Spring Break
Letter to the Editor
Attacks should be well thought out
Issue date: 4/15/09 Section: Forum
Mr. Fancher, your "rant" in the April 13 Forum of The Daily Barometer is an excellent example of what is wrong with our media: when left with nothing productive to write about, let's criticize conservatives!
"Why we shouldn't listen to O'Reilly's hypocritical rants." But we should listen to yours, Mr. Fancher? How are you any different from O'Reilly? You, just like him, cater to a specific crowd of people with a similar point of view, attacking those of differing points of view. You, like O'Reilly, are criticizing someone for their beliefs. Mr. Fancher, some people in our culture do in fact believe that it is disrespectful and morally reprehensible to make sexually lewd expressions directed towards a respected member of a state government. You, on the other hand, are more apt to defend the guy doing pelvic thrusts behind a grotesque misrepresentation of the Alaskan governor.
Which leads me to problem number two in the media: when it's liberals being attacked, their "freedom of expression" is at stake, according to you, Mr. Fancher. However, it's fair game to call a conservative "a self-serving egomaniac and a hypocrite …"
"Throwing people," (read: liberals) "under the bus for political differences is also not a very positive message to send America's youth," according to Mr. Fancher, but it's apparently OK to throw conservatives under a train for expressing their moral beliefs.
Too bad we can't simply say "abracadabra" and have your column published on Uranus; Scott Conover hasn't gotten us that hyperdrive we need just yet …
Ryan Ruark
sophomore in business admistration
"Why we shouldn't listen to O'Reilly's hypocritical rants." But we should listen to yours, Mr. Fancher? How are you any different from O'Reilly? You, just like him, cater to a specific crowd of people with a similar point of view, attacking those of differing points of view. You, like O'Reilly, are criticizing someone for their beliefs. Mr. Fancher, some people in our culture do in fact believe that it is disrespectful and morally reprehensible to make sexually lewd expressions directed towards a respected member of a state government. You, on the other hand, are more apt to defend the guy doing pelvic thrusts behind a grotesque misrepresentation of the Alaskan governor.
Which leads me to problem number two in the media: when it's liberals being attacked, their "freedom of expression" is at stake, according to you, Mr. Fancher. However, it's fair game to call a conservative "a self-serving egomaniac and a hypocrite …"
"Throwing people," (read: liberals) "under the bus for political differences is also not a very positive message to send America's youth," according to Mr. Fancher, but it's apparently OK to throw conservatives under a train for expressing their moral beliefs.
Too bad we can't simply say "abracadabra" and have your column published on Uranus; Scott Conover hasn't gotten us that hyperdrive we need just yet …
Ryan Ruark
sophomore in business admistration
Note: writers will not reply to comments.
Be the first to comment on this story
Comments by registered users are approved by default.