December 30, 2009

Amherst New Era Progress

Change or Not?

Our winless wars are hurting this country financially. Foreign aid is also part of the problem. This is where the money for healthcare lies.  We can’t even take care of our own country, much less someone else’s. Where is the outcry on that issue?

And this problem called Congress? They pass the laws and are the ones that are not getting things done because they spend most of their time trying to cut each others throat. But, the people keep electing the wrong ones, so put the blame where it belongs, on the people. The insurance industry is as corrupt as they come, and many people believe them and swallow everything they say, hook, line and sinker. They care about those who pay them off, not the people.

Many would rather blame the lack of getting things done on President Obama, but creating jobs is the responsibility of those with the stimulus money that was handed out, so set your sites on them.

Bush got us into this mess years ago, so the Republicans need to come up with a plan to get us out or keep their mouths shut for at least three years. You cannot change things overnight. Prices are going up and will continue to do so, regardless. Nothing or no one can ever change that fact. But, let things just continue as they are going. Lets “not” use the unused bailout money for jobs like the Republicans suggest. Just send the country back to the “40”s. I was there once and I could handle it again. I still have some old rationing stamps!  “It is better to work with the construction gang, than the wrecking crew”.

for creative writing one week, we were supposed to write a letter to the editor. Sadly, mine was not published, but here it is. Enjoy! Letter to the Editor

The recent article summarizing an article summarizing Italian-American outrage over MTV’s “Jersey Shore” has apparently offended some readers. In particular, reader Gaye Males was so distressed by the article she wrote in and demanded a retraction. Here it is:

Italian-Americans enraged over Dumb Dagos of “Jersey Shore”: A Dec. 9 article stated that an unnamed member of the cast released the following statement regarding the controversy, “‘Ey, whatsa’ matta you with the Situation?”. The cast member is Gaye Males’ second cousin, The Situation.

The Kennebec Journal (KJ) has done what has become rare and published something which is full of sense and science: a letter by me.

Naturopathic medicine is pure bull.

Let’s not beat around the bush on this one. Those who practice naturopathy are quacks. They may be sincere quacks, but sincerity does not translate to evidence — or your health.

The Ontario legislature is considering giving naturopathic “doctors” prescription rights. This presents a serious danger to the health of any Canadian ignorant enough to be duped into the “care” of these charlatans.

But it hits closer to home than that. Maine is just one of several states that give these vastly underqualified “doctors” such rights. This presents a serious risk. They have no relevant medical training for offering prescriptions; this makes them highly susceptible to blindly doling out contra-indicated drugs, among other dangerous possibilities.

I cannot overstate this fact: Naturopaths are not doctors and they are not qualified.

They cherry-pick evidence, often lie and misrepresent facts.

Recently, a local naturopathic “doctor,” Christopher Maloney, wrote a letter in which he committed himself to that third possibility. He implied H1N1 vaccination properties for black elderberry. The only relevant studies on black elderberry are for the regular flu, do not show vaccination properties, and far larger studies are needed (as noted by the original researchers).

I implore anyone considering naturopathic “medicine” to not do it and/or cross-check Maloney’s “facts.” Naturopathy is not a science in any sense of the word; it is not to be trusted.

A long laundry list countering false naturopathic claims can be found at the qualified page Terra Sig on http://scienceblogs.com/terrasig/2009/11/more_naturopathic_nonsense_in.php

If everyone began to demand evidence, we could do away with this naturopathic “medicine” malarkey. We’d be all the safer for it.

Michael Hawkins

Augusta

withoutapologyinmaine@gmail.com

I’m glad I was able to sneak that email address in there. Without Apology is my publication and the sister site to FTSOS. That little advertisement is probably the best I can do there since I’m sure the KJ won’t let me link back to myself.

Anyway.

I don’t know if it was because I recently laid out a short summary of the sort of antics this paper has been playing (and then subsequently emailed the link the head honcho), but it took me some time to get this letter published. I originally wanted a much more comprehensive letter published, but Jim Evans lied to me and wouldn’t admit that libel was his concern, so I settled for a pro-atheism letter. Seeing through Evans’ lies, I rewrote my letter so that I could call Maloney a charlatan without directly saying it and submitted that. And then resubmitted it. And again. It looks like persistence won the day. (And that’s fortunate for Evans because once finals were over I planned on paying him a personal visit to get him to just tell me the truth. I mean, goodness. Just say what you mean.)

