Is asking a question sometimes more revealing than simply giving an answer?
by Nick Bahl

Nick Bahl

Tap, tap, tap, is this thing on? Is anyone out there? Do you mind if I ask you a few questions?

Don’t questions pop in and out of your head all the time – am I the only one? Sometimes I wonder who’s going to answer all of the questions I think up, don’t you? I mean, isn’t it strange that there are always more questions than there are answers?

Who was it that said that there’s nothing more ridiculous than to answer a question that hasn’t been asked? Was it Mark Twain? Wouldn’t it be all the more ridiculous for you not to ask a question that can be easily answered? How come it’s ridiculous to answer a question that hasn’t been asked, but it’s perfectly fine to ask a question that doesn’t have an answer? What’s the difference? Don’t you ask a question that hasn’t been answered so that someone will find the answer? Don’t we ask open-ended questions all the time? What’s wrong with being two steps ahead of everyone else? Is this a sign of how little the members of our society strive to accomplish?

Why wouldn’t you ask questions? If you don’t ask a question, does that mean that you really don’t want to know the answer? What are we afraid of? Are we afraid that there might not be an answer, and that we would then have to forget about being lazy for a minute so that we could look for it on our own? Why wouldn’t you want to know the answer to a question you’re questioning? Isn’t that the very nature of a question? How come some people sit in class and don’t ask a single question all semester long? Are they smarter than we, or are they learning nothing at all?

The word “nothing” is a confusing word, isn’t it? Have you ever thought about it? Can you even begin to imagine everything, let along nothing? How would the senses perceive such a thing if it’s not even a thing? Is this what Martin Heidegger meant by the “thingness of the thing?” Where did he come up with such a word? Is this negation? Even if you didn’t go out last night, didn’t you still do something?

Do you find the world to be an irrational place with no limits, borders, or rules? Is there really such a thing as a law of nature? Can you prove it? In a world where we can’t even start to comprehend the words that we, as humans, created, how else could we expect the world to be? Could it be that irrational people made up an irrational word to describe an irrational world? Is it then rational to base any kind of theory or philosophy on such a ridiculous idea? Shouldn’t we create irrational theories and philosophies to fit our irrational world? Round male connectors are made to fit in round female connectors, right? Puzzle pieces are made to fit together, why shouldn’t puzzles, ones that aren’t man-made, fit together according to their utility? Don’t pieces of nature do this already by virtue of their place in nature? Is this fate? Is this circular thinking? When did humans start thinking that they, we, weren’t part of nature? Is the world rational and orderly if we can’t prove it? Can we prove it one way or the other if we don’t ask questions? What am I thinking? Can you tell me? Why am I even trying to be rational? Is it because it often works?

Could all of this irrationality be the answer to the oft-asked question, “Why can’t we all just get along?” Can we all just get along? Have we ever gotten along with one another? What have we worked together on other than our own destruction? When will we start to get along? Would we all get along if we were all equal? Are we equally irrational? Is there any other possible form of equality? Is this even possible? Is this utopian, realist, or fatalist? Am I making any sense in all of this? Am I the only one that feels like no matter what questions I ask, and no matter who I ask them to, I’ll never find an answer?

Don’t you get annoyed when you ask someone why he or she did such and such a thing, and they say, “Why not?” What the hell kind of answer is that? Will we ever quit beating around the bush? If I’m asking questions, I want answers to those questions, why else would I ask?

Why can’t I just have answers to all these questions? Who’s going to give me answers? I keep trying to get them at school, but my professors just say things like, “Nick, why are you even in school?” Aren’t we all in school to find answers to questions that can’t be answered? Why are we wasting our time? Are we really wasting our time? Am I the only one around here that wants rational answers to rational questions – is any of this really rational? What about this irrational world? Am I the only one who’s lost in all of this irrational-rational questioning? Am I lost or am I pulling your chain? Am I being naïve? What’s the difference between being naïve and being wise? Isn’t wisdom, knowing that you’re naïve? Is wisdom even a good thing to start with? Can anyone out there answer me this one question? I’ll forget all the rest of my questions, because I’m sick of always asking questions that are open-ended by the very essence of their content, yet, I still want answers, but answers to what?

Do you here me loud and clear? Why do I only hear silence?

Tap, tap, tap, is this thing on?

