<$BlogRSDURL$>
thoughtsnips
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
 
Have we overlooked the October Surprise?

I have a hunch that the pundits - of the mainstream and of the blogosphere - are underestimating the flu vaccine shortage crisis, big time. Remember that there are swing states, especially Florida, where seniors could make all the difference. And they are the most affected in the crisis. And they tend to vote their interest.

 
Have we overlooked the October Surprise?

I have a hunch that the pundits - of the mainstream and of the blogosphere - are underestimating the flu vaccine shortage crisis, big time. Remember that there are swing states, especially Florida, where seniors could make all the difference. And they are the most affected in the crisis. And they tend to vote their interest.

Monday, October 25, 2004
 
I'll be damned!
No Joke (washingtonpost.com)
I have personally been approached by people who claimed to support LaRouche twice - once when I was in India, and one this year - at the John Edwards rally in tdowntown Columbus during the first debate.
I had no clue that this went this deep. What a sickening movement!

Sunday, October 24, 2004
 
If Ohio Goes Democrat

Used to be times, more than six days ago, when OH was seen as the keystone to this election. But not anymore. For some reason, the Bush campaign has stopped focussing on OH - the POTUS will visit us,
The Buckeyes, only once from now to the E-day. The new darlings are the Dairy folks of Wisconsin.

There are two views among the Dems as to why Ohio has lost Bush's attention. One group believes that Bush has given up on the state in a tactical shift. Another group believes that Bush has taken a surer way of winning Ohio - steal it. Of course, Cuyahoga, the most populous, and Democratic county in OH, is already complaining about its ballots. The GOP has is also sending Larry Russell, the man who oversaw the alleged vote fraud in South Dakota, to Ohio.

But that aside, if Ohio does go Democrat, is the BC'04 finished? Not really. Bush is counting on winnin Wisconsin, which would mean that Kerry has to win New Hampshire to win the Presidency - and this does not seem very probable.

The fly in the ointment for Bush? He has to win Florida - if Kerry wins both Ohio and Florida, the Presidency is his - irrespective of what happens in Wisconsin or Iowa or New Hampshire or New Mexico. That does seem possible - with Kerry closing in on Bush in the Sunshine state, and the Republican leaning Orlando Sentinel today endorsed Kerry. The last Democrat that paper endorsed for Presidency was Lyndon Johnson, in 1964.

 
Kerry is too much of a fag to hold the Presidency!
This is the crassest ad I have seen till date - appealing to the basest sentiments of subconcious homophobia to appeal for votes for the Man (notice how the President can hold a football with ease and command - something that the Homo Democrat cannot).

The intended audience, the self-righteous right, are the pervs who cannot see anything but sexual attraction if a man touches another - so much for being inspired by scriptures. And yeah, any man with a twinkling eye or teeth must be femme.
Thanks, Andrew Sullivan for the link.

PS: The intention of linking this site is not to increase the hits for those b******s - send this to any moderate Republican - or fence-sitter American you know - it might help them firm up their mind.

 
Guardian Unlimited | The Guide | Dumb show
Will somebody shut up the Brits (or, more specifically, The Guardian)?

The Guardian has been doing its best to show the worst face of the Kerry supporters - and to get Kerry beaten. This column is despicable. There is a decorum that one must maintain in talking about the opposition. You cannot - and should not - call for assasination of a leader of another country that is not at war with you. I would not dream of thinking that this would make people aware of the inadequacies of their crowd. The only conclusion, then, is that this piece is the left equivalent of the Scary John Kerry site I linked in the previous post.

Disgusting.

Saturday, October 23, 2004
 
danieldrezner.com :: Daniel W. Drezner :: I've made up my mind

Conservative pundit Prof. Daniel Drezner has made up his mind - to vote for John Kerry. Or, more precisely (as in the case of a great many people), against George Bush. Money quote:
"To put it crudely, my anger at Bush for the number of Mongolian cluster-f**ks this administration was discovered to have made in the planning process in the run-up to Iraq was compounded by the even greater number of cluster-f**ks the administration made in the six months after the invasion, topped off by George W. Bush's decision not to fire the clusterf**ks in the civilian DoD leadershop that insisted over the past two years that not a lot of troops were needed in the Iraqi theater of operations."
Well said, Professor.