In the comment section of this letter, “homesteps” of Chelsea speaks of his/her experience being treated by Maloney. S/he says this.

Chris is very good at looking at factors that may impact mysterious conditions. He helps patients with food diaries and elimination diets. He encourages them to embrace an all-around healthier lifestyle. On top of these qualities, he is focused on finding the true underlying problems and treating the whole patient. He often recommends that people see their regular medical doctors, as he recognizes the limitations of any one-size-fits-all approach. He is one of the most caring doctors we have been to.

Maloney is NOT a doctor! He has NO qualifications which earn him that title! It’s all fine and dandy if someone wants to waste money on someone telling them to not eat crappy foods* (should I be charging you readers for that nugget of advice?), but let’s not pretend that these people are actually qualified to be doling out medical advice. As I note in my letter, people run the risk of taking contra-indicated drugs if we start treating naturopaths as real doctors.

*I’m not disparaging true nutritionists or implying that their advice is a waste. My comment is more specific; think of going up to some random schlub on the street and asking him for dietary advice. He may rightly tell you that eating a lot of trans fat is bad for you, but that doesn’t mean that he has done anything to earn payment from you.

My newest letter to the editor was published by the Sidelines, titled “Offensive Speech Still Equals Protected Speech”.

(A reader named Donald asked if I would post his letter to Tiger Woods.  Always willing to publish a free post, I said, “Yes.”  The following is his letter)

Tiger Woods has allegedly had an affair with Las Vegas cocktail waitress Jaimee Grubbs (and possibly the entire Dallas Cowboys cheerleading squad).    I used to have a tremendous amount of respect for the greatest golfer of all time, but now I’m questioning his intelligence.

So, this is my open letter to Tiger Woods:

Dear Tiger,

You are the most recognized athlete in the world.  Your reputation up until a week ago was virtually flawless.  Then, you back your car into a fire hydrant and proceed to crash into a tree at 2:30 a.m.  There are very few explanations for how that could happen, but you have none.

Because you won’t come clean and tell the full truth, I will make up my own story.  Your wife went through your phone while you were carving the turkey last Thursday.  She found some racy texts from some girl named Jaimee (her name in your phone was “Cocktail Waitress #Fore”).  Your wife and mother of your children, who is absolutely gorgeous by the way, confronted you about it.  You said Cocktail Waitress #Fore was a finalist to be your new swing coach (wink wink).  Your wife then tied you up and beat you senseless with a 4 iron.  You were unconscious for several hours while Elin and the kids enjoyed a lovely Thanksgiving dinner and put up Christmas decorations (tis the season).  When you woke up from your coma, you got in the car with your hands still tied behind you back and tried to drive.  Obviously, it’s tough to operate a vehicle with no hands.  Elin came outside to finish the job, but the ambulance arrived before she could tee off on the back nine.

While this story sounds too crazy to be true, you should expect nothing less when you leave the door (or perhaps shattered car window) open to speculation.  Speculation is dangerous.

by Sam Palmer
Contributing Writer

Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to Jake Hawkins’ article entitled “Transy men strap on heels for good cause.” The Nov. 19 article reported details of the campus event “Walk a Mile in Her Shoes,” which raised money for the Bluegrass Rape Crisis Center (BRCC). Unfortunately, the article was falsely reported, because it failed to recognize the InterFraternity Council (IFC) as a co-sponsor.

The article informed readers that Transylvania’s Sexual Harassment and Assault Resource Peer Educators (SHARPE) solely planned and sponsored the event, when IFC and SHARPE contributed equally in planning and promoting “Walk a Mile.”

IFC representatives first heard about the event at the annual Southeastern InterFraternity Leadership Academy held last February in Atlanta. IFC then approached SHARPE to co-sponsor the fundraiser. Thanks to the combined efforts, the event raised $700 from over 40 participants and was highly successful.

A main goal of IFC during 2009 was to enhance its campus life outside of fraternity recruitment. Co-sponsoring “Walk a Mile” was a way IFC could become a more active organization at Transy. Considering the strong Greek support at “Walk a Mile” I thought it appropriate for IFC to be recognized in their efforts.

