4B
Thursday, March 27 , 2003
Rockets coatl
Opinion
rOMIANO®
takes leave t(
treat cancer
By Michael A,Lull
THE ASSOCIATED Pl!i!
HOUSTON - Rod
roach Rudy Tomjanovidih
\ hat he had to do, for Mi
elf and the team: He is tail
ndefinite leave to treat his
ler cancer.
The 54-
e a r - o 1 d
each broke
he news to
is players
Wednesday in
n emotional
:am meeting,
he Rockets
re vying for
le final playoff spot in
/estem Conference.
"At this critical partofi
rason, this team, any tin
eeds a coach who has pi
ive 100 percent of his tasi:
» helping the tei,
omjanovich said. As much'
ive this team, I know’,
oughts would be
her things.”
Tomjanovich missed
am’s recent five-game
ip and had been expected
join the team for Wedi
ght’s home game against!
is Angeles Lakers.
Assistant Larry Sn
nitinue to coach the
iring Tomjanovich's aim’;
When Tomjanovich
ked if he saw any pos:
not returning next
id “not in my mind.”
Tomjanovich, in his
ason as head coach,
ickets to consecutive Nl
les in 1994 and 1995. ii
robatic on the sidelines, ui
said that would be tdi
main.
“When I coach, I putevf
ng I have into it,”
d. “1 come out of gamess
ed ice packs,
renal in flowing, that can^
id for a healing
i doesn't make sense
Guard Steve Francis said!
m meeting was
"I didn’t look at
e, ” he said. “It was la
in again, it wasn’t
; on his sick bed. I
iy an emotional guy
■> telling you you di
ig wrong or
; not feeling well.”
fomjanovich was
March 18 with ti
cancer on his
tors said would be t
i medication,
earn physician Dr.
itz said there had 1
ige in the diagnosis.
The only change inhiscos
m is he’s calm, he’s opt
ic,” Muntz said. “OuT
ssues that came up was!*
ment should start tit' 1
<. It became obvious
treatments should comet*
and not juggling some#;
) at night that
done at 3 p.m,’
mith says the Rockets ft*
Fonijanovicli a favor!
ling.
I love the guy,” he
just happy that he’s
OK. Now this is
nd get win,s and we’l
'thing in our power It
He wouldn’t want it
way.”
le team initially #
anovich would
during the West Coast#
g, then announced!
.1 miss the entire trip, ft
sts went 2-3 under Sn#
itil his absence on
Tomjanovich h
d a game in 11 seasons®
:l coach.
mjanovich said he got
idder infection ah
i ago and went for n
v-up testing. One
negative, but another"®
/e. That led to the n#
live test March 17 #
med the abnormal cells.
’s hard to deal with,”#
Glen Rice said. “Wtf
it easier is to deal wit#
ilk about it, and tli#
we’ve got to do. I IP
react good. Just seein-
ive the team a lift, tost*
ling strong.”
1
The Battalion
Page 5B • Thursday, March 27, 2003
A NATION DIVIDED
Extreme protests must stop as they only segment a nation already at war
n diplomacy and international relations, war is sel
dom the first option. More often than not, there are
many steps that leaders go through in the diplomatic
rocess before finally looking to war as an option,
dien war occurs, it is always with a heavy heart that
he task is assigned because it bears so much negativity.
Diplomacy has failed, and the time to make a stand has
ome. Now, America must support its troops.
While thousands of Americans have openly protested
uilitary involvement with Iraq, they have done nothing
>ut divide a country already at war. The effect of this
in the American public is obvious — America has become a
divided nation, with antiwar protesters
on one side
and those in favor of the war on another. The situation
has split the country down the middle, forcing those
with neutral opinions into uncomfortable situations.
Some friendships are strained because people cannot
agree on the situation.
In the midst of it all are the troops — the soldiers
who may or may not want to be involved in this war.