Friday, October 22, 2004
 
The Australian: UN divided over human cloning [October 22, 2004]
The President, who is not able to push a ban on therapeutic cloning at home through the consent of the American populace, is now trying to push it through the back door - via a global ban, and his vehicle is the UN?
Did some one say this is the conservative President? Are not conservatives supposed to believe in more local control of laws and norms? Are not conservatives traditionally against using the UN as some kind of global policy making body/government? Moreover, is this not a compassionate conservative President, who moderated his right-wing agenda to shut down therapeutic cloning?

Thursday, October 21, 2004
 
MSNBC - India draws 'medical tourists'
A very encouraging article. Sadly, we are not able to provide even basic health care to a section of our own population. We should work on that too.

Wednesday, October 20, 2004
 
How do you know OBL is dead/paralyzed/in total isolation?

He has not come out with an endorsement of President Bush. Obviously, this President is the best thing to have happenned in the War on Terror - best for them. They know it - does the American voter?

Tuesday, October 19, 2004
 
The Water States Strategy

water_states
Originally uploaded by kmramki.
A study after the 2000 elections showed that generally, areas near water bodies tended to vote Democrat. Not just coastal states - we are talking about counties adjoining big rivers like Mississippi even in hard Red states. Keeping that in mind, here is a scenario where Kerry would be the President.

He wins all the west coast states (it does not look very far fetched), and all of New England and Mid Atlantic states. Of these, only ones that he needs to worry about even a little are New Hampshire, Maine and Pennsylvania - but all the latest polls show him leading in those places rather comfortably.

He also takes Michigan, Illinois and Minnesota - where he has been leading quite comfortably, and the swing states of Wisconsin and Ohio. With Hawaii, that would make 272 electoral votes - even if Bush takes all the other states, including Florida, and even if Maine awards one vote to Bush, Kerry would still triumph. Of course, non-water states like New Mexico or Arkansas (a long shot) would be an extra.

The crux of the strategy? O-H-I-O.

PS: But yeah, you could swap Ohio and Florida in the above discussion, and the whole thing stands. But I think there is a much bigger chance of Kerry winning OH than FL.


 
The Washington Monthly
Boy, now, this is democracy. A conservative commentator is deeply worried about whom he is going to vote, and a liberal commentator, who rarely agrees with the former on issues, tries to rationally convince him that his favorite guy should get the former's vote. Nice!

Monday, October 18, 2004
 
Reading the Tea Leaves

Well... call it schadenfreude. I have a gut feeling (yay! I used at least one of the President's favorite phrases without retching!) that Bush will win the popular vote, but lose the electoral college.

Worst case, they will be so close that Kerry v Bush will be fought over whether Colorado can split its electors (though I think legislature in the state will be able to help Bush here by nominating his slate of electors, Bush v Gore decision of 2000 will force the Supreme court to prevent that chance).

OK, wake me up now.

 
Keyes says incest awaits kids of gays
This is the latest pearl of wisdom from the "calling her Lesbian is outrageous" Party. Let's see... let's see all that outrage now from all those Bob Novaks and Bill Safires.
And yeah, I would love to hear teh President explain how his "culture of life" will not inexorably lead to men marrying their sisters, given that it promotes anonymous adoptions as an alternative to abortion. And yes, given the manner in which the Right loves slippery slope arguments (especially when it comes to marriage or sexual matters), would not this mean all men will marry only their sisters and mothers (yuck!) in future if adoptions are encouraged?

 
Flash news

Veerappan, the Sandalwood brigand, finally killed.

 
Instapundit.com -
Oh, a quick response indeed - a statement from abroad is wrong only if it is against Bush - then it is intervention. But if it is for Bush, it is fine, indeed.

 
CNN.com - Putin urges voters to back Bush - Oct 18, 2004
About a week back, the German Defense Minister, Peter Struck, hinted in an interview to the Financial Times that Germany might send troops to Iraq if Kerry won on Nov 2. It raised a furore among the right here in the US.
Now, the latest dictator of Russia is endorsing the President. Hmmm... it will be interesting to see if the Right asks Putin to shove it.

 
All my friends, take note

Peter
Originally uploaded by kmramki.
I should be starting my dissertation soon. This is the first task allocation in that - to all my friends out there - remember this quote all thru next year!

(Thanks Patrick , for the beautiful picture!


 
Thackeray blames Muslims for defeat
A classic recipe for disaster - an aging politico, who has lost his touch flailing to shift the blame in any which way for a defeat from which he may never see his party recover. Good for the country.