The most important part of “Walk a Mile” was that it helped raise money for BRCC and raised awareness for preventing sexual crimes. On behalf of IFC, I would like to thank all participants and sponsors who helped in its success. I thank the Rambler for covering the event, but was disappointed in the story’s accuracy.

–Sam Palmer, IFC President

After a semester of pro-conservative feedback from the student body making its way into The Scroll, Liberal voices have begun to strike back.  There have been numerous letters in the Scroll which have warned of the impending socialist takeover, most of which pointed towards Obama’s health care reform.  You know, the reform that will, if passed, give America the most conservative public plan in the world.

The highlight of the December 1st edition included a letter to the editor from Brian Devine.  Within the his lengthy letter he states that health care coverage is an extension of a citizen’s right to life.  The most entertaining portion of his letter was that he stated;

Biting my tongue at this university has not come easily.  But as I get closer and close to escaping Rexburg for greener lands (Ok Provo), my inhibitions melt away bit by bit.

Devine did an amazing job of showing the Liberal dilemma at BYU-Idaho.  He then continues to dismantle the rights most powerful tool in fighting collectivist policies, the pejorative use of the “s” word.

This isn’t about socialism, the word socialism is just an epitat the right throws out there.  This is simply about one thing, allowing the government to do what it promised in the Declaration of Independence, that is, protect our right to life, or allowing your selfishness to overcome such endeavors.

I think what I liked the most about Devine’s letter to the editor was that he didn’t hesitate to call out right-wing selfishness.  It’s a shame that he’ll soon be leaving BYU-Idaho for Provo because this school needs more gutsy liberals.

Something I’m supposed to do (and if you look through my blog, you can see that I have done some of this already) is to attract media attention.  One of these methods is to write Letters to the Editor.  I’ve done this several times in the past.  They never get published in the paper, but I do write them.  The most recent one I wrote was to the Cincinnati Enquirer, and they posted it on their online message board (this is not the same thing as having it published in the paper).  This is what I put:

• I am a UC graduate who will be attending the United Nations’ climate talks in Copenhagen in just a few days as a member of the non-profit SustainUS. As part of SustainUS’ team of 30, I will act as a youth delegate, reminding our policymakers that their actions (or inactions) will have consequences for future generations.
• I maintain that the Copenhagen climate talks will be of historical importance. Climate change is real; it is dangerous, and it is high time we did something about it as a planet. I urge the public to be cognizant of this issue, and to pressure their lawmakers into action for the sake of the next generation.

At http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2009/11/26/copenhagen-climate-talks-will-be-of-historical-importance/#pluckcomments

That’s kind of inoffensive stuff, right?  Well, right off the bat, three angry people wrote in.  I’ve worked in customer service, and I’m not really sensitive about rude people, right?  But I do wonder what makes these guys tick.  Why all the hate?  And what do these people do with their lives, just sit around on message boards and defame everyone who disagrees with their ideology?  What kind of a life is that to live?

I mean, I’m just a cute and ineffective little young person who wants her policymakers to do the right thing.  I said as much.  People could say, “I support your ambition to make the world a better place” or “I think it’s good for young folks to get involved on big international issues” or even, “You’re a good citizen, going to all this trouble to represent your country”.  Instead, though, so many people just zero in on the phrase “climate change” and then think they have you all figured out.  Imagine that!  Someone who’s never met me in their life and has only read 114 of my electronic words knows all about me, my education level, my political affiliation, my background, and my values.

Due to an inside joke, my mom always reads my entries and thinks I’m pretending to be Michael Jackson because of my false positivity and my generalized statements of affirmation for kids and the younger generation.  No ma’am.  But tonight that’s really true–somewhere in all the hype surrounding Mr. Jackson’s death, I heard him say in an interview, “Don’t judge me unless you’ve talked to me one-on-one.”  That’s it exactly!

The thing I dread most about my line of work is people making assumptions, judging me, and assigning me a label based on their perception of a single thing I say.  I’m a non-controversial person.  I’m not assertive.  I’m a milquetoast, you even might say–I don’t like to put people off or argue with them; I think it’s preferable to build bridges rather than walls.  I’d rather figure things out and solve problems rather than antagonize people.  I guess that’s why I’m working in DIPLOMACY.  That is not to say I don’t have my beliefs and convictions, because I do, or that I won’t stand up for them, because I will.  But that IS to say that I understand that life is multifaceted, with lots of grey areas–and I don’t like to shove my agenda in everyone’s face.

