Edwards is no different from the others

I’m writing this in response to the article entitled Edwards the kingmaker which attempted to disparage Edwards by pointing to his economic activity over the last few years. The following numbers all come from a recent article in Money magazine entitled “Millionaires-in-Chief.” The numbers correspond, respectively, to each candidates net worth, the cost of their house(s) and their 2006 income.

Edwards; $54.7 million, $8.5 million and $3.7 million. Giuliani; $52.2 million, 9.3 million and 17 million. Clinton; $34.9 million, $5.9 million, and $12.1 million.Obama; $1.3 million, $1.9 million and $991,000.McCain; $40.4 million, $3.9 million and $3.9 million.Romney; $202 million, $18.7 million and $37.6 million.

This shows that Edwards is no worse than anyone else. They’re all aligned with certain corporate interests and all invest in companies that do harmful things. Think of the current administration and Halliburton.

It wouldn’t hurt to do a bit of fact checking either, as the Democratic nominee won’t be selected in a “few weeks” but at the end of August. It would lend a bit of credibility to what you’re saying if we knew where your information was coming from and could trust that it was accurate.

Finally, I would recommend trying to be more constructive in your political coverage. You did not spend much time discussing Edwards’ platform or the ideas he has presented and I think that would be a more worthwhile endeavor. You should try to provide helpful information about the candidates instead of vilifying them and turning the paper into a collegial version of Fox News.

Alex Yegiyantssenior, criminology

Reconsider your approach

Speaking as a Democrat, I find Mr. Wright’s latest column “Looking Past Race and Gender” substantially troubling and irresponsible. Growing up in the South, I was always taught that people should be judged on the basis of their character and their abilities for whatever position they seek to obtain. While John Edwards is not my ideal candidate for President, and more reasonable arguments against his candidacy could have be made, Mr. Wright instead chose to write off John Edwards by labeling him as a “cheap shot lawyer.” Instead of pointing out policy stances that Edwards holds he disagrees with, Mr. Wright instead chose to play the name-game without even backing up his name-calling. Therefore since Mr. Wright chose not to defend his brand on Edwards with substantive material, myself and the other readers of the Technician are left only to assume that his entire opposition stems from the fact that Mr. Edwards is a white middle-aged man who has no right running against honorable candidates, such as Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, because he does not share the historic status that they do. I think it is very clear that the ultra-liberal causes Mr. Wright habitually tries to advance are a prime reason why the Democratic Party has trouble succeeding with common-sense grown-up voters, especially those in the South. I urge Mr. Wright in the future to better think out his political claims before he puts them down on paper, or pick alternative topics.

James Wallyjunior, civil engineering