Oh, BTW, interestingly, albeit a little worryingly, the Sena was the only party which increased its vote share in these elections. In spite of the loss of nearly 7% votes, Congress got more seats. Yes, may be because of strategic voting. But if it is so, what is the solution? I do not think there is anything wrong with strategic voting, as long as the group indulging in it makes sure it does not spoil them.

It was the Sena's fault that they decided to alienate the Muslims and non-Maharashtrians completely, gambling for the Maharashtrian vote. They are paying for it.

Sunday, October 17, 2004
 
After more than 12 years...

After 12 years, I was rooting for Congress, against the BJP in an election. And thankfully, The BJP-Sena lost. I am glad. This is bound to be a blow for the Thackeray clan - and possibly, a fatal blow for the Sena.

Meanwhile, you find something amusing in this?


Friday, October 15, 2004
 
How this Indian chemist missed share of Nobel - Newindpress.com
A sad anecdote about how we are wasting our talent....

 
Andrew Sullivan thinks that conservatives should vote for the Democrats this time - so the Dems are forced to take responsibility for the WoT. His reasoning reminds me of the three reasons John Adams gave for asking Jefferson to write the Declaration of Independence. Strangely, all of them seem applicable to the current situation.

Reason first: You are a Virginian (replace with a Democrat) and a Virginian ought to appear at the head of this business. (This is very similar to his argument)
Reason second: I am obnoxious, suspected and unpopular. You are very much otherwise. (Deservedly, or otherwise, Bush is not trusted by the world. Kerry wins 86% in polls outside the US)
Reason third: You can write ten times better than I can. (Kerry simply IS a better diplomat than Bush)

Hmmm.... the timeless wisdom of the Founders!

 
http://http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/15/means.season.ap/index.html

I agree. Just wondering if John Edwards' sunny optimism and 'The best days of America are ahead' philosophy would have done the trick better than the onslaught of negative ads, negative comments and an overall negative strategy by both campaigns. Somehow, it seems that true optimism and a positive strategy jsut do not work.




Thursday, October 14, 2004
 
The awaited Kerry interview

Kerry's interview was quite satisfying, I should say. The only sore point, I guess, is that he did not promise anything about the UN SC seat. There was one little misspeak (I hope) - when he said that whatever decision is taken about Kashmir, it has to be in Delhi, Islamabad and Srinagar. That last part could be spun into an endorsement of tripartite talks being pushed by the Hurriyat.

 
Kerry and Mary Cheney

I disagree with Rachit. I mentioned this in my review of the debate yesterday.

In there, I mentioned that it could be seen as a low blow from Kerry. The implied meaning being that it was not. In fact, I think Kerry really bit a bullet there, saying, in effect, that homosexuality is about who you are, and not how you behave. It's a shame that the President tried straddling on this question.

First, let's parse what Kerry said:
We're all God's children, Bob, and I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as. I think if you talk to anybody, it's not choice.

First of all, I do not see anything but respect in his reference to Mary Cheney. In fact, he continued from there to talk about the struggles of people who try not to be what they are. In effect, congratulating Mary for her courage.

Second, Rachit never took offense at Edwards mentioning the same thing in the Veep debate - or even Cheney himself mentioning it in a public speech. Apparently (this is from my conversation with him), he believes what sets Kerry apart is that "Cheney was not even there to defend her." Wait a minute - did Kerry call her something bad? Why should she be defended? I guess it says more about what we think about homosexuality than it says about her, when we subconsciously infer that being called a lesbian is an insult - even to a person who is openly gay!

Third (this was another contention of Rachit): This was no violation of her privacy. He invaded Mary's privacy only as much as the President did of Mrs. Missy Johnson, when, in teh first debate, he reminisced about his prayers with her for her late husband PJ Johnson.

Fourth, it was not as if Mary wanted to keep her homosexuality a private matter. For those who do not know, she was the head of gay outreach program at Coors.

Strangely, it was Lynne Cheney who objected to what Kerry did - not Mary. I wonder what Mary thinks of her mom using her as a tool in trying to pull a fast one on a political opponent who only expressed his empathy, and admiration, for her.

R

 
I'm back

Hi folks.. I know this has been an extended absence but I'm back. Hope to be more regular with my blog postings.