Headlines

Ten reasons ABOR is bad for schools
by Joel Tagert

Joel Tagert

On Tuesday, Sept. 30, radical right winger David Horowitz is coming to campus to pitch his so-called Academic Bill of Rights (ABOR) to students. ABOR claims to protect intellectual diversity and defend against ideological discrimination, but here are ten reasons why we should tell Horowitz to keep ABOR to himself:

1. Protection from discrimination already exists. Any student may challenge a grade if they feel they have been discriminated against. Most schools already have policies protecting students from discrimination and supporting academic freedom.

2. There is not a problem with ideological discrimination on campus. Tara Tull, assistant dean of liberal arts and sciences at Metro, was quoted in the UCD Advocate as saying that in the last year and a half, “the number of grade appeal grievances that have been submitted has been zero.”

Zero? Absolutely none? Not one student felt they had been discriminated against for ideological reasons? So where is the problem?

Supporters of ABOR say that right wing students are afraid to come forward. This is ridiculous. So afraid that they won’t make a simple complaint? What are they afraid of? A savage beating by Tara Tull?

3. Horowitz says ABOR is needed because campus is a “hostile learning environment” for right wing students. However, no authoritative evidence exists showing that this is so.

Horowitz and others routinely cite anecdotes to support their views; but these anecdotes are naturally by right wing students who may have political motivations for telling these stories.

4. ABOR creates a climate of fear on campus. Horowitz vehemently denies that ABOR is a witch hunt. ABOR, however, encourages students to file complaints about their professors for ideological reasons. It will especially encourage right wing students to attack liberal professors. This is dangerous, because again, these students may have political motivations for wanting to see liberal professors fired. Rather than eliminating a hostile learning environment, ABOR creates a hostile environment - for professors.

Remember also that these students have nothing to lose. At worst, they might face a reprimand for making a frivolous complaint. Our professors, however, will constantly have to worry that they may lose their jobs because a student wants to see his teacher fired and his grade improved.

5. By creating a climate of fear, ABOR seeks to silence political dissent by teachers. Dissent is vital to democracy, and schools have always been centers of dissent. Is it reasonable to expect political science professors not to express political opinions?

6. It is essential that teachers, not politicians, have ultimate control over their course content. The idea that a professor should not argue for or against views is contrary to the spirit of debate that animates the educational process. Indeed, skillful argumentation is crucial to academic life, and the drive to publish is evidence of this. For that matter, making one’s views known in the classroom may actually inoculate students against those views by making clear the professor’s bias.

7. Along with threats to tenure (also due to Republican influence), the climate of fear created by ABOR may damage the quality of professors seeking employment in Colorado colleges and universities.

8. ABOR uses deceptive language to achieve dubious political goals. Like those other masterpieces of doublespeak, the Patriot Act and the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), the Academic Bill of Rights obfuscates its intentions in a cloud of progressive-sounding language. Who opposes “intellectual diversity?” Who supports “ideological discrimination?”

9. The danger rests not in ABOR, but in how it is enforced. Once the government begins dictating to teachers what they can and can’t say, it’s difficult to see where such a policy might end. The devil’s in the details.

Conservatives often argue against affirmative action for precisely this reason; however, at least affirmative action seeks to remedy old wrongs and level the playing field for minorities. ABOR, on the other hand, seeks only to expand the control of today’s ruling elite.

10. ABOR is part of a larger Republican effort to control educational content, eliminate minority and women’s studies programs, and privatize education.

ABOR comes at a moment when higher education is particularly vulnerable. Colleges across America have faced enormous budget cuts due both to the recession and to tax cuts forced upon the American public by Republican leadership. Here in Colorado, we also face the restrictive influences of Amendment 31 and TABOR (the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights) - another Bill of Rights that has had devastating effects on Colorado civil government.

These cuts are not accidental; rather, they are part of a larger Republican plan to deprive civil services - including education - of funding and thereby push those sectors towards privatization. Already we see their hard push towards school vouchers, which would give private schools unprecedented state funding.

Their motives? First, to give the usual windfall to their wealthy corporate donors, and second, to destroy the liberalizing influence of state colleges.

What are Republicans so afraid of? Why do they continually attack social programs - the constructive arm of government - while pumping up the military - the destructive arm? Well, if Americans thought that they actually deserved a decent education, who knows what they might demand next? Universal medical care? A foreign policy that made sense? God forbid!

