Collegian Venues - your weekend starts here
  Collegian Chronicles



Get a deal with Daily Collegian Coupon Corner
  The Digital Collegian - Published independently by students at Penn State
Opinions
[ Monday, April 5, 1999 ]

Letters to the Editor

Ten percent discount doesn’t matter at HUB


On Friday, I saved 16 cents at the HUB. That is what I was told by the woman working at Union Street after I purchased an apple juice. I know she was just doing her job, but I couldn’t help but saying, "Wow!" I started to think about the list of things I could now afford to buy with the generous 16 cents I saved, and then when I thought really hard, I realized that I couldn’t buy anything.

There recently have been signs posted all over the HUB eating areas saying that by using our ID cards to purchase meals, we are saving a whole 10 percent! The management at the HUB has put up these signs because of increasing student complaints that the HUB prices are way too high for poor college students.

They are, in fact, trying to trick us into believing that this is a new deal, that prices are being lowered. But in fact, we have always saved 10 percent by using our cards, they have just decided recently to inform us about it.

I am what is called a "HUB rat." I might as well live at the HUB. I eat most of my meals at the HUB, have the biggest meal plan and last week, I ran out of points. It is not right for the HUB to be charging us so much money, and I hope our new Undergraduate Student Government officers will be able to make the HUB lower their prices.

Polly Marans
sophomore-advertising

Force only option when diplomacy fails


This letter is in response to the letter to the editor Friday "Bombing not answer to suffering in Kosovo," by Hector Firoglanis. The writer seems to be placing the blame for the refugee crisis on the NATO airstrikes. This is evidenced by his statement, "Since the bombing began last week the Albanian Kosovars have suffered more ... because of the NATO airstrikes." With all due respect to the writer, this is a completely inaccurate statement. The reason for the refugees fleeing into the neighboring countries is the same reason NATO is bombing the region. That reason is the Serbian President Milosevic.

The refugees overwhelmingly favor the action that is being taken by NATO. They say so themselves. They are being forced out of their homes with the threat of death by Milosevic and the goons who work for him, not the NATO military action. President Clinton said it best when he said, "Sometimes looking away is simply not an option." The Serbian president has been trying to rid the area of the ethnic Albanians for years now.

Recently, the situation has become so bad that he is carrying out mass executions against men who will not leave the region. I guess the writer feels we should just stay at the negotiating table for several more years, let Milosevic continue his murderous ways and let stability fall by the wayside in southeastern Europe. The writer offers no solution to the crisis other than trying to negotiate a settlement. Well, NATO has tried that. It obviously will not work because Milosevic is an unreasonable person. You cannot try diplomacy again and again when it has become increasingly evident that the Serbs will not compromise anything. When diplomacy fails, you must use force, and that is what NATO is doing.

Firoglanis also believes we cannot bomb Milosevic into surrender and gives some exaggerated examples to back up his claim. This is not World War II or Vietnam, when many sides conflicted. It is basically NATO against one man. Sure, Russia is mad about it, but they are in no position to take a stand against anyone. Just give the airstrikes some time. Remember, Saddam Hussein held out for 38 days. I doubt Milosevic can make it that long.

Jack Chiostergi
Class of 1998

Pitt News joke just part of football rivalry


On April 1, the Pitt News reported that Penn State coach/deity Joe Paterno had died but would continue coaching as a zombie. At Penn State, sportswriter Chris Masse devoted a column denouncing the story. Come on folks, this is football, rivalry football. This is the stuff that makes rivalries great, especially lopsided ones like Pitt vs. Penn State. Pitt’s got nothing going for them; they won’t even have their stadium in a couple of years. And it’s not like Penn State is any more dignified with its beautiful Pitt chant either, so let’s just have fun with it all.

Rivalries are the best part of college football, whether it is Army vs. Navy, Alabama vs. Auburn or Yale vs. Harvard. The latter provided memories such as "Gentleman, you are about to play Harvard, never again will you do something so important" and "Harvard beats Yale 29-29" from The Harvard Crimson after a spectacular come-from-behind tie against the previously undefeated and unscored upon ‘68 Bulldog team. It’s a shame that Pitt can’t play its part in making the rivalry great by having the program it once did. Truth be told the rivalry was never as polite as those Ivy Leaguers, and that is all right.

Even though it’s pathetic, the fact that Pitt fans chant "Penn State sucks!" during home games, even against other teams is a great tradition. This irrational hatred has its place and anything short of effigies of specific players and violence is probably fair game. So, who cares if the Pitt area Papa John’s makes fun of JoePa, guess who won? There are only two more games left in the series because Penn State got criticized for having an easy non-conference schedule (I’m ducking from Pitt fans already) so lets all enjoy it to the fullest and to the Pitt-heads, see yinz in September.

William F. Yurasko
senior-media studies



Send an Opinion Letter to the Editor about this article.


   





TOP  HOME
Blogs  About  Contact Us  Back Issues  Advertising 

Copyright © 2008 Collegian Inc.
Updated: Monday, September 22, 2003  11:54:19 PM  -4
Requested: Wednesday, October 15, 2008  9:51:13 PM  -4
Created: Wednesday, May 07, 2008  6:26:25 PM  -4