Credit for immigrants makes for problems

I write this letter in response to Stan Molever’s column (“”Legal credit for illegal immigrants””). At first I was skeptical and angry about Bank of America’s credit “”scheme.”” I say scheme because I figured they are just trying to make more money off of people, and what better way than to pull immigrants into it.

I then read Molever’s column and was skeptical about bank accounts not requiring Social Security numbers. After some research, there are many cases of SSNs not being needed (i.e. to cash a check, etc.), but I also saw information that states when your SSN is stolen, people can use it to gain credit in your name (FBI identify theft warning).

So I came to two conclusions/questions: One, if a person steals your SSN and therefore can gain access to your credit, then how is it a person without an SSN can get credit? How are the banks supposed to track these people down to pay back this credit that they have be given?ÿ

Two, when Molever mentioned punishing the groceries for selling the illegals food because banks are punished for what they are doing, I laughed. You can’t make that connection. The bank is giving the illegal person credit and, in turn, money. No one has to show identification to use cash at the grocery stores. Not even a 4-year-old has to have ID to use cash. So the grocers can sell food without checking IDs. It’s when you use a credit card that a cashier is supposed to ask you to see your ID to make sure you’re the one who is supposed to be using that credit card.

I’m all in a twist now. It may seem like a great move for Bank of America, but I think they are going to get screwed over on this one financially and the people who are going to have to clean it up will be the honest people. Perhaps ID credit theft will go down now since that an all-elusive SSN is no longer a concern for illegals to get money? Man, now I’m confused. I shouldn’t have done this without having my coffee first.

Kimberly Clark
Tucson resident

‘Snobby’ engineers still have nothing on English majors

As an English major, but more importantly, as an objective critical thinker, I have to take offense to Antony Mills’ letter (“”Bias? More like ‘barista'””) in Wednesday’s Arizona Daily Wildcat. Not only is he unnecessarily sarcastic and nasty (which is quite different from flippant, as any English major could tell you), he’s also clearly uninformed.

In an April edition of CNN’s online Fortune Magazine, author Annie Fisher notes that “”strong communications skills are the single most important attribute a candidate can have – and also the one most lacking among job applicants, according to a recent poll of hiring managers by the National Association of Colleges and Employers.”” One of her sources, the founder and president of CollegeRecruiter.com, argues, “”It’s the students who graduate with very specialized degrees [with] little job experience who struggle to find a position.””

In a follow-up article a month later, Fisher notes overwhelming reader response to her article, with 3-to-1 in favor of a broad-based education in the humanities over more technical or specialized degrees. In fact, these readers note that the biggest challenge in having a degree in English is being perceived as overqualified. Maybe more people should be English majors!

Additionally, a quick Google search of various university and business-oriented Web sites reveals that approximately 40 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs majored in the liberal arts. However, there’s no need to go farther than our own English department’s webpage to see that there’s more to being an English major than serving coffee.

Of the 65 or so alumni who have posted their information so far, careers include law, technical writing and professional communication, research administration (at the Arizona Cancer Center), CEOs, television and movie writing (including Emmy winners), magazine and book publishing, military intelligence and the armed services, banking and library and information science – all in addition to the more traditional jobs teaching high school and college.

Yes, there is a lone waitress on the UA English Department’s alumni page. However, as she points out, not only does she get free food (who could say no to that?) but she is “”a waitress with one published book, one current book deal, three national nonfiction awards and a day job of writing for ESPN – all achieved before my 32nd birthday.”” I’d rather be a waitress than a snobby unemployed engineer any day.

Georgie Miller
English doctoral student

Greeks find rewards in good decisions

As an alumnus of Tau Kappa Epsilon who graduated in 1996, I have to give Chelsea Jo Simpson’s column (“”A toast to double standards””) a good “”OOORAH!”” Way to go!

I have nothing but positive things to say about my greek experience. It developed me and thrust me out of my shell and into leadership. TKE was a pivotal point in my progression as a man and I’m thankful for every minute of it. Did I make some mistakes along the way? Yes, I did, the key word there being “”I.””

TKE provided me with a set of values and the chance to make decisions. I found that when I made decisions based on good values and common sense I was rewarded with success. Poor decisions based on self-serving values were not rewarded and were met with shame and embarrassment. I learned quickly who was in charge of my own destiny – me, not my fraternity.ÿ

Greg Gallop
UA alumnus

Engineers hired by liberal arts majors

This letter is in response to Antony Mills’ letter (“”Bias? More like ‘barista'””) regarding liberal bias. As a proud alumnus of the hydrological engineering program at the UA, I am disheartened that Mr. Mills feels that as an engineering student he is not attending the UA to “”expand his cultural horizons.”” In fact, that is exactly what he should be doing during his time at the UA.

Being an engineer does not make you better than anybody. Those “”liberal arts majors”” are your bosses, Mr. Mills. As an engineer, you have a social responsibility to the world to use your “”technical competency and innovative thinking”” to make local, national, and world communities better. Gloria Steinem, Robert Frost, Frank Lloyd Wright and Sam Walton are just a few recent historical figures that I think few would classify as “”engineers”” but who are nonetheless innovators and “”technically competent.”” They are people you should aspire to emulate because they exemplify social action and a want to strive for a better society.