Not everyone thinks like this, though, and they would rather label you as something insulting because you care about the environment (or in Michael Jackson’s case, children) and how it pertains to your personal survival and well being.  Rudeness and meanness doesn’t offend me (judging me does), but it’s something I will never understand.  Where does it come from?  Is it fun, seeing things in black and white all the time?  Do people derive pleasure from electronic name-calling?  Is it satisfying to shove your anger and contempt down the throat of someone who may never actually read your words?  And why did I just waste half an hour trying to figure this out?

The world may never know.

(Written in response to How to Spot Walmart “Security.”)

Irritated Tulsan,

only thing i dont get is that you post crap like this when more money is stolen from retailers then banks. making all the honest people in the world pay may more for a gallon of milk then a gallon of gas. maybe you should find some way to prevent shoplifting instead of trying to make it easier for everyone. some kid stole some make-up so what? well next time you buy some mascara for $10 you will thank your local thiefs for increasing the price on every product. if you want those black friday specials like $500 50 inch TV’s then help stop those poor “petty” thiefs from stealing the tvs all year long and jacking up the price. If you are doing nothing wrong then those security guys shouldnt bother you or are you so peranoid because you have done something wrong before that they might be looking at you now.

Signed,
Irritated Shopper

.

Dear Irritated Shopper,

WHAT?!?!?!?  PARANOID?!?!?!?  WHAT DO YOU MEAN?  WHO’S LOOKING AT ME?  WHY ARE THOSE PEOPLE WATCHING ME?  I RECOGNIZE THEM!  THEY’RE THE BUSH PEOPLE!  THEY HIDE IN MY BUSHES AND WATCH ME WATCH THE NEIGHBORS AS I MIND MY OWN BUSINESS!  I THINK NUNS FOLLOW ME TOO, AND POSSIBLE GARTH BROOKS!  HE MIGHT BE MY STALKER!  I’M SCARED!  WHAT IF THEY TOUCH MY NO SPOT!  WHY IS MY DOG SMELLING ME!  I HAVE TO GO!  MY SPONSOR IS CALLING!

Thanks for Writing In,
Irritated Tulsan

By Luther Hollis
Opinion Editor

A few weeks ago, the Beacon editor received a letter in response to “Shame, Shame you’re not handicapped.” Last week the Beacon ran that letter; there seemed to be some confusion as to the article’s facts.

In my article, I did not say that my ticket for parking in a handicap spot was unfair. I stated that the attributed fine was unfair; there is a difference. I acknowledged that the ticket itself was warranted, but made an argument against the amount of the fine and how it was determined.

It was said that I could not possibly know if handicap “students” would pull in needing the space that I was occupying. First, elementary school students cannot drive. Second, I am a very analytical and logical individual; when I picked up my daughter from the elementary school of which she volunteers at the afterschool program, there were only four other children left. I deduced that the probability of the remaining parents all being handicap was very slim.

I know this since I pick my daughter up daily at almost the same time.

So yes, I could possibly know that there would not be a slew of handicapped “students” or parents pulling in and needing the space I occupied.

As for the reference to Rosa Parks, who cares if that incident was staged? The point was the unfairness of a societal norm that was obviously discriminatory. I made the same point in my reference to her action.

Finally, the “judgmental” attitude toward those who hold handicap licenses was directed toward the 25 to 45-year-old individuals who exit their vehicle at a brisk pace (if not a sprint). If it were up to me, all senior citizens would receive handicap status out of respect; they get discounts on so many other things, why not discount their walking distance?

Personally, I know there are plenty of individuals abusing their “handicap” privilege because it is convenient. My article took aim upon those individuals, not legitimately handicapped people nor senior citizens.

I would like to encourage anyone who reads an opinion column to write in with suggestions and comments. The Beacon always welcomes responses to any of its articles. If you have something on which you’d like to sound off, e-mail Beacon@pba.edu.

Dateline:  November 23, 2009 Jenee Osterheldt’s KC Star commentary

On occasion, I read something in the newspaper that demands an immediate response. Within an hour of reading Jenee’s column, I have fired off an email to her and a Letter to the Editor.  And I was handed a blog idea.  Hmmm…as my grandmother used to say, she “got a rise out of me”.