They are the ones who must fight the battles. They are
the ones who face the real dangers, who may lose their
lives for their country.
Not all of them are weathered marines who have
spent years in training. Many are reserve members, some sign
ing up so the government would help pay for their college edu
cation, others trying to escape civilian life. These soldiers have
spouses, children and families. Yet they
are serving their country because it is
their duty and because they believe in
fighting for their country. They are risk
ing their lives for America, and some
how that has gotten lost in the debate.
The men and women fighting for
America overseas deserve every ounce of
support and respect that we can give them. It is
time to come together as a nation to support the
armed forces. Remaining a nation divided will
only hurt the war effort.
A similar situation occurred in the Vietnam
War. The nation was split over whether the cam
paign was truly necessary. Protests
and riots were common, possibly
harming troop morale. Without the
backing of the nation, the troops lost sight of
they were fighting for and, in turn, support
for the war waned. For this war to go smoothly
and to end as soon as possible, it is necessary
for us to lend our support.
One can only wonder if the recent
attack on the 101st Airborne Division
by a U.S. Marine was partially
encouraged by the protesting. If
America is divided at home, how can the troops be expected to
ignore the antiwar sentiment?
This protesting benefits no one. It is time America gathered
its strength and applauded its troops, because they are fighting
for what this nation stands for. Spirit is what separates America
from other countries. This nation must defend the troops who
are doing the dirty work for all of us. We as Americans have to
remember that.
Erin Pirrung is a junior
English and psychology major.
Graphic by Becky Maiden.
T l
:
Attempts at patriotism were a facade
Celebrities at Academy Awards did little to mask criticism of war
he absence of the red carpet for the
March 23 broadcast of the Academy
Awards did little besides postpone the
entourage of fashion critics who traditionally
evaluate celebrity outfits before the cere
monies begin. The Academy also removed
the bleachers near the red carpet normally set
aside for curious fans in the Academy’s
attempts to “scale down” the event due to the
“seriousness of the world situation,” accord
ing to a press release available at www.oscar.com. However,
these mundane and half-hearted attempts to show respect for
armed forces were merely a fa5ade, articulated best by host
Steve Martin, who sarcastically said, “You probably noticed
there was no fancy red carpet tonight. That’ll send them a mes
sage.”
The message most of them seemed to be trying to commu
nicate, however, was one of objection to war and an urgency
for peace, which is no surprise due to the many actors and
actresses who have been rather outspoken in objecting to the
war with Iraq. Although organizers of the Academy Awards
urged the participants not to turn the ceremony into a protest
for peace, the night did have its surprises.
Michael Moore, who won best documentary feature for
“Bowling for Columbine,” was the first to bring in harsh criti
cism of the war with Iraq as well as President George W. Bush
during his acceptance speech. His severe words were met with
a mixture of boos and applause. However, the majority of win
ners avoided the subject altogether, while others made indirect
references toward peace.
a
...these mundane and half-hearted
attempts to show respect for armed forces
were merely a facade, articulated best by
host Steve Martin, who sarcastically
said, 'You probably noticed there was no
fancy red carpet tonight. Thatll send
them a message.
Additional attempts were made with the Iraqi conflict in
mind. Many of the celebrities present at the awards chose to
subdue their normal glitzy attire, several of the women opting
for subtle black dresses, according to foxnews.com.
However, should the self-indulgent actors and actresses gen
uinely care about the military conflict currently going on in
Iraq, or even the necessity for peace, the mere change of a col
orful sparkly dress to a black sparkly dress, both likely costing
more than the salary of a soldier who is overseas fighting,
might not seem like enough to them.
Had their concern been genuine, whether it be supporting
sentiments for peace or support of the troops, they might
have seen the irony in parading into ceremony, wearing
thousands of dollars worth of clothes and jewelry, solely to
elevate themselves.
