Thursday, April 08, 2004

Ballot Controversy at Stanford?
I received this in my email box tonight....not quite sure what it means........
Today, Husbands-Schwartz supporters e-mailed a thinly disguised campaign ad to Stanford students-- an ad that brought a nasty and negative tone into this campaign and passed off written opinions as news reporting.

In an attempt to look objective, the ad lists a series of "quotes from the Daily"-- five extremely positive ones about the Husbands-Schwartz slate, and three extremely negative ones about the Lee-Mefford slate. What the ad doesn't tell you is that the three negative quotes on Lee-Mefford are all pulled from ONE op-ed piece-- a piece written by supporters of the Husbands-Schwartz campaign!!!

In addition, the actual substance of the quotes about Lee-Mefford is suspect. Essentially, the ad suggests that the Lee-Mefford slate does not and will not care about the true interests of communities of color at Stanford. In addition to exploiting the politics of racial divisiveness, this claim is an outright lie; there is nothing in Lee-Mefford's public statements or campaign literature that would suggest that they have anything but a deep respect for and commitment to the concerns of Stanford's communities of color. Believe it or not, nobody has a monopoly on issues important to the SOCC communities. Both slates have gone to great lengths to show that they will serve our communities well, and both deserve credit for their hard work.

What we have in this election are two slates that are both qualified and committed to similar objectives, but have different ideas about how to achieve those objectives. One slate, for example, decided that negative campaigning was a good way to achieve its own ends. In casting your vote, be a TRULY informed Stanford voter. Don't be taken in by false campaign ads and smear tactics. Instead, check out the candidates' websites, at:

Decide whose ideas you like best, and vote at

No comments: