Herald misses the point...
I was mad last night after the socialists barged into the College Republican meeting and called everyone cowards, but after reading the Badger Herald this morning, I am furious.
The article, written by Drew Hamm, is all at once poorly written, extremely biased, and not based in reality.
Let’s break it down:
First the title: “Anti-war activist interrupts College Republicans”
Yeah, that did indeed happen. But that is not what the meeting was about and even though the anti-war folks were amusing and all, most of the speaking and attention was on the three Iraqi War veterans speaking to the audience. I blame this more on the news editor than the writer though. A better title: UW College Republicans hear from Veterans.
3rd and 4th paragraph:
Members of the UW Stop the War! movement attended the meeting to voice their support of the referendum. However, when Stop the War! member Chris Dols became too “disruptive,” two UW police officers asked him to leave.“It is a little hypocritical for them to publicly denounce Stop the War! when they won’t even debate us,” Dols said.
The first quote in the article is from Mr. Dols. Why is this? The event was about the anti-troop referendum they quote Mr. Dols after he is asked to leave the meeting. The writer also uses the infamous “editorial quotation” to describe him as disruptive. Well, as a witness to the event, Mr. Dols was extremely disruptive. He was physically unable to keep still when the veterans were talking and would not stop adding his two cents. It was only AFTER he called the panel and crowd cowards, after he pointed out that a veteran killed a child, after he was taken to the curb with FACTs, was he asked to leave after one of his 2 minute soliloquies. It is obvious he was never taught how to be quiet when others are talking. But the reporter found it so newsworthy to talk about it that he went on with dribble.
The overall opinion of the panelists was that they love the people of Iraq, and that the response from Americans has been overwhelmingly positive since returning home.
Don’t forget, Hamm, that they also preached time and time again that the Iraqi people WANTED THEM THERE. And that every one of the veterans said that those pushing this referendum are in fact AGAINST the troops.
The dialogue went back and forth for a majority of the meeting on whether or not the troops should leave.No, it was more like:
Veterans: No, we should stay, we want to stay until the job is done.
Anti-war folks: No, all troops want to leave no.
Veterans: No, we want to stay and help the Iraqi people build a democracy.
Anti-war folks: You kill children and you want to come home.
The Anti-war folks must have found it disheartening and horribly ironic that the same folks that they want to bring home are willing to go back. The same folks that they want to save from this “evil war”, want to fight for the rights of the Iraqi people. Ha.
“We are all for getting these soldiers out of harm’s way,” Dols said. “I want you and all your friends home.”
Okay Chris, what if the soldiers WANT to stay in Iraq? Then what? The Reporter forgot about the quote from Mike Hahn which said that there are record re-enlistment numbers in the Army and impressive numbers in the Marine Corp. It seems that the reporter was more interested in Chris Dols than in the veterans at the front of the room.
This was one of the only topics that the two sides agreed on during the meeting.
No, they didn’t agree. Although they want everyone to come home, the veterans and all of their fighting friends still over there want to stay until the JOB IS DONE! Again, the reporter must have been outside the room at that point interviewing Chris Dols.
The College Republicans set up the “Vote No” panel to educate students on their views on the issue. Dols requested to be on the panel but was denied because he had views opposing the College Republicans’ stance.
Of course he was denied. He came to the meeting and just asked to be on the panel. Even though he was NOT on the panel, he still spoke out of turn and acted like a 5 year who no one wants to play with. He whined the entire meeting…obviously into the author’s year. This was a vote NO panel, it was designed to let the campus know the other side of the issue without the threat of rudeness and disrespect. The last time the College Republicans participated in a panel with the left, it was 1 on 5 and the conservative was hissed any time he spoke. That is not a debate, that is disrespect towards the first amendment. What right do the anti-war folks have to coming to our meeting and taking over? What right does Chris Dols have in coming into our meeting and being disrespectful. They have every right to come and listen and to ask short pointed questions, but after that, they are infringing on our first amendment rights. They by no means have or deserved the right to have a “heckler’s veto” at UW Madison. They are in the majority and they have decided to continue to oppress conservative thought. Only now, they have come to the one place that we can say something without the sighs or the hisses or the disrespect that we get in every class and in every other group on campus.
Dols and his constituents came into the meeting and called the College Republicans “cowards” for not debating him, which set off a yelling match between the panelists and Dols.
Yep, more talking about Dols. Again, the BH should be ashamed for running this piece.
Despite the differing opinions, Smith said she thought the meeting went well.
It did go well. It would have gone better if the anti-war folks would shut up and listen instead of assuming they are always right. There were 3 Iraq War veterans and instead of learning from their first person experiences, the anti-war kids “know” that their propaganda is right and the soldiers are wrong. For shame.
This story was horrible and for the first time in a long time, the Daily Cardinal’s coverage was so much better that I cannot even compare the two. Drew Hamm should be fired…or sent to the Madison Observer, because with this kid of reporting, that is where he belongs.
From a paper who formed in opposition to the anti-war movement of the '60s, the Herald should be ashamed.