Business Featured Letters News Politics

NHS funding

Below is a letter I just e-mailed to my MP. I find it disgusting that HM Government spends far more tax money on welfare and healthcare than defence at a time when we’re allegedly under grave threat from terrorism. Yes, I sent it through the leftist 38Degrees, but only for convenience’s sake.

Many believe the NHS needs more funding. Being of a more libertarian persuasion myself, however, I do not believe in additional taxation but of a decrease in wasteful spending instead. So I’m getting in touch to see if you could attend the debate on health and social care on Monday afternoon.

I know this is late notice, but it’s an important opportunity to start working on solutions for NHS and social care funding. Having recently received an overview of how much of my taxes is spent on welfare and healthcare, I would welcome advocacy for more balanced spending priorities. I do not believe it is right to spend disproportionately more on welfare than on defence at a time when the government claims we are under severe threat from terrorism.

I believe the government needs to be much more stringent in clamping down on NHS abuse by non-entitled persons such as tourists or high wealth residents. There also appears to be room for a reduction in coverage for non-essential procedures. NHS spending should be based on sound principles, not political expediency!

On the more Labour flavoured side, 38 Degrees have produced some research laying out 28 different policies that could help get the NHS the money it needs. They can be found here:

If you aren’t able to attend the debate, please could you write to the Chancellor about how we can run the NHS more efficiently, or talk to your colleagues about the policies?

Thank you.

Business Letters Personal Technology

Protected: Farewell to romance

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

CWQTPY Featured Letters News Politics Spectrum reject

Shot while breaking the law? Tough luck!

The following is the newest letter to The Spectrum which will probably not be published. It is a response to this silly piece. But oh dear, I actually too the time to write something entertaining and thought out (compared to this “letter”)!

To the editor:

This letter is in response to Dan Mecca’s column in your October 29 issue.

I believe Mr. Mecca should teach a master class on how to discuss feelings with criminals while under duress as he seems to be an expert on that matter.

I doubt that if a gun wielding meth addict were to threaten him and his (hypothetical) family, he would offer the offender some tea and cake and try to sit down with him to discuss his feelings. Seeing as he seems to favor being a victim, I suppose he would happily volunteer himself and his family to be executed on the spot, but that too would be a silly thing.

The whole idea behind the castle doctrine (the law passed in Florida and elsewhere) is that you should not be punished for self defense. Most sane individuals consider it very counter intuitive to be forced by law to be a victim of a crime when such a situation could be avoided very easily. Granted, avoidable deaths are sad, but many mistakes do not go unpunished.

Contrary to Mr. Mecca’s mistaken illusions, it is the criminal’s fault if he gets shot while committing a crime. It is he who should be concerned about what his actions will effect in the lives of those he cares about. Just like you can’t jump off a 20 story building and expect to survive, it is reckless to expect to not suffer for committing a crime.

It would be very funny to see a victim celebrate his family’s death with the person who just caused those deaths, but as always, reality just isn’t that ideal. Until teleportation becomes a viable form of transport for law enforcement, I’d rather not trust that they’ll appear out of thin air to save the day the moment a criminal breaks into my house. I’d much rather break out my gun and show the perp that in my house led poisoning does not come from the paint on the walls.

There’s a nice sign you can use if you wanna make the above common sense approach more formal. It simply reads: “No Trespassing. Violators will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.” If you can’t understand that you certainly deserve to get shot.

CWQTPY Featured Letters News Politics Spectrum reject

A Spectrum of sheep

Below is another attempt of setting my school’s student newspaper’s editors straight on a few things. But oh no, I criticized the administration without being a hippie communist shouting obscenities outside a building… I guess that explains why this is yet another quality letter rejected in favor of some infantile idiot’s drivel.

To the editor:

This letter is in response to your article and editorial on SA’s alleged inattention to students’ schedules.

I think students need to first be reminded of what an awesome deal they get with their student association. For only just under $80 per semester, each student gets many free movies, at least one festival and several smaller concerts, prominent speakers, club events, and so much more! Even if you only go to a few movies and a fest, you already have received great value for your money. I bet if you went to, say, Ozzfest and half a dozen movies off campus you’d be paying more than $80.