If you believe that your professor’s political orientation does not affect your education just because you’re in engineering, then you have not been attending class or you’re not listening. Mr. Mills, you have it wrong. Those liberal arts majors you obnoxiously characterize as “”snooty baristas”” are your bosses, not your servants. I hope you begin to take more advantage of the opportunity you are being given at the UA.

William Paul Miller
UA alumnus

Open border proposal a ‘philosophical utopia’

Stan Molever needs to come out of his philosophical utopia and come back to the real world (“”Legal credit for illegal immigrants””). Here in the real world, things aren’t as simple as I’m sure he thinks they are in philosophy class.

Molever would like us to just open our borders and let anyone who wants to come and go as they please but, oh yeah, we have to “”screen them on their way in to make sure they aren’t terrorists.”” That means we’re somehow supposed to have information on every person in the world and be able to access this while they wait in line at the border? Oh wait, we do that, it’s called legal immigration; it just takes longer than the nanosecond you expect it to since backgrounds on some of these people are much harder to check than others.

These people simply have to wait, like everyone else who follows the law. But for whatever reason, be it innocent or malicious, they decide to sneak across the border, in effect cutting in line in front of everyone else. In a perfect world, sure, there would be no borders for any country and we would all live happily together. But this isn’t philosophy class. We can’t just open our borders and welcome everyone, because there are people who will take advantage of us.

I really don’t want to pay for the welfare of someone who brought his family of nine kids across the border. If we allow too many of these people into the country, we won’t be that great country everyone wants to come to anymore. Americans might have to start illegally immigrating to Canada, where we can take advantage of their universal health care.

David Knapp
electrical engineering sophomore

Smith death doesn’t deserve attention

Please tell me Allisa Stoimenoff’s letter on Thursday (“”Anna Nicole ‘inspirational,’ a tribute to self-reliance””) was a joke. It pains me deeply to read such words, especially from a college graduate.

Stoimenoff’s first mistake is relying on the Wildcat 100 percent to inform her of the “”issues facing our great nation.”” I’d like to point out to her that in the same issue that included her letter, the cover story was about the potential loss of our beloved “”power hour.”” Furthermore, the issue included a multi-page spread on “”the most pleasurable places to poop”” in Tucson.

The real news, such as briefs on relations between the U.S., Iraq and Iran, occupy only the top one-third of page eight. It’s pure folly to rely on one news source in our technologically interconnected age, especially if it’s a college newspaper.

Her second mistake was to believe that Smith’s “”natural beauty and intense drive”” inspired anyone. Smith didn’t have any natural beauty. Take a look at a picture of her from 1985, before her fake breasts, blond dye-job, and makeup cover-up.

Also, her drive didn’t accomplish anything except surgical enhancement, Playboy appearances, gold digging and drug addiction. Most people accomplish more intellectually meaningful tasks every week than Smith did in her entire life. Stoimenoff’s common sense and intuitive morality tell her not to “”marry the next fabulously wealthy gentleman”” that comes along, not Smith’s mistakes. She should give herself more credit.

I don’t mean to be insensitive. Yes, a person has died. That’s a sad thing, but Smith’s death doesn’t deserve the attention it’s getting. Let’s get real. There are far more important things to which we can dedicate our emotions and actions. There’s real news happening every day.

Finally, we must get our information from many responsible news sources simultaneously. No single source can accurately give us all the information we need. It’s our job to piece together everything and use our best judgment. It’s not the easy way, but it is the way.

Luke Wootton
senior majoring in English and creative writing

‘Monologues’ uses women’s rights as cop-out

I am responding to the absurd article in the Wildcat, “”ASUA decries bias in choices,”” stating that the representatives of the women’s play, “”The Vagina Monologues,”” had “”their rights pushed aside in a travesty of injustice.””

Yet again, and a consistent theme of this year’s Wildcat, is an article delivering misrepresentation and bias. Conveniently excluded from the article is the fact that “”The Vagina Monologues”” was planning to use ASUA funding to distribute chocolate-covered vaginas on the mall to students and other various vagina-related material.

Although the board’s choice to revoke this funding may seem like an infringement on freedom of speech, the board has every right to deny funding to organizations that will make a large portion of the student body feel uncomfortable. This semester, the ASUA Appropriations Board has also denied funding to other clubs that were using inappropriate material for promotions and fund raising. The only difference: those clubs did not send female representation.

The article also portrayed very intelligent and fair leaders of ASUA as people “”who don’t know what they are doing.”” The Wildcat made the mistake of buying into the political travesty that encompasses ASUA every year around election time. Even the American government does not put on such a two-faced political show as the executives, senators and election candidates come February and March.

The article included a myriad of misleading and didactic quotes from other senators. But remember, no quote or article in the newspaper is ever accurate or indicative of ASUA’s true character – ASUA has none.

So before hopping on the women’s rights bandwagon, look at the situation as it is: The board viewed vagina-related funding as inappropriate and “”The Vagina Monologues”” cried “”Women’s rights!”” to rally the troops (including the Wildcat) to get their $970.

Way to go, ASUA senators – hope you get more votes in the upcoming elections. As for the Wildcat, you have a journalistic obligation to be fair. I give you a failing grade.

Henry Prestwick
political science junior