Headlines

Some realistic advice for students beginning college
by Jacob Ryan
The Metropolitan

The transition from high school to college can be a huge shock for some students. One of the biggest shocks new college-goers experience is how relaxed their class schedule appears to be.

However, this can be a very misleading event.

When I began attending Metro, I loved the idea that I was only going to class on Monday, Wednesday and Friday for only four hours each day. This came out to 12 credit hours each semester. Looking back on that now, I realize how much taking an easy class-load like that came back to bite me in the ass.

For the past three semesters, I have been frantically playing catch-up so I can finally graduate. Taking 12 credit hours per semester has put me a year and a half behind schedule, and that is something nobody imagines would be in their future when they first begin attending college.

Adding to my misfortune, I didn’t really take college seriously as a first time student in higher education. I skipped several classes, taking advantage of the less strict attendance policies when compared to high school.

This was mistake number two for me.

It is too easy to fall into these potholes in the beginning for many students. Yet, it takes a wake-up call to show you exactly how your schedule or poor attendance can really screw up your education.

I see this happening every time my ethics class meets. This is a class I am taking just to fill up my required number of credits needed to graduate in December. It is a level 100 course, so needless to say the majority of students enrolled to take it are freshmen. Every normal class day, the room is only about half-full. But when the day of a test arrives, there are more students in the room than there are desks available.

Surprising? Absolutely not.

These are the same type students that complain to the instructors about the low grade they receive on their exam. But really, what did you expect? After missing nearly 75% of the instructor’s lectures, I don’t think anybody has a reason to blame anyone but themselves when something like this happens.

This is a trend that you can easily see slowly fading out as the classes progress more towards upper division course numbers.

As I am sure it is with most colleges, this is a natural progression for students. You see what works, and what doesn’t work. And several upper classmen would probably, if asked, say they would go about college very differently if they had to do it all over again.

It kills me to see students make the same mistakes I made, which still haunt me to this day.
It has ended up costing me more money than I’d like to admit in the normal fees every semester. My student loans wouldn’t have looked so frightening if I had pulled my head out of my ass for about five minutes as a freshman and looked at the big picture.

As for the issue about the number of credit hours to take as a freshman, I would suggest you look at how you cope with the first semester, then decide from there. Like the old saying goes, if it seems too good to be true, it probably is. A smaller schedule can wind up hurting you more than it will help. Jumping your class load up to 15 credits for the next couple of semesters will seem like a blessing when you’re a senior. This easily beats breaking your back at the end of your college career in order to graduate on time.

Like I said, it pains me to see students headed down the same path that I was on before I got some sort of direction in school. It simply isn’t worth the hassle.

Another bit of information is that it’s never too early to knock out the majority of courses for your major, minor or general education requirements. This is one concept I did manage to grasp very early on in college, and I am very grateful that I did.

I have made several wrong choices. And clearly, I’m paying for it in the end, in both the length of time I’ve been in college and in my student loans. Take it from me, the sooner in college you come to this revelation, the better off you will be.

Headlines

Homeland security, support from our allies
by Bryan Goodland

Bryan Goodland

The price tag for the war on terrorism continues to mount. We have already spent billions of dollars on the war itself and will now spend even more on rebuilding Iraq and various other expenditures once the war is completed. However, that’s the problem. When will the war ever be finished and how much are Americans willing to pay in both lives and in cold hard cash?

Of course something needed to be done, but some parameters should have been set at the beginning. America cannot afford to fight the entire world, and even though we are the reigning superpower, our resources are limited. What we needed to do is to commit ourselves to one tactical front and pursue it to its completion. However, instead of just fighting an enemy, we chose to fight an idea, terrorism. Is it really possible to eliminate terrorism from this planet? How will we ever know if we’ve accomplished our goal? No matter how many terrorists we capture or cause to flee to another country, there is always someone waiting in some dark corner to take his place. In fact, some of them are probably right in our own backyard.

America doesn’t have to look too far to find someone that hates us or would potentially do us harm. But there is no way that we can pursue every radical fringe group that may or may not have us in their sights. So what is America to do?

First of all we need to stay focused on homeland security. We need to keep updated and constantly seek consultants to test out our latest security measures. We should also seek out those foreign countries that deal with terrorism on a regular basis and see how they have confronted the problem. We need to create more effective security measures then the prevention of passengers bringing finger nail files and scissors on board our commercial airlines. The terrorists on September 11 were able to gain access to airplanes, commandeer them and crash them into the twin towers, without bringing any of the aforementioned on board. We need to thoroughly analyze our security measures.

