Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor,

Regardless of who wins in November, a different man will be leading our nation. The choice this year seems more dire than in previous elections.

A failing economy, a failed foreign policy and an energy crisis all make for one very competitive election. We are at a juncture that leaves us with two choices: change or experience. The experienced person promises reform. The change guy promises policy overhauls like we have not seen since Reagan dismantled the tax code.

Sen. John McCain has chosen a running mate whose only career achievement is reforming ethics as Governor of Alaska, a state more corrupt than the 16th-century Roman Catholic Church.

A great act is not always a difficult act. McCain’s namesake legislation is the McCain-Feingold Act, which reformed the Federal Elections Committee control of political contributions. In Sarah Palin’s acceptance speech, she used the word “reform” eight times-that’s eight more times than Sen. Barack Obama used the word in his acceptance speech. However, it is several times fewer than both Obama and Sen. Joe Biden used the word “change” in their acceptance speeches.

To be fair, Palin did use “change” several times, sarcastically throwing it back at the Democratic nominee. McCain switches between using “change” and “reform” from speech to speech.

So which is it? Reform a broken system-or change it? With a Democratic Congress, Obama will be able to do much of what he has promised; McCain will have to hope for a down-ballot miracle to retain any chance of Congress being split near even. The decision between “reform” and “change” for the naturally apolitical student is not always easy.

For me, it is easy to stay informed and to stay active-it will be my future career to stay involved. However, many of my peers either refuse or do not know how to be involved politically.

This campus offers eight registered political organizations, yet participation and member rosters in these groups are often low. Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, a screaming feminist or a paleo-conservative libertarian, there is an active group of students who share your views and want you to get involved.

If you renounce submission to partisan ideologues, try getting involved with something that affects you directly. The Student Government Association has an election Oct. 7 through Oct. 9. You can start by stopping by the SGA office. They always want new students getting involved-involvement is the only way SGA can govern effectively. This year is not the year to be uninformed or inert.

The point is, regardless if you want to “reform” a broken and corrupt government or want to “change” society as we know it, you cannot sit this one out. This presidential election is going to be historic; it will be the deciding factor in how much we pay for gas, how many of us have adequate health care and how many more countries the United States invades. Get involved, get informed and get active. You have no right to complain Nov. 5, 2008, or until Nov. 7, 2012, if you refuse to get out there and vote.

Darrell Coffey
SGA Student Senator
VCU Young Democrats VP of Communication

Dear Editor,

After reading Associate Specturm Editor Veronica Barabelli’s (Garabelli’s) rather scathing review of DreamWorks Pictures’ “Tropic Thunder” (“Stiller’s latest comedy dull despite star?studded cast,” Aug. 21 issue), a thought occurred to me: Maybe I had missed something. Maybe when I saw the film opening night, the unceasing laughter that erupted throughout the theater made the movie funnier in my eyes than it really was.

After all, a full house of appreciative fans can make an experience better than it would be were that not the case. Now that I’ve viewed the film a total of three times ? with three completely different audiences, who were all laughing from opening to close – I can easily pose a question that I’ve been ruminating on a while.

When does a person’s view on a certain matter go from being an opinion to just plain wrong?

Since The CT ran the review of “Tropic Thunder,” the movie has been number one at the box office for three weekends in a row, a feat only matched this year by the mega hit “The Dark Knight.” It has beaten other opening films such as the Vin Diesel vehicle “Babylon A.D.” and Jason Statham’s “Death Race.” Two sub-par films to be sure, but the drawing power of their stars is considerable.

Along with the powerful box-office results, “Tropic Thunder” has amassed an impressive array of glowing reviews, not the least of which are from Newsweek and The New York Times. David Ansen of the former said, ” ‘Tropic Thunder’ is the funniest movie of the summer-so funny, in fact, that you start laughing before the film itself has begun.”

Michael Cieply of The New York Times said “Thunder” was shaping up to be “one of (DreamWorks’) best prospects for the summer.” Rotten Tomatoes, which compiles reviews from virtually every critic in the country – as well as reviews from moviegoers – had the film running at an 84 percent rating, among the top -ten rated movies of the summer.

Not to mention the fact that Garabelli’s review hardly mentions what’s wrong WITH the movie. She spends the first seven paragraphs of an 11-paragraph review summing up the plot. The other four make sweeping statements such as “Tom Cruise … should figure out comedy is not his forte.” First, it is worth mentioning that the two publications I mentioned earlier pointed to Cruise’s performance as the funniest of the movie. Even so, this is opinion we are talking about, and Ms. Garabelli can obviously think Cruise’s performance was not great. But why? What’s wrong with his performance? Is it too stereotypical of producers; is the vulgarity overpowering? Were his scenes too lengthy?

Add to that some other statements, such as “if you are looking for versatility, this is not the movie for you.” Let’s see, in one character alone we have Oscar-nominated American actor Robert Downey Jr. playing an Australian actor named Kirk Lazarus, who is – in turn – portraying, in blackface, an African-American platoon Sergeant named Lincoln Osiris. Either Ms. Garabelli misunderstands the meaning of “versatility,” or she was on her cell-phone, sending text messages throughout the movie.

Instead of merely giving your opinion on an actor’s performance, why not back it up with a reason for the opinion. Any person can say a movie is bad-it takes an intelligent one to point out specific reasons why.

Sean Collins-Smith