Lil’ bit o’ love for Lieberman

To the editor:

I am very disappointed that Tom Nardi, a member of the Villanova community, took such an abrasive and anger-filled tone in his recent column, “Senator Joe Lieberman (Hack-Connecticut).” I feel that Nardi’s comments are great examples of what is wrong with the media in this great nation, as he took comments made by a known conservative Democrat (who was elected overwhelmingly as an independent by the people of Connecticut, by the way) and spun them completely out of proportion. Lieberman stated a known fact: we are in a war against Islamic factions, not just al-Qaeda, that have sponsored terrorism both in their own region and around the world. Syria has been known to harbor these networks and has stood idly by while they continue to wreak havoc on the streets of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Baghdad and other major cities across the globe. Yet Nardi ignores the fact that other terror networks cause just as much civil unrest and violence as al-Qaeda and mocks Lieberman’s position of being against foreign relations with a nation known for its ties with Islamic radical groups who wish to destroy all that is not Islam. Nardi uses the term “ignoring the problem” when describing Lieberman’s position in the past when it comes to foreign policy, then describes instances in which Lieberman took an active role in the affairs. Just because Lieberman disagrees with the method Nardi seems to think is effective does not give the author of this column the right to denounce the senator in such a malicious and abrasive tone. Speaker Pelosi’s actions were reprehensible and irresponsible foreign policy, and Lieberman not only has the unequivocal right to but is correct in criticizing the speaker’s actions when it comes to foreign relations. Lieberman should be applauded for his unwavering and firm belief in taking the right action rather than the popular action. I would further like to point out that Lieberman’s criticisms, unlike Nardi’s, were respectful in tone and stated civil disagreement rather than anger-filled ad hominem attacks that serve to divide our community. I hope that in the future, Nardi will take a more civil, respectable and intelligent road to discuss his views. Dissent and the freedom of speech and belief are cornerstones of our American society; however, sharing ideas and dissents through abrasive and anger-filled tones is exactly what is dividing this nation in this critical juncture in the global community.

– Philip R. Consuegra, ’06

Lieberman still needs some love

To the editor:

I must express my strong disagreement with Tom Nardi’s most recent article criticizing Senator Joe Lieberman, while also taking a jab at Senator Arlen Specter. Nardi’s attitude of “stick to your party,” specifically the Democratic Party in his own case, is a poison to our political system. He criticizes Lieberman for being a “hack” Democrat. Nardi then goes on to proclaim that the chairman of the Committee on

Government Affairs and Homeland Security is less informed than himself, specifically in regard to the senator’s opinion of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent visit to Syria. I would suggest that Lieberman be commended for his loyalty. Rather than cater to a party, he remains loyal to his own conscience as a representative of the people. He chooses to speak up, despite the fact that his party chose to briefly abandon him this past fall. Yet, Lieberman still cast the vote of realignment, because he considers his own beliefs more aligned with the Democratic Party. Furthermore, Nardi criticizes Specter for the times he speaks across party lines yet fails to act. This is a bold criticism of a man who has consistently sought moderation in our courts (see Robert Bork) and crossed party lines on one of the biggest votes of the last 30 years: the Clinton impeachment. To be honest with you, the United States needs more members of Congress with the integrity of Sens. Lieberman and Specter. Those who are willing to stand up to their peers and forsake the notion of “party loyalty” deserve our respect, not criticism.

– Ryan Bendinelli

Gator facts straight first before swamping self

To the editor:

I believe Justin DiBiase may have written the most uneducated and under-researched article to appear in The Villanovan to date in “Despite Florida’s success, ‘Nova still champs in my book.” First, in order to say Billy Donovan is not teaching his team morals due to the fact that he has players leaving one year early while Villanova does not is ridiculous. When in the past 15 years has Villanova had any talent besides Tim Thomas, Michael Bradley and Kyle Lowry that could have left early and even been considered for the NBA draft? Donovan allows his players to make the best decisions for their future, and he, as a man, is extremely giving to aid the UF community. He has opened a Catholic elementary and middle school in Gainesville in order to give the youth of the community the best possible education, also giving donations in order to give the underprivileged of Gainesville the opportunity to learn at a private Catholic school. Next is the biggest travesty that is in your article. To even insinuate that Danny Wuerffel is in any way “sluggish” is disgusting. Maybe he did not become an All-Pro player like the “great” Brian Westbrook, but he has surpassed any work Westbrook has accomplished on the field by his work off the field. Wuerffel has not maintained an existence in a $114,000 median family income neighborhood like so many of us here at Villanova have. He has turned his supposed sluggish work ethic to New Orleans where before Hurricane Katrina he opened the Desire Street Ministries to help the poorest of the poor in New Orleans’ predominantly black Neighborhoods. After Hurricane Katrina, he worked on a national level to raise millions of dollars to help rebuild New Orleans and his Desire Street Ministries. Maybe before you write an article that many will read you will take it upon yourself to be a responsible reporter and do some research.

– Sean Malone