Secondly we need to continue to rally support from our allies to aid us in our plight. We simply need help in order to make this work. Now would also be a good time to engender feelings of goodwill towards our current allies and our potential ones. We could do this by forgiving debts, creating trade, and helping to build economic stability in countries that are less fortunate than the United States. We must change our isolationist tendencies and reach out to the world at large.

Finally and most importantly we need to understand that all these measures will take time. In our fast moving and instant gratification society, we need to begin to see that world solutions cannot be forced, but must instead be allowed to grow at their own pace.

We must be consistent and show the world that America and our democracy are great for a reason. We must act as though the entire world is watching, because in reality they are.

Headlines

Intellectual diversity is needed
by Dana J. Parker
The Metropolitan

On Tuesday, David Horowitz, one of the nation’s best-known examples of radical-lefty-turned-radical-conservative, visited Metro to talk about his proposed Academic Bill of Rights. Let’s welcome him back to his liberal roots.

After all, one of the hallmarks of liberalism is the willingness to include opposing viewpoints. For example, the list of conservatives and liberal-haters regularly or until recently published in nominally “liberal” magazines and newspapers includes Christopher Hitchens (The Atlantic), Andrew Sullivan (New Republic, Salon), Tucker Carlson (New York magazine), Alexander Cockburn (The Nation), William Safire (New York Times), George Will and Robert Novak (Washington Post) and Horowitz himself (Salon).

How many liberals and conservative-haters do you think are published in Mr. Horowitz’ conservative Front Page magazine? That’s right, none.

As for Mr. Horowitz’s newfound concern for students’ intellectual independence, I’m all for it, but I don’t think it goes far enough. If, as he says, college students are getting only half the story because their professors tend to be non-conservative, why stop at the Academic Bill of Rights for college faculty and students? If Mr. Horowitz’ true agenda is to promote “intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech”, with the stipulation that “no political, ideological or religious orthodoxy will be imposed on professors and researchers through the hiring or tenure or termination process”, let’s take it a step or two farther. Let’s pass legislation for an Academic Bill of Rights that applies to university boards of trustees.

We could start with the Metro State Board of Trustees, appointed by Gov. Bill Owens. It boasts exactly one member (aside from the faculty trustee) with a background in academia; most of the rest are business executives in oil and gas, banking, marketing and public relations and homebuilding. One member is Gov. Owens’ former campaign manager and deputy chief of staff; another is his director of economic development. Is it possible that any of these Board members were appointed by the very conservative Owens because of their own conservative political beliefs, and that their conservative ideologies could have some bearing on how they govern the college?

Perish the thought. That would be tantamount to imposing the policies of a single political creed on all Metro students, not just those few who might have to learn political science from a non-conservative.

And let’s not stop there: let’s look at state boards of education. Not even Horowitz could plausibly claim that too many liberals in positions of educational authority were responsible for the Kansas Board of Education vote (since reversed, thank Darwin) to give local school boards the option of removing the teaching of evolution from their science curricula – which made Kansas the nation’s laughingstock. If state boards of trustees and local school boards were to abide by the Academic Bill of Rights, Kansans could have been spared this humiliation. On the other hand, a statewide ban on the teaching of evolution could have far-ranging benefits, too. In a Bush economy, with starved education budgets, a university could save a lot of money by completely eliminating the geology and biology departments.

But to be really effective, let’s take Mr. Horowitz’s Academic Bill of Rights to its ultimate and logical conclusion. Let’s extend the Equal Time Rule to all political speech and writing, not just candidates for public office. After all, to guarantee students’ intellectual independence, it is important to prevent them from being indoctrinated by a one-sided onslaught of voices of authority and influence off-campus as well as on.

Let’s make it mandatory for media outlets to hire commentators and columnists with no imposition of political, ideological or religious orthodoxy through the hiring or retention or termination process. Fox television will undergo a major reorganization, as they lose half their conservative pundits, and hire their political opposites. Molly Ivins will get equal play with William Saletan in Slate. MSNBC will have to rehire former ratings leader Phil Donahue, and Bill Maher will get his old show on ABC back. For every desperately unfunny Dennis Miller “comedy” routine, we’ll get a hilarious and original performance from Wanda Sykes or Jon Stewart.