My first post after the break is regarding, what else, but the debates. I think Kerry won at least 2 of the 3 debates. My comment here is on the last debate when he made a reference to Cheney's daughter. I think it was highly inappropriate that he did so. It is absolutely uncalled for to drag family members to score political points. Whats interesting is that it seems as though it was planned.. Edwards mentioned it in his debate and now Kerry again mentions it. It cannot be a coincidence.

Rachit.




 
More Gaffes

Oh, how could I have forgotten the President's remarkable request to the youngsters - "Do not take flu shots?" First, his administration screws up. And the young people are supposed to risk their health? And worse, compare this to his bleeding care about the possibility of the medicines from Canada being from the third worlds <sic>. Kerry must have gone behind him with tongs for that.

Wednesday, October 13, 2004
 
The Last Debate

By far, the most unremarkable one. The questions that were asked were quite incisive. But surprisingly, very important domestic issues - including the gas prices, alternate fuels and environment never came up (gas prices came up in none of the debates!).

I was taken aback by a couple of point-blank questions, especially, the one on homosexuality being natural orientation or a lifestyle. But I think it was a very wishy-washy reply that Bush gave, and Kerry did answer it in a way that could be biting the bullet. But, I seriously did not understand why Kerry had to draw in Mary Cheney on the question - except, possibly, to put a human face on the reviled group. But the fact, Senator, is that gays are not that faceless mass anymore. Almost every American today knows at least one person who is gay. So, I guess it would come across as a cheap shot by Kerry.

Bush was wishy-washy abt Abortion too - he actually passed it up after 30 seconds. Is it confidence in knowing he has gotten the message to the interested base in his Dred Scott decision code lingo?

Bush seemed very engaged in the beginning, and I almost gave this one to him... before he turned all ruddy, and started rambling a lot.

Interestingly, there was a pattern in the Veep and the Prez answered questions on the jobs question - they helpfully informed us that the best way to get Americans working is to get them employed!! I mean, seriously!!! To be fair, they followed it up with a lecture on education - leaving the respective challengers to point it out.

Kerry was strong on the substances. If one remained awake thru the debate, she would have got an impression that he knew the stuff. Bush mixed up a lot of numbers. And there were the usual bunch of Bushisms (International world?).

But Kerry made a couple of gaffes where it matters. He should have mentioned second amendment, along with first and fifth, when he said he would never limit the rights of the people. That is the beauty of the Bush campaign machine - they are excellent at filling in the spaces with codewords and correct phrasing that would get the message right.

Kerry's joke about Sopranoes did not get thru again. But then, I initially thought that Paygo thing that Bush came up with was a Bushism! I think Bush has reminded people of his scowl too many times now. Kerry's joke abt marrying up, more than Schaeffer and Bush, was quite good. But, was Laura richer than the Bushes?!

Overall, I think Kerry would be seen as the victor of this (Fox New gives him 65% - you decide).

Tuesday, October 12, 2004
 
And now a Sino-Indian gas pipeline plan

Been more than a few interesting developments in India-China relations recently.

Apart from entertainment value, there's not much more to this election campaign from the Indian PoV (in terms of verifiable difference). Its also debatable whether Bush's recent largesse to TSP is linked solely with bribing Mush to yield more in the run-up to election day. There's more to it than that. Looks like people in the Indoo establishment are also seeing it against that backdrop, and developments vis a vis China should be considered in that framework IMHO.

Ramki, long time no see!? A favour: Do put in permanent links to BRM and BRF from your blog.


Sunday, October 10, 2004
 
Iraq's Bigger Picture (washingtonpost.com)

Jim Hoagland gets it wrong in this piece. Nobody is empathising with Hussein for failing to make WMDs. Nor is Kerry retrospectively defending him for acquiescing to the UN resolutions. And by no stretch of imagination is any one praising him for that, forget nominating him for the Nobel Prize!

Kerry campaign does not try underplaying the atrocities and corruption of the Hussein regime. Kerry's repeated insistence that he would have voted for the resolution to authorize the President to use force knowing then what he does now is an acknowledgement of the fact that Hussein's regime was problem that had to be handled. What they are insisting is that it was not so urgent that the Bush admn had to leave Afghanistan with a diluted security system and invade Iraq.

Let's draw a parallel here to clarify this position. Today, a genocide is going on in Darfur. Everyday, people are getting killed, or dying of starvation. Does that mean that the Bush admn should leave Iraq to the so-called National Guard, and prepare to invade Sudan? After all, the human crisis in Sudan is not just the responsibility of the United States. Every country that claims to be a responsible player in the world affairs has to play a part in handling that crisis. That effort to build an alliance should be led by the United States, as the pre-eminent power of this day.