Having said that, I think the Spectrum should state the inconvenient truth (pun intended) of the matter. It is the UB administration that is to blame for these scheduling conflicts. Their refusal to construct several new badly needed and actually useful buildings has left schools and departments with no other choice but to schedule classes in inconvenient locations at inconvenient times. Don’t blame the SA President for not ruining his career by pursuing this matter to the utmost of his ability.

Instead of finally building the Lee Road extension, for example, the School of Management constructs a building that almost no one uses if they don’t have to (relative to Lockwood Memorial Library, for example), they put up silly artsy pots on an unnecessarily renovated founders’ plaza, they renovate parts of buildings, all conveniently located to entice the exploited of the future, they spend lots of cash on talking rubbish and placating their cash cows with gifts.

Isn’t it funny that most changes are conveniently located in or around Capen Hall? Also, isn’t it funny that the kings of UB care more about Buddhism than about their students? Why is it that at least one Rabbi and a Priest spend so many more hours with students than the allegedly ever so caring administration? Granted, a man of God is supposed to do that, but I’m sure they wouldn’t mind an environment more suited to quiet study and reflection more often as well.

Getting on with building something other than housing at some remote time in the future will be very profitable, and probably a lot sooner too. Why not quit squabbling with Amherst residents over who gets to cash in on student housing first and build something on land that UB already owns? I’m sure First Amherst has had to turn businesses away because there wasn’t enough space left in the Commons. So why not build the second batch of the most profitable commercial real estate in WNY now and not lease it to a private corporation?

Eventually, campus will be too crowded, and the main source of income for the window dressers atop the Capen libraries will dry out. A premier institution respects and honors its students, Mr. President!

CWQTPY Featured Letters News Politics Spectrum reject

Elementary education for editors

Here’s a letter to The Spectrum from earlier this month that “didn’t make it”. This one was a response to one of their commie greenhorns blasting the President.

To the editor:

This is in response to Joshua Boston’s editorial in your October 8 issue.

As President Reagan famously said over a quarter century ago, there you go again. You look for some silly little problem and then blame all the bad things in the world on President Bush. We get it, liberals, if it weren’t for President Bush we’d all be millionaires, lahdeeda…

Last year, Democrats promised to not only end pork barrel spending but also to end the war in Iraq. To date, they have done the exact opposite. Rep. Murtha and his friends have been stealing more money for their districts than ever and despite all the moaning they have done about how much they want to see our armed forces humiliated, they have continued to increase funding for the war.

Get this into your thick skulls: Congress is guilty! Why do you think President Bush has a better approval rating than Congress? It’s because Congress has done far more to waste our money than the President has.

As for the President being the “destroyer”, that’s the pot calling the kettle black. In the relatively short time that President Bush has been in office, he has done quite well to undo some of the massive damage you liberals have been doing to our country for the past century.

If you want a true destroyer, look at Karl Marx, or if you prefer a living one (but one who is a murderer too), take Senator Ted Kennedy. That wheezing pile of communist excrement has done far more to hurt Americans than President Bush has ever had the chance to.

As for your little bridge, you have several layers of officials below the President who are supposed to take care of that. Seeing as you seem to like the federal level, you may want to contact Congressman Reynolds. As the bridge is in his district and he has prided himself in bringing money here from Washington, I’m sure he would look into taking care of that sore spot on his otherwise flawless record. But do try to be mature… A kind word in his mailbox will go a lot further than something scooped out of the toilet paper made by the Communist Party.

CWQTPY Featured Letters Media News Personal Politics

Some philosophers…

Another week, another letter to the editor, well, almost. After some graduate students published an immature moan fest about an upcoming speaker, I decided to respond as follows:

To the editor:

This letter is in response to the letter to the editor from three Philosophy students in your September 28 issue.

Before delving into their “argument”, I would like to point out the fundamental hypocrisy and set of weaknesses at the basis of the TA’s letter.

You cannot be in favor of free speech in a “not in my backyard” manner. Either Professor Levin has the right to speak or he does not. To say that because UB happens to be connected to an event that they don’t agree with the event should not take place is an immature argument to make. If it were not, us students should be protesting our football team for being division IA and almost never winning a single game while being funded by our fees and or complain that professors are deprived of compensation because of Jewish holidays. I wonder if they truly have never wanted their taxes refunded because the US government, for example, spends money on protecting foreign dignitaries whose countries are taking a hostile stance towards the United States. Free speech means that you will have to tolerate the inconvenience of funding or being in the vicinity of activities you don’t agree with. Grow up!