Just as it is a canard that the media are liberal, so it is a myth that all those in positions of authority in academe and education are progressives who stifle the conservative viewpoint.

If Mr. Horowitz - and Gov. Owens, who supports legislation based on the Academic Bill of Rights in Colorado – is truly concerned about students’ freedom from indoctrination, they could both start a bit closer to home.

Headlines

Letter to the Editor addressing the writings of the SGA
by Tim Dunbar
The Metropolitan

The Pen, it is said, is mightier than the sword. True, but only if that pen is wielded with the same determination and precision. Words, especially those meant for the printed page, should be chosen and executed with care and purpose, not tossed randomly like so much confetti at a homecoming parade.

Last week, Rachel C. Miller, a person you, the student body, elected to serve as V.P. for Communications for Metro, submitted to the office of The Metropolitan the following letter (this is a reprint of her original text):

Dear Metro Campus,

The intensive semester of getting into the grove of classes, working, changes, etc is upon us. This will be an interesting semester for the Student Government Assembly (SGA). We are trying to prepare and complete our duties as your advocates here on campus. As our intern-president Ray Keift conveyed to the SGA, “It is important to have a student perspective”. This SGA believes in this statement with all of our hearts.

The Vice Presidents has been very active this past summer.

Candice Gill, VP for Student Fees proposed and the Board of Trustees passed her fee recommendations for next year. Krista Kaufman, VP for Academic Affairs is dealing with the grade appeals. Linda Cordova, VP for Student Organizations is working on getting input from all student organizations on how to meet their needs. Sarah Prouty, VP for Student Services is working with the 18 different services.

This SGA is dedicated to helping the students. We all feel very strongly about representing you the students to the best of our abilities. There are three new ways to connect with your SGA. The first is the new channel on the new MetroConnect system, and the new group function is available on this system. The next form is the webpage www.mscd.edu/~sga. These new functions help us try to communicate with you. However, we always enjoy having a visit from the students.

Sincerely,

Rachel C. Miller
VP for Communications

Aside from the obvious grammatical, syntactical and punctuation errors and the fact that she addressed the thing to the campus instead of its students, this letter says virtually nothing and says it badly. Ms. Miller’s communiqué begins by stating the obvious: yep, the semester sure is upon us. But what’s this? The intensive semester . . ? Does that mean that no semester before this one and no semester after it will be intensive? And what is this “grove of classes, working, changes, etc” (etc.with no period, no less) that is upon us? We’re guessing she meant groove, but who knows. “This will be an interesting semester for SGA.” Oh, good! I’d hate to have SGA, an organization who seems, at least to this writer, to serve no visible function whatsoever, to be bored. Of course, since they’re “trying to prepare and complete” their duties as our advocates, they’ll probably have plenty to do. Question is, what happens when these “duties” are “complete?”

Moving on…

Not only does our esteemed VP for Communications not know that we have here at Metro an interim-president not an “intern-president,” she seems to be in the dark regarding the spelling of Mr. Kieft’s name. Nice to know, too, that the SGA, believes in Mr. Kieft’s statement with “all of (its) hearts.” I wonder, though, how many hearts this single entity has.

But I digress.

Miller then tells us that the Vice presidents (plural) “has” (the singular present tense of have) “been very active this past (Hello! Clue!) summer,” then goes on (and on) about what each VP is, presumably, doing now. Or at least attempting to do; the language is so vague it’s hard to tell.

The SGA, says Miller, “is dedicated to helping students” and “representing you the students (in case there was any question as to who “you” are) to the best of our abilities.” Judging from the punctuation (or lack thereof) and singular/plural disagreement in that sentence alone, the SGA’s “abilities” are severely limited.

Now, if (a very BIG if) you should want to “connect with your SGA,” Miller says there are three ways to do that. The third way is apparently a secret, to which only the numerically challenged are privy, because Miller lists only two: “the new channel on the new MetroConnect,” and “the next form … the webpage” (well, what is it, a form or a Webpage?). Unless she means that the group function available on MetroConnect has something to do with SGA. The way it’s written she just wanted the reader to know the group function was available. At any rate, “these new functions will help (SGA) try to communicate with you.” On a whim, I checked out the Website. Whoo,boy! If Metro did not have an open admissions policy, I’d have to wonder how any of these people got into this college.