The main justification from the Bush administration for going in alone (okay, with a handful of allies, including the UK, Italy, and Eritrea) was that it was not simply a human crisis handling which would be a common responsibility, but a specific threat for the United States. This part has been utterly denied by the Duefler report. The problem is that President Bush did not encertain that particular claim, which made it a War to Occupy Iraq, rather than an international effort to remove a dictator, and provide relief to the suffering people of Iraq. That is an crucial error in judgement that Bush has to be made accountable for.

Friday, October 08, 2004
 
The Debate

I think Bush was better than last time. At least, he was screaming, instead of mumbling. He also made the crowd laugh three times (by my count), which is important. It is painful to see Kerry try making people laugh - I do not think that Red Sox joke plays in ol' Mizoorah. Neways.
Kerry stumbled a couple of times. The most notable was when he talked of Bush's mistakes instead of his own, for the last (?) question. He would have shaved off a chunk of that Boston Brahmin image if he had seemed genuinely feeling that he had committed a mistake on this issue or that. And instinctively, people tend to believe that people who own up to mistakes - and can confess publicly - have conviction. Kerry lost a golden opportunity there.
And what about that Timber company thing - was that some factoid that was thrown in by some over-enthusiastic aide that will turn out to be wrong? Or, will the Kerry campaign have some info backing up the candidate's statement? This is gonna be interesting.
As I had predicted, Bush wielded the "Liberal, Liberal" slogan. And thank God he did not do bad - or, we would have heard the nukilar slogan ("fag, fag") too.
And Kerry's statement in response to the abortion debate was kind of winded. But I guess the base would be satisfied. And it would not offend the moderates. Bush's dig there, saying he was trying to decode it was not really a good idea. Bush came out as an idealogical guy there again.
I do not get it... I think Edwards' response to the 86 tax increase votes of Kerry (that he had supported > 600 tax cuts) was easily more resonant. Kerry should have mentioned that too.
Bush really screwed up the question on draft. Kerry failed to excoriate the small army idea of this admn (popularly known as the Rumsfeld Doctrine). He missed another opportunity there.

Overall, I think Kerry took this one too.

 
I TOLD YOU SO!!!
The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > The Mystery of the Bulge in the Jacket

Geez, I was just kidding about that spine brace idea... turns out, Karl Rove reads ThoughtSnips!! :-P



 
Fag, Fag...

Brace up. If President Bush sees himself slip up again tonite (I am very sure he did during the course of the last debate), he will go on the offensive, attacking Kerry for being a liberal, and commence the showdown I have been predicting all along - he will try to turn it into Middle America vs the Metro. And you will hear, in all possible codewords, the slogan that titles this post. Brace up.

 
BPO: Kerry clarifies in India Abroad
We will wait for this... Rachit has especially been concerned abt Kerry's stand on BPO. Let's see if this convinces him.

 
The New York Times > International > Middle East > Three Explosions Strike Sinai Resort Towns in Egypt
What does this mean? Is this because they are not able to hit inside Israel and hence are attacking Israelis in other countries? Or is this an expansion of the attacks on Israelis and Jews to all other countries, besides Israel?

Wednesday, October 06, 2004
 
'I'd worship Hitler, not Gandhi' - The Times of India
Indeed a sad state of affairs. Gandhi represented the quintesse of the Indian cultural ideal - a responsible, individualist with a conscience. Ironically, in the name of secularism and Hindutva we seem to be importing a culture tinged with a lot more of Christian and Muslim ideas and culture. In the name of fighting creeping western mindset, the so-called intelligentsia in our society have changed our discourse in a direction that resonates with the culture wars of the west and the Muslim world. Today, there is more to read of our traditional wisdom in Thoreau than in Nehru and the RSS idealogues. Sad indeed.

 
NDA's river-linking now UPA priority, it was 'Indira's idea' - Newindpress.com
And you thought they learnt a lesson... This idea should be a red rag for those who are tired of the Nehruvian grand dreams-turned-nightmares. But, apparently, we are made of a different stock. It is amusing, nay, shocking to see people excited beyond themselves at the very thought of having such a grandiloquent scheme in the works. Where the funds would come from, whether this is scientifically viable - those discussions are not for us.

I thought that one good that might come out of the NDA loss would be the death of this project - and more funds for the quadrangle project. Apparently, I hoped too soon.