Perhaps the acting community can learn something from
colleagues Will Smith, Angelina Jolie and director Peter
Jackson, who all withdrew their participation from the ceremo
ny due to its triviality during a time of international conflict.
However, most of the acting community continue to boldly
express their disapproval for the war and will go on pushing
for peace without pausing to be grateful for the freedoms that
they exercise and the lives of luxury they lead.
The irony of the country’s most admired and wealthiest
opposing a war that enables them to keep that role has been
lost on the majority of them. Luckily for them, and for all that
disagree with war in Iraq, their opposition will not halt the
protection of those freedoms.
Sara Foley is a sophomore
journalism major.
ACLU for conservatives and liberals alike
In response to a March 26 mail call:
When Texaminer and the ACLU joined forces to fight the viola
tion of the free speech rights of candidates for student govern
ment, I thought I found a cause that both liberals and conserva
tives could champion. However, as Mr. Nicholas Rangel implies in
his recent mail call, it is hypocritical for conservatives to enlist the
assistance of a usually liberal organization in order to bring to
light an issue that should transcend ideological labels.
do not appreciate it when the SGA, which supposedly repre
sents students, takes it upon itself to trample over the
Constitution. Additionally, it has known for a year that many of
the election regulations are grossly unconstitutional.
While I do not support everything that the American Civil
Liberties Union does, it is the premiere organization in America
today when it comes to defending First Amendment Rights. This
is why we contacted the ACLU.
As a purported communications scholar, Mr. Rangel should
know better than to hide behind intellectually bankrupt argu-
Dients with rhetorical labels such as "far right wing." While
^examiner is a proudly conservative publication, we will stand up
for the First Amendment and work with others who do so.
Mark McCaig
Editor, Texaminer
Class of 2005
MAIL CALL
Mr. Rangel seems to misunderstand the entire point of my
actions. Political orientation means nothing to me; the issue is
the fact that a student organization that is not recognized wants
to say that it considers me the best candidate for SBP.
I do not necessarily endorse, agree, or even like the
Texaminer's views; what is important is that a group of Aggies
said "we want you for SBP," at which point I said "Sure!"
It is not my place to judge the opinions or stance of a group.
I am applying for a position where I will likely be dealing with
groups I may not agree with or may not like.
Does that make their opinions any less valid? Does that mean
I should just dismiss their views and dismiss them as people?
Right wing, left wing, Republican, Democrat — none of this is
important. All that I care about is how we can make Aggieland
stronger.
Anyone who wants to endorse or speak up in my favor is wel
come to, not by virtue of his or her views, but by virtue of being
Aggies.
For your future reference, I am a political moderate; among
other things, I am going into the military but am also a card-car
rying member of the ACLU.
Political polarization is the greatest scourge within our coun
try; let's try to leave this at the gates of Aggieland and not be so
angry!
Ed "El Ramos" Brown
SBP Candidate
Class of 2003
Conoley's diversity initiatives flawed
In response to a March 26 front page story:
Jane Conoley opposes the diversity she says she encourages by
demanding that others conform to her views. A cherished member
of my extended family is homosexual, and although I bitterly disagree
with his lifestyle, I still love him very much and would hate to see him
harmed.
Consensus on diversity is an oxymoron. Perhaps we should com
promise and accept that gays are human and should be treated like
everyone else, not singled out for persecution or celebration. There is
little I can do to change the decisions of gays whether I agree with
them or not, so why should I, or anyone in the College of Education,
for that matter, have to say, "Yes, I believe homosexuality is a beauti
ful thing and should be celebrated." Such a demand is nothing short
of hubris on the part of Jane Conoley and those who support her.
Lars A. Doucet
Class of 2006
The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 200
words or less and include the author's name, class and phone num
ber. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style
and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 014 Reed
McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters also may be mailed to: 014
Reed McDonald, MS 1111, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
77843-1111. Fax: (979) 845-2647 Email: mailcall@thebatt.com.
Attachments are not accepted.