College Park’s proximity to Washington pulls away prospective eateries, stores

I read Jaime Malarkey’s column Tuesday (“Hungry for diversity”) with great interest. I am currently a graduate student here but went to college in Ithaca, N.Y., a town in the middle of nowhere (45 minutes to the nearest interstate).

One of the perks of this isolation was there were many stores, bars, movie theaters and restaurants within walking distance of Cornell University’s campus. Because there were no cities nearby, businesses came to the community rather than waiting for us to go to them.

I believe the closeness of Washington siphons a lot of the attractions away from College Park. I usually end up in Washington when I want to eat out or see a movie. While I appreciate all the things to do there, it’d be nice to have more places to go in College Park. Life is less spontaneous and more stressful when you have to drive half an hour to get to a store or bar.

I also hope more stores will come to College Park in the near future. I’d like to see the downtown area expand beyond Route 1, which might make it more compact and pleasant to walk around in. This would bring more student shoppers and more businesses.

Dan Lenski

Graduate student

Physics

Columnist’s threat of violence proved the hypocrisy in his defense of free speech

I read Morgan Hubbard’s column last week (“Freedom Forum,” Feb. 16) with great disgust at his hypocrisy. How can he so magnanimously support Ward Churchill’s right to free speech while threatening to “punch him in the forehead” for what he says? For that matter, how can Hubbard worry about Churchill committing “incitement to imminent lawless action” when Hubbard himself explicitly calls for harassment and implicitly encourages assault and battery?

If Hubbard is really concerned for his academic and intellectual integrity, as he says he is, then by all means he should go ahead and construct an argument against Churchill’s position. I dare him. Simply saying Churchill is crazy does not count. And while you’re at it, take the time to understand his position, which has been severely misconstrued by the witch-hunting media and political establishment.

I won’t dwell any longer on how Hubbard’s idle but tough-sounding threats from a distance belie the immaturity and insecurity of a schoolyard bully. By portraying Churchill’s criticism of American foreign policy as somehow “insane,” he seeks to vilify and marginalize all dissent. Worse, his threats of violence just encourage the culture of left-bashing that the mainstream media try to get away with.

Despite the limitations of Hubbard’s world view, the brutal imperialism of the U.S. government has millions of critics, myself among them. It would be one thing for you to ignore us; but what Hubbard is doing is trying to scare dissenters into silence. He will fail. Those who oppose U.S. foreign policy will continue to do so, despite Hubbard’s idle threats.

David May

Office of Academic Affairs

University System of Maryland