 
Mazel Tov

Congratulations are due to the newly minted uncle of the blog - Rachit. We join his family in welcoming into this world Rachit's 7 lb nephew, Parth, born Oct 4th.

 
If u followed closely...

the debate last night, you would have noticed some startling maneuvers - some effective, some not so effective. Some that I got:

1. The whole thing reminded me of the Titanic. Cheney was this iceberg that threatened to maim the beautiful Titanic, and sink it. Menacing, huh? Sure. But who has ever empathised with the iceberg for getting hit by that overspeeding ship? That is how it was. Sure, one was able to appreciate the girth of Cheney, his experience etc etc. But one could just not relate to him.
Cheney tried to come across as one of us, everyday humans, who has lost his health care, been laid off etc at some time in the past. But he was cold through all that, kind of as if all that had made him numb to human suffering. Ironically, Edwards was more effective in thawing that image a little bit, talking about Mary Cheney, and the emotions the Veep and his wife must be going through etc. If Cheney thought he was playing the taciturn westerner, he did not quite get it.

2. Edwards' legerdemain came when he talked about the Medical Malpractice claim. He smartly avoided cases where it was a Doc versus a patient he had tried to save. Instead, he chose to talk about a case where an unfortunate, unsuspecting child was maimed by the greedy folks at some swimming pool company - not health care company. Smart, eh? Cheney never caught it. Worse, he started talking about how some poor company in Wyoming was suffering. Who could relate to that?

3. Edwards was given a golden opportunity to launch his future Presidential bid when asked what made him think he qualified to be the One heartbeat away. He did good job. But wasted a bullet - he could have pointed out that he has more experience than the top of the challenger ticket last time.

4. While Cheney was targeting the base with all that redmeat, Edwards quietly went for the middle. Not much talk about out sourcing (Will Saletan counted it to a mere four), no talk even about two Americas. And in some places, he smartly tacked to the right - for a moment I thought it was cross talk when Edwards said that the best defense is a good offense!

5. Overall, I think it was a draw. But I think Edwards would score with the people who matter - the center. He came in as the underdog, and exceeded the expectations. Cheney's performance will be forgotten. So, as we go forward, I think this will be seen as a win for Edwards.

Monday, October 04, 2004
 
For a few Laffs

Why Sonia belongs in India and especially, Indian politics!! (Hat tip: The inimitable folks at the OxBlog)

 
Hung House in Maharashtra likely, says Express-Loksatta-NDTV Opinion Poll - Newindpress.com
I am rooting for, hold your breath, the Congress-NCP alliance in this race. A perceived BJP-SS win would strengthen the so-called Hindutva forces in the BJP, egged on by Thackeray.
However, if the Congress-NCP can pull it off in Maharashtra, in what could be Thackeray's last election (he is 77), it would be seen as a failure of the Uma Bharthi strategy (I wonder if Advani was the brain behind that idea - hopefully not), giving the moderates in BJP a stick to beat the saffronites with.
And the self-styled Hinduhriday Samrat would receive a rebuff - which is good any day.

 
Patrick Belton, over at OxBlog, wonders if Fox News did some photoshop to show President Bush taller than he is, to reduce the contrast with Kerry.

As amusing as it would be if they had, I guess it is not the case after all.... If you look closely at the pictures, you would notice that in the picture from AFP has Bush being much closer to Kerry (notice the "V" shaped gap between them). I guess the Prez was leaning more in that AFP pic, and was standing straight in the Fox News picture.

We could expect the Prez to turn up with spine braces in the next debate - Karl Rove will look to it.
;)

Sunday, October 03, 2004
 
University revises guidelines for student groups
A welcome development. I believe that while discrimination against small, or traditionally condemned groups should not be allowed, it should not be that any one who has beliefs that believe a member of such group is wrong should be made to feel guilty for thinking so. That is just another form of discrimination.

I guess this revision is reaction to the brewing problems with an association of Christian students from Moritz School of Law (affiliated to the OSU), who demand the right to exclude LGBT students from their ranks. To force them to take in people who are not of compatible with their own reading of their belief is to deny them their identity. No liberal outlook should condone such an amalgamation through coercion.

The best OSU could do, and should consider doing is to encourage dialog between groups such as that association and, say, the LGBT groups in OSU, both sides willing. Now, that could be considered promoting diversity.


Powered by Blogger