Leaning to the left wing

When you voted the Unity slate into office, did you know it was full of America-hating, self-serving, two-faced hypocrites? I didn’t, but the slate certainly made its tendencies evident when it purposefully passed a radically gutted “”pro-America”” resolution. The resolution only served to patronize those seeking its passage while maintaining the slate’s own radical leftist agenda.

Pat Leung
Guardian

In light of the Sept. 11 assaults on America, the UCSD Freedom Alliance felt it would be appropriate to conceive a monument of student unity through a “”pro-America”” resolution.

Drafted by Conservative Union President Vince Vasquez, the wording was eloquent and the message simple: The A.S. Council, on behalf of the majority of the student body, reaffirms its support of our nation’s leaders, the servicemen and women seeking to improve our way of life, our flag; and, as proud Americans, we honor the firefighters and police officers who lost their lives on Sept. 11.

The full resolution can be viewed on request at the A.S. offices in the Price Center.

This is hardly a controversial message; Americans have never been so united. To demonstrate that supporting America is not a partisan issue, the Freedom Alliance consulted with the College Democrats at UCSD, who initially supported the resolution after changes were made in response to their and the A.S. Council’s request. The College Democrats withdrew support the day the legislation was scheduled for a vote.

The Freedom Alliance thought that however leftist the A.S. Council may be, it could join together and pass legislation that would satisfy most UCSD students.

The A.S. Council demonstrated how underhanded it could be, however, when Vice President External Dylan de Kervor announced a series of amendments effectively gutting the resolution.

The term “”Americans”” — apparently a dirty word — disappeared. Along the same lines, the idea that our soldiers are fighting to preserve our way of life was nixed because, as de Kervor stated, the council does not think the soldiers are doing so. Worst of all, any support for our flag — the same one that symbolizes our most cherished liberties — was removed without explanation. After a delayed roll call vote, the A.S. Council passed a hollow shell of the once-meaningful resolution.

Why did the A.S. Council strip the heart and soul from the resolution? It is all well and good to claim support for our nation’s leaders and soldiers, but by denying the patriotic ideals that they strive to preserve, the resolution is just an insulting waste of paper.

Were the changes made to avoid hurting the feelings of the handful of foreign exchange students on this campus? Hardly, and even if that were the case, the A.S. Council would merely be composed of incompetent rather than self-serving extremists. A resolution was proposed that the vast majority of students on this campus would agree on, including foreign students.

Why would foreign students be offended by supporting a country generous enough to open its doors and provide them with a top-notch education and the same civil rights as its citizens? It doesn’t make sense that this would offend them, and if any people hate America that much, then maybe they should not have made the decision to attend school here.

But the decision to nix parts of the resolution was not made out of consideration to anyone who might take offense to it; that, at least, would have been a misguided attempt at nobility.

Rather, the decision was made because of the utter disdain this council has for the United States and its principles. During an A.S. Council session, Vice President Internal Jenn Brown declared that the American flag represents a history of hatred and bigotry. I am sure Brown would be delighted to autograph the meeting’s transcript along with her new book, “”Why the United States Is Responsible for All Evil Throughout the History of Humanity.””

How about de Kervor, who actually proposed the amendment? She was quoted in the Jan. 10, 2002 issue of the Guardian as saying, “”The same flag has flown over plantations and internment camps.””

As for A.S. President Jeff Dodge, he said at one meeting that the term “”Pro-America”” was too divisive, and the resolution was thus renamed the “”Sept. 11 Resolution.””

The Freedom Alliance fails to comprehend why “”Pro-America”” is so divisive in a country where the ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are all anyone seems to agree on. Maybe the members of the Freedom Alliance were flattered, however, to discover that if the resolution had passed without the disgraceful amendments, Dodge would have exercised his first-ever veto.

The senators are far from exempt from blame here, since they voted to approve the amendments. Whether they despise the United States as much as their colleagues or they are just a bunch of sheep following the lead of their superiors makes no difference to me. The senators are either deliberately wrong or lack the fortitude to make a stand for what is right. Whether it be through disgust or apathy, they really dropped the ball.

There are those who feel the A.S. Council should not have spent time on the resolution because its sentiments are self-evident. I can respectfully disagree, but what is suspicious is not that a lot of time was spent on it, but that the A.S. Council went so far out of its way to drain its spirit. What could possibly motivate the A.S. Council to destroy something it had spent so much time on, unless it disagreed with its sentiments in the first place?

Whether you are as passionate as I am about the issue at hand should not occlude the question of whether the students can trust their elected council. The A.S. president and two vice presidents certainly did not campaign on such vicious, anti-American quotes. Perhaps they feel that being a crafty politician entails lying to their constituents.

Once this is published, the A.S. Council members will probably release some sort of statement skewing the realities of their lies. They will not tell you that they did not want to go on record striking down a “”Pro-America”” resolution, so instead they passed a radically gutted version, figuring no one would research what really occurred and expose them for what they are.

I cannot help but wonder whose interests the A.S. Council has in mind, but they certainly are not those of the student body.

More to Discover
Donate to The UCSD Guardian
$200
$500
Contributed
Our Goal

Your donation will support the student journalists at University of California, San Diego. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment, keep printing our papers, and cover our annual website hosting costs.

Donate to The UCSD Guardian
$200
$500
Contributed
Our Goal