To set the scene….she is at Chipotle, standing in line.  In front of her are two “mean girls”, whispering and laughing at the man in front of them, who is dressed in “over the top fashion”.  ”Flashy” leather jacket, tight colorful jeans.  The girls graduate from laughing at him, to taking his picture with their cell phone, presumably for a “snarky tweet”.  He looks around, confused.  Horrible enough, right?

But the worst isn’t over.  Jenee stands there.  She is waiting in line, watching this unfold, and does nothing. Other than wait to place her fajita burrito order. Bypasses the opportunity to do the only right thing, which is to quietly say to the girls, “Stop.” One word, and they would have known exactly what she meant.  Now that would have been heroic.  Best case scenario, those girls would have been shamed into one of those lightbulb moments.  Worst case?  The girls would have turned on her, and continued the laughing and the snarky stuff.  Worth the risk?  Of course.  That would have taken some guts, some integrity.  And think, just think how much better the commentary would have been if she had played out the whole story.

Seems like that is Journalism 101.

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/11/15/l3.html

University student organisations are vital hubs of democracy and creativity – irrespective of their political beliefs. It seems strange that Moviment Graffitti, ranked first on campus in a recent evaluation (a ranking which could entitle the student organization to some precedence in choice of premises), is being stripped of the office it has worked in for 10 years, and a vote on the Student Council’s organ, for failing to show up at a meeting. What does this say about the democratic leaders of tomorrow?

Stefano Moncada, Noel Agius, Albert Bell, Michael Briguglio, JosAnn Cutajar, Michael Grech, Angele Deguara

by Cory Collins
Contributing Writer

Dear Editor,

In last week’s Rambler, you called for respect. I admire that. It can be disheartening to put time and passion into something, only to be disrespected. I especially connected with “what the Rambler really needs is a supportive community.”

However, I write this letter, not out of praise or anger, but simply because I was very disappointed to hear that your publication would not be running a review of “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.” I wasn’t disappointed because I wanted to see something I was involved in printed, but because the actors who put so much time into it deserved more than a vague backpage preview.

It’s easy to ask for respect. We command it. At Transylvania, we are involved in so many things, and sometimes all we want is a little recognition. After all, you devoted an entire editorial to the very subject. But then, to turn around and ignore activities happening on campus, while simultaneously covering other organizations in bulk is not a way to earn the respect of students. While organizations like Transylvania Environmental Rights and Responsibilities Alliance have gotten multiple mentions in prominent positions, “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern” was treated like an afterthought.

I can’t sit here and tell you what you should cover. But at the same time, you can’t demand respect without earning it. Luckily, in acting, we know that if we can please that one member of the audience, then we’ve done our job. Maybe the Rambler should take on that mentality, or, reciprocate respect.
—Cory Collins ’13

New elections board rule is good policy

I must say that I was disappointed in The Gazette’s recent coverage of the Board of Elections decision to not attend closed-door meetings ["Open meeting squabble in county leads to new policy," Oct. 28]. Far from being a pitched political battle waged between two political parties, as your paper portrayed it, the issue at stake was one of good policy: Should the body that is charged with ensuring basic equity and fairness in our election process be caucusing with the Democratic Party?

Let me set the record straight. First off, Mr. [Terry ] Speigner is the chairman of the county Democratic Party, not some elected official. For him to be meeting with any public body behind closed doors sets a bad precedent, which I’m sure he’d point out if the situations were reversed! Second, the idea that the Prince George’s County Senate delegation is not a public body just because the General Assembly is not in session is ludicrous. If it looks a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck, even if it calls itself a chicken!

I don’t know where Mr. Speigner’s engraved invitation to attend the board meeting went. It’s obvious, however, that he was a little upset about not receiving one. Seriously, is this what is expected? An invitation?

Mr. Speigner, despite his title, is not an elected official. Outside of the Democratic Party, he is merely a private citizen and, as such, is entitled to no special treatment. The information regarding the board’s meeting was available on its Web site, which is where I found it. Furthermore, in an e-mail that I wrote to state Sen. Jim Rosapepe on Oct. 24, I personally invited him to attend the meeting. I felt that it was important to reach across party lines to resolve this situation in an amicable way, which the county Democrats are apparently unwilling to do! Finally, a member of the general public also attended the meeting. I wonder how he found out about it. The charge made by Mr. Speigner and repeated by The Gazette that we Republicans somehow had a closed-door meeting with the Board of Elections is preposterous!

