Letters Hockey cheers, Iraq, Rehnquist

Author: [no author name found]

Respectable cheering

To the Editor:

I would like to pick up the theme of the letter by Tim Hollander '65 that was printed in last week's Campus regarding the idiotic chant at hockey games, especially directed at the opposing goalies, of "You suck!" As a fan of both men's and women's ice hockey, I would like to point out the effect college cheers have on younger fans.

At the home opener Midd-Conn. College women's hockey game on Dec. 1, a very young and very enthusiastic fan waved and sang out the marvelous "HMMMMMMMMMMM-See Ya!" cheer as a Connecticut player made her way to the penalty box. The positive vibrations caused by his cheer warmed the cockles of this fan's heart, and I noticed that his mother was smiling, too. I doubt we would have been amused had he used that other cheer, and in fact, I suspect his dad would have had something to say about it, too. Grow up and act your education.

Sincerely,
Ann LaFiandra '73
Middlebury, Vt.


Professorship supports college

To the Editor:

A letter signed by more than 30 faculty members refers to "documented patterns of hostility Justice Rehnquist demonstrated toward historically underrepresented groups." That is a serious charge against the former Chief Justice, who served on the Court for 33 years and as its leader for 19 years.

I am not trained in constitutional law, but a review of a few of the supporting opinions written by, or endorsed by, Justice Rehnquist suggests that reason grounded in constitutional arguments (not hostility) was the basis for his rulings. My own political views would differ from those of the Chief Justice, but that is beside the point. In a nation that strives to follow "the rule of law," one's political views are not the primary determinant of judicial outcomes. Chief Justice Roberts noted in his recent visit to Middlebury that a Supreme Court Justice is obligated to issue rulings, grounded in the interpretation of laws and the constitution, that sometimes collide with one's personal views.

A web search reveals that such experts in judicial matters as Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe and Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy have expressed their admiration for Rehnquist's leadership and integrity. I urge that we make distinctions between where one's views fall on the political spectrum, and one's competence and integrity in carrying out the responsibilities with which he or she is charged.

I am optimistic that the appointment of Jim Ralph to the Rehnquist Professorship in American History and Culture at Middlebury bodes well for our Faculty and for the education of future generations of Middlebury College students.

Sincerely,
John Emerson
Charles A. Dana Professor of Mathematics,
Secretary of the College


Professorship shows diversity

To the Editor:

I have become aware of a controversy at Middlebury concerning the naming of a chair after former Chief Justice William Rehnquist. As a former law clerk to then Justice Rehnquist, as well as an alumnus of the Middlebury Language Institute, I wanted to weigh in on this issue. I should add that though I clerked for Rehnquist, I usually opposed his positions, as illustrated by my chapter in the book, The Rehnquist Legacy, which I organized and edited. Nevertheless, I considered the Chief Justice a wonderful person and a good friend. He was, undoubtedly, a political conservative. However, his opposition to the creation, or expansion, of constitutional rights by the federal courts was not a simple manifestation of conservative values. Rather it reflected a belief that the democratically elected branches of the government should make such decisions, not the unelected federal courts. I am confident that Rehnquist did not, for example, oppose abortion when such a right was enacted by a state legislature.

Any educational institution that believes in "diversity" should recognize that this is a highly respectable position among legal scholars, even though it may differ from one's own. The rejection of a chair in the name of the Chief Justice would hold Middlebury College out to the world as a place that is intolerant of diverse points of view.

Sincerely,
Craig M. Bradley
Calamaras Professor of Law,
Indiana University School of Law in Bloomington


No price tag on my voice

To the Editor:

In last week's "Letters to the Editor," Kathleen Duquette, a parent of a Middlebury student, spoke of the need for a conservative voice on campus. Quite frankly, it does get a little boring around here when we all agree to agree. Ms. Duquette correctly stated that "all voices have a right to be heard and respected." That said, I really wish that she had stopped writing there.

Ms. Duquette concluded her letter by writing, "What they [the students who oppose the Rehnquist professorship] need to do is grow-up and get a job that allows them to give back to the school and demand a professorship of their choice!" This is a statement with which I cannot agree. If growing up means that I have to adopt conservative view points, count me out! I will never oppose gay marriage, equal rights, freedom of religion and speech, privacy, abortion, health care and higher education for all, and sound environmental practices in favor of growing up. To suggest to the students of Middlebury College that liberal view points are somehow immature is irresponsible.

Moreover, I object to her insinuation that only those students who seek out and gain lucrative salaries will ever truly give back to and have a voice at Middlebury College. Apparently, it seems that not all voices have a right to be heard and respected, only those which emerge from the mouth of someone with a large bank account. My sensibilities, however liberal they may be, need not be attached to a $2.5 million price tag to merit their expression.

Sincerely,
Sarah McGowen '08
Windham, Maine


Withdrawing from Iraq

To the Editor:

The time to begin withdrawing our troops from Iraq is now. Others have offered different opinions, such as Congressman Charles Rangel's request for a draft. However, this does nothing for our military and it defeats the professional nature of its purpose to be free of conscripts.

In the same vein, John McCain's call for more troops appears to be more posturing for his '08 run. While I don't believe in a timetable per se, as that only emboldens the insurgents, I believe that the time has come to begin a draw down of our soldiers. It might be painful, but I have come to believe that the alternative will be worse in the long run for the interests of the U.S. The U.S. has lost its direction; it has stopped fighting to win and is now fighting a political war, similar to the catastrophe that befell the U.S. in Vietnam.

The Iraqis have decided to hitch their star to the theocracy in Iran, and the Malaki Government has continued to support Muqtada al Sadr and his death squads.

The government has gone so far as to interfere with military operations and engagements. As a result, it has put U.S. soldiers in harms way.

It is up to the Iraqis to decide if they want to fight for freedom for themselves. Our support to prop up the Iraqi military is doomed to fail if the Iraqis can't fight for themselves. The time is right to cut bait and live to fight another day if needed.

Sincerely,
Steve Gordon '08
Allentown, Penn.