Here are a few of examples of the literary gems that have been copied and pasted directly from the SGA Website, starting with the VERY FIRST SENTENCE after their masthead (italics added):

Some of the things that the members of Student Government wishe to do or have done this past summer.

This piece of work is from Sarah Prouty:

As Vp of Student Services I will be advocating the student needs to the administration, by being an active member on Student Affairs Board. Also promoting Student Services to the Students.

But wait, there’s more; and really, this should be enough to convince you that SGA is a sham, an embarrassment to the students and to this campus and should be abolished. After seeing their Website, I am thoroughly convinced that the members of SGA are, without exception, idiots and have no business taking even a dime from the student body. This jumble of nouns, verbs and non-sequiturs comes courtesy of Candace Gill, VP for Student Fees:

I just finished a large project retaining to 30 course fee requests this summer that will go into affect next semester. At the past September’s board meeting these particular course fees that were brought to me at the beginning of the semester. That later went up the ladder and latter on to the board were passed in August’s board meeting. Although the BOT did have a few questions about the process, I was able to answer them in a public meeting because the process to which we do or do not approve these fees is rather extensive.

Huh??!! Can anyone, including the grammatically inept Candace Gill, tell me what on earth the above is supposed to mean? “Retaining?” Don’t you mean pertaining? The fees go into “affect?” You mean “effect,” don’t you? The “later, ladder, latter” sentence, like the entire Website (aside from the Constitution, which, clearly, was written by someone not currently involved with SGA) makes no sense whatsoever.

These things may, as Ms. Miller stated in her letter, “help (SGA) try to communicate with you”(whatever that means), but without several barge-loads of help for itself first, SGA is a hopeless cause. And just in case I haven’t yet convinced you that SGA needs to shut its doors and disband, I’ll leave you with their “Purpose,” again, taken, six weeks into the semester, directly from their Website: The Purpose of the Student Government will be announced in the near future. Please come back and visit in the near future.

Headlines

Letter to the editor addressing concealed weapons ban on campus

This is in regards to the article by Elena Brown in the September 18, 2003 edition of The Metropolitan. While I feel bad for Mr. Castaldo and all of the other victims of Columbine, Restricting the rights of law abiding citizens is not the answer. It seems that the author of the article left out a few facts in her article.

First, the monsters that committed the Columbine attack already violated several gun laws. One of these laws being, that they were not allowed to have possession of the firearms in the first place. They were also not allowed to have guns on school grounds. The concealed-carry law that just took effect, does not allow guns on high school campuses.

The author also left out some other facts about getting a concealed-carry permit. The person applying for the permit has to be legally able to own a gun, the person must take a handgun safety course approved by the State of Colorado, and the background checks for any felonies. She makes it sound like all a person needs is $152.50 to be able to carry a gun.

She also points out that a student has already been arrested on campus for having a gun. He was arrested because he was breaking the law.

That person was already not allowed to have a concealed weapon. This did not stop him from bringing the weapon to school.

I agree with Mr. Castaldo, I do not see a reason for anybody to bring a weapon onto campus. However, that does not mean that I want to restrict the rights of law abiding students to so so. If somebody wants to bring a weapon onto campus to hurt somebody, no law is going to stop them.

Joe Martinez

Headlines

Have an opinion?
Help us help you.
Write it down, e-mail, fax or drop it by our office, Tivoli 313.
The Metropolitan welcomes letters of 500 words or fewer on topics of general interest.
Letters must include a full name, school affiliation, a phone number and e-mail address.
Letters might be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.

Mailbox:
The Metropolitan
900 Auraria Parkway
Suite 313
Denver CO 80204

For letters to the opinions editor, email Justin Breuer at breuer@mscd.edu

phone: 303.556.2507
fax: 303.556.3421

Policy for submitting letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor must be received Monday in order to appear in the following week’s issue of The Metropolitan. Letters should be emailed to the opinion editor Justin Breuer at breuer@mscd.edu. Letters to the editor must specifically address the student body, local community or other identifiable organized bodies. All other submissions will be taken as opinions and ran as columns. Any student may, and is encouraged to, submit an opinion piece for publication. Pieces submitted are subject to space limitation, editing and deadline requirements. The Metropolitan reserves the right to refuse to publish any submission. For further questions please contact Justin Breuer at breuer@mscd.edu.