As for the meeting itself, during its deliberations, more than one board member stressed they had problems with the idea of attending a closed-door meeting! Furthermore, the board’s counsel believed that even if the Senate delegation didn’t violate the law, it might be possible for the board to do so by attending the meeting. All of the participants at the meeting agreed that, regardless of the legality of meeting with Mr. Speigner and the delegation, they had a special obligation to ensure they remain neutral in their dealings with the public and with all political parties in the county. This was the basis for the board’s decision to create an explicit policy regarding closed-door meetings. I, for one, thought it to be good policy and was, frankly, shocked that such a policy did not already exist!

Shame on Mr. Speigner for his outright lies! Shame on the county delegation for meeting behind closed doors and for hiding behind a loophole! Finally, shame on The Gazette for not having their facts in order before publishing!

What I witnessed Oct. 26 was an exercise in good public policy. Instead of condemning the Board of Elections as Mr. Speigner has, we should stand up and cheer. Honesty and integrity won out over cloak and daggers! That is something to be proud of, no matter what your political persuasion is.

Jason W. Papanikolas, Laurel

Dear students,

Early Tuesday morning, two students were victims of an armed
robbery. As a reminder, please be aware of the following general safety precautions:

1. When confronted with a potential robber, make sure you make “I” statements. Be assertive without putting the blame on the listener. ( e.g. “I understand that I have money that I should be giving to you.”)

2. Express your feelings to any potential assailants. (e.g. “I feel hurt and vulnerable when you point a gun at me.”)

3. Offer suggestions that would improve the experience for you without causing the other party undue hardship. (e.g. “I would appreciate it if you would let me transfer my notes onto my flash drive before you take my computer.”)

4. Offer criticism constructively by beginning with a positive aspect of the criminal’s work. (e.g. “The banana you are wearing over your mouth really brings out the color of your eyes. But it is my opinion that you would be able to accomplish your goals more efficiently if you used a sawed-off shotgun as opposed to a small pistol.”)

If you have any information about this crime, please write about it in your diary.

Sarah Werner
Dean of Students

I submitted the following letter to the editor of the Journal Inquirer on November 6.

Letter to the Editor: The Future of the Montgomery Building

Several weeks ago the Town of Windsor Locks began foreclosure proceedings on the Montgomery property on Canal Road. As anyone who visited the area this past spring or summer knows, the Montgomery building (both the original nineteenth century structure and the newer addition built in the 1920s) was in a deplorable condition, with many smashed windows and broken entrances. During the summer there was a flooding incident caused by a water leak as well as a small fire on the property. Prior to its sale several years ago a number of local businesses were housed in the building and there were few if any problems. As a result of recent action by the town, the building is now much more secure. The broken windows and entrances have been boarded up and a new fence has been installed.

The Montgomery facility could be suitable for light manufacturing and other business use, but for almost ten years the Town of Windsor Locks has failed to adequately promote its potential commercial use, and has instead focused on condominium development despite the rather obvious fact that the property is not suitable for residential housing. This stubborn insistence on developing the building into condominiums may be a profitable opportunity for a few real estate interests in town but it has not worked out well for the Windsor Locks community. The town is now owed a substantial amount of back taxes as well as expenses that have accrued as the result of fires and other damage to the property.

What will happen in the future with the building is anybody’s guess. Whether the owners will pay the substantial amount of money they owe the town is uncertain. I understand that residents will know more about the outcome of the foreclosure proceedings sometime in November. If the town does gain title to the property, it will have both a challenge and an opportunity on its hands. It is interesting—and I think significant—that the Montgomery building continues to dominate our downtown landscape, both physically and psychologically, just as it did one hundred years ago. We need to pay attention to this historic structure. The Montgomery building, in ways we might not be able to predict, may hold the key to downtown’s revitalization.

Dear Tommy of Tommy’s,

I was shocked to learn that you will be adding a salad bar to your fair establishment. I frequent Tommy’s to shove my face full with greasy grubs and wash it all down with your refreshing suds. But Tommy’s is more than a feeding trough to me; it’s a man cave. It is my refuge from the harsh socioeconomic consequences of a world dominated by feminists and vegetarians. By adding a salad bar, you will invite these undesirable elements into my sanctuary. Please reconsider this decision.

Robert Donnel

Trinity ‘13