In response to the April 24 column titled, “Scandal proves US only human”:

I think Megan Hurley misses the whole point of the “scandal” of Secret Service personnel being involved in prostitution in Cartagena. The point isn’t prostitution or drinking or supposed U.S. values (after all, prostitution is legal in Nevada). It is about the security risks of those charged with protection of the U.S. president being in situations where their knowledge of President Barack Obama’s movements and security arrangements could be compromised. Alcohol is the first ingredient in that recipe for disaster, and drunken carousing with ladies of the night is a strong second ingredient.

From what we know, the behavior of the Secret Service personnel was totally unprofessional and likely in violation of their security clearances. That’s the scandal, not some self-righteous reaction to boys being boys when out
of school.

— Forrest Holly,
adjunct professor,
Civil Engineering-Engineering Mechanics

ONLINE COMMENTS

In response to the April 25 column titled “Planned Parenthood smart for turning down Tucker Max’s donation”:

I agree with this editorial 100 percent.

If he wanted to give money to them because he was thankful they had helped him out, he would have just given money without asking for a reward.

As a woman, I wouldn’t feel safe going somewhere named after a guy who’s practically a rapist, based on his books.

— Christina Bee

In response to the April 24 article titled “Policy changes will prohibit those not affiliated with the university from using some library computers”:

Wouldn’t be opposed to alumni (specifically graduates or dues-paying members of the alumni association) retaining access.
Spent a good chunk of cash helping BUILD the ILC (two degrees through UA) and wouldn’t mind the courtesy of using it for a few minutes if I’m on campus (that is, if students aren’t waiting … students should receive priority at ALL times).

— Brett Fera

Apparently, we will soon discover if the community finds the university a greater asset, or it’s the other way around. $120 doesn’t go as far as it once did.

Systematically denying access to a greater number of campus resources has many negative impacts, in this instance the ILC, those “in power” will soon discover. Perhaps someone over the summer who is no longer affiliated with the UA needs a computer for a few hours to file some work-related report and will not be able to do so at a place where he or she helped build with their property tax dollars — in addition to the fees they paid while in college. They may very well throw away the next alumni solicitation for badly-needed funds at the university.

My main point is that the University of Arizona is a fantastic treasure in the desert and the entire Tucson community and her lifestyle is enhanced by its’ existence. We must all work together; coexist if you will, to keep our institution of higher learning sustainable.

— Cody

I can’t believe you people think this is a bad idea. As a full-time student who actually pays to have these facilities available, I would appreciate not having to deal with homeless people and other non-university affiliated people taking up resources that are meant to be used for students.

It is a university, not a charity.

— Nick

In response to the April 25 article titled “Court date set for Jesse Perry”:

Dumb of her to leave, or at least not report a follow up to the police or ER right away. Suspicious.

— Zip

So stupid!!!

— Ryan Burklo