have. Action such as his is grossly inappropriate and sullies the image of the University and the student body.
If Raj is so opposed to Ann Coulter, he would have been better served by peacefully participating in the protest outside or simply boycotting her appearance, like many of his fellow students did. Instead, he chose an unprofessional and inappropriate course of action that will hopefully have drastic repercussions for him. One would expect an English major to be able to come up with classier rhetoric than Raj chose to use; indeed, any reasonably intelligent person could have gotten his point across without resulting to vulgarity.
Raj's right to free speech is not in question here; rather, it is his responsibility to represent his fellow students in a suitable and tasteful manner that is most important. We fully support his arrest and hope that his punishment is swift and fitting.
Coulter is known for viciously attacking any ideology other than her own with harsh rhetoric, but this does not give anyone the right to sink to such a low level and risk the reputation of UT and its students. Moreover, it gives Coulter more ammunition with which to attack differing views; now she can point to Raj and - no matter how unfair the comparison is - generalize his actions to reflect on all moderate and liberal views that she opposes.
Thanks, Ajai, for ruining it for the rest of us.
- Sarah Pratt, Religious studies and Sociology sophomore. Andy Kretschmar Computer science and German junior
Coulter rude to the right, too
I would like to object to Yashoda Sampath's characterization of the heckling at last night's event featuring Ann Coulter as "incessant." Coulter was given ample opportunities to speak, tell jokes and insult students. And I am not talking about liberals like me who showed up hoping to register their complaints.
Coulter was equally rude to conservative students who were nothing but polite towards her. One young man who asked about her inflammatory rhetoric's impact on his ability to bring people into the Republican Party was dismissed as a "girl," while another student was simply told that his question was stupid.
I am also deeply saddened to see that the University wasted $30,000 to bring Coulter to speak here instead of finding a notable conservative who could actually engage the student body in constructive political dialogue instead of merely insulting them and bragging about her book sales.
- Joseph Bogen, LBJ School of Public Affairs
Burnham afraid to take stand
James Burnham: So, you're a junior. I'm guessing around 21. I'm not too much older but old enough that you make me sad.
You are afraid - afraid to be labeled; afraid to take a stand. You have your feet firmly planted in the middle. You think Ann Coulter's a kook, but you feel the same way about Michael Moore. God forbid you actually get angry about something - that you actually believe in something enough to take a risk.
I don't know the kids who were protesting Coulter. Yeah, what that one guy did was immature. But personally, I think fart noises are kind of funny. And I also think sitting back to be "entertained" by someone who is morally reprehensible to you is sick and cowardly - and lazy and immature.
I don't personally want to be arrested, but if it has to happen, please let it be for making obscene gestures at an Ann Coulter gathering. I'd be a lot more proud of that than of a clunky, poorly written column that only reveals how very little I know about myself.
Here's my wish for you: Do something radical, James. Don't stay comfortably in the middle. We're all scared, but you don't always have to be "rational and civil." It's okay to make mistakes and be passionate. Be the change you want to see in the world. The messiness of it is what makes it worthwhile.
Big words you got out of the thesaurus and excessive use of adjectives do not a good editorial make.
- Kendall Lynch, Graduate student in playwriting
You forgot to mention...
James Burnham should be ashamed of himself. Here are just a few of the things missing from his column:
The University paid $30,000 to bring a bigot to campus. Ann Coulter has said that airlines should engage in more racial profiling and use advertising slogans like, "The friendly skies - unless you're an Arab." In Coulter's hate-filled rant, she "joked" about torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay.
While she was allowed (and paid) to speak, she cut off the microphone to people who made comments or asked follow-up questions. A student who waited in line to speak during the Q&A session was dragged out, arrested, held for several hours and issued a citation. This was supposedly justified because he used profanity.
I find it astonishing that Burnham is more offended by profanity than by Coulter's racist and homophobic vitriol. Coulter's mission is to intimidate and silence anyone who disagrees with her. She has written a defense of Joe McCarthy and argued for a return to McCarthyism. She regularly calls for oppression of gays, Arabs, Muslims, immigrants, liberals, leftists and even women. In her words last night: "They're always trying to act like they're oppressed. So let's do it. Let's oppress them."
The only way to respond to these attacks is to stand together and refuse to be intimidated. We need to be vocal and protest. Racism, sexism, homophobia and McCarthyite intimidation have no place at the University.
-Jon Bougie, UT alumnus
Coulter offered nothing
I was at Ann Coulter's talk Tuesday night. She spoke for about 20-to-30 minutes in her usual style: strings of one-liners aimed at Democrats and "stupid liberals." It went over well with most of the audience, heavily conservative as it was, though a modest-sized anti-Coulter contingent at the back of the LBJ auditorium punctuated her speech and the following Q&A session with frequent jeers.
Coulter is very good at what she does: spout off clever anti-liberal zingers, dismiss left-wing viewpoints as inept and spew venom at anyone she doesn't like. Dissenters who had the courage to direct a question at her, she deftly made objects of ridicule and contempt. My problem with her speech and writing is that it lacks substance. The sole purpose of her work seems to be to make right-wingers feel good about themselves, to assure them that it isn't worth trying to listen to or have any meaningful discourse with the left. They live in a fantasy world, she tells us; they're whiney and they "think they're God," while conservatives are right on every issue, without exception.
While bits of her critique of left-wingers have some truth to them, I noticed that when she is faced with an uncomfortable topic, such as the torture of detainees at the hands of Americans or the glaring incompatibility of her professed Christianity with her general hatefulness, she will, without fail, distract her audience with a vitriolic joke and quickly move on to her next rant.
Those of us who went hoping to expose themselves to well-thought-out right-wing viewpoints with some real substance went home sorely disappointed. All Coulter had to offer was a vaudeville act designed to lull like-minded individuals into a sense of superiority.
- Tyler Utt, Linguistics senior
Some people enjoyed Coulter
Last night as I left Ann Coulter's lecture, I facetiously wondered whether the Texan would cover the speech or the protests. Imagine my surprise this morning upon seeing the headline and photo for the article. The only thing that shocked me was its placement in the lower right. But then again, when did University events take precedent over non-University stories?
I do not fault your coverage of the event. There were protests, along with expletive remarks and actions aimed at Coulter.
Yet you failed to mention that many of her statements were greeted with widespread cheers, which all but drowned out the sparse booing.
Furthermore, many of those who questioned her values and stances cowardly ran from the microphone instead of listening to her responses.
Coulter wanted shock value, as she believes it is the only way to convert people. In response, Raj also wanted shock value. He succeeded and has the rap sheet to prove it. However, his 15 minutes are up, and surprisingly enough, his efforts failed in converting me to his lewd and crude beliefs about marriage.
The final line of the article struck me, as it stated the price of the event. Interestingly enough, I don't recall the Texan mentioning the prices of other lectures, especially that of Michael Moore, whose stances are as far left as Coulter's are right. I guess the cost to hear a speaker with whom you agree is much easier to bear than that of someone you don't.
- Thomas Holstien, Business sophomore
I can make people mad, too
So let me get this straight: The Student Events Center spent $30,000 to have Ann Coulter show up on campus, talk for 30 minutes and piss off a bunch of people.
I've got things to say that would make people angry. Where do I sign up?
- Jake Holbrook, Radio-television-film junior
Be the first to comment on this article!