Having said that, I also object to their flawed approach to demonstrating the professor’s alleged discriminatory attitudes. Quoting statements out of context without providing opposing factual statements does not prove any point apart from the authors’ lack of common sense.

CWQTPY Featured Letters Media News Politics

Spectrum Fact Check

In my second letter to The Spectrum this semester, I put right some naive observations they wasted paper on:

To the editor:

In your balanced coverage (gasp) of the 6th anniversary of the attacks of September 11, 2001, a few larger facts seem to have fallen by the wayside.

Especially Dan Mecca’s editorial was wrong on several points.

He was first very childish to remark he is grateful that President Bush’s second term is nearing its end. Not only can the President not be held responsible for every foreign policy action and decision, it is a delusion common amongst liberals that somehow everything would be better if it weren’t for President Bush.

I believe it is imperative to remember that ultimately there isn’t much of a difference between Democrats and Republicans. While Democrats generally don’t care about our nation’s wellbeing and only look after their own elitist concerns, Republicans too have recently acquired a weakness for band aid “solutions” and cowardly actions. Both spend like a kid in a candy store and both fail to eliminate the waste of our armed forces’ time and resources.

While President Carter catered to Muslims by remaining inactive during the build up to the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979, President (G.W.) Bush has backed down every time CAIR has moaned about a measure and President Clinton too abused our armed forces for purposes not related to our interests (when he wasn’t busy slashing defense funding).

So to believe that “it will all be better soon” is not only foolish but also very naive. Do you really think Rudy Giuliani or Hillary Clinton will change things?

Mecca was also wrong on the tax and WMD issues. Not only do we still not know where the WMDs that were not shipped to the UN in New York went, but the richest are still paying the most taxes percentage wise.

It is also not criticism that in unpatriotic, it is immature whining, temper tantrum throwing and releasing classified information to our enemies through our mass media that is. Wishing for fellow citizens’ deaths and the destruction of the US is only patriotic if you happen to be in North Korea or some urban environment in old Europe.

It was also hypocritical of Mecca to complain about a lack of checks and balances. He would be well served to study many a judge’s circumvention of the due process of our political system to enact unpopular laws and strike down popular ones.

As for Bin Laden, he is not the problem, the ideology he espouses is. If he were killed, some other lunatic would step up to lead those suicidal maniacs.

Let James Raymond write more. At least he gets 70% of his facts right.

Featured Letters News Personal Politics

The liberals’ idea of “diversity”

The following is a letter to the editor of my school’s student newspaper, The Spectrum. After they had opined that this year’s Distinguished Speaker Series lacked diversity of opinion and background (i.e. no conservative speakers), I responded as follows:

To the editor:

While you were correct to point out that there is no ideological diversity in this years (the twenty first!) Distinguished Speakers Series, you did not include an insight that explains why, contrary to logical thought, there is diversity in this year’s lineup.

When educators and fellow liberals and communist friendly executives talk about diversity, they mean anything but anyone or any ideology to the right of Senator Clinton. Diversity to them is a smokescreen, not a worldview.

Our “dear leaders” want a truly diverse environment about as much as Fidel Castro wants Democracy or the Chinese government wants freedom of speech. They are not interested in a broad, no-holds-barred exploration of knowledge, history and truth. Many historical periods have only one correct interpretation, others are never mentioned, and some simply don’t get any attention whatsoever.

This leads to an environment where Hitler was always more evil for killing fewer people than their idol Stalin, crimes against humanity committed by friendly armed forces are taboo and the only truly noteworthy religion is Buddhism.

Following their peculiar brand of logic, one may conclude that seeing as there are men and women, white and of color, and not necessarily all heterosexual, in the lineup, the series contains much diversity (and none of that pesky conservative and libertarian hole-poking).

But I suppose it is too much to ask for true diversity in an age where even “old Europe” has speech codes enshrined in federal law.

Fellow students, friends, allies and foes, don’t believe the truth!

Study religious texts yourself, read historical works for yourself! We have some awesome libraries with friendly and very helpful librarians at our disposal. Show them that they have not been replaced by computers!