Keep Lexis-Nexis
GW’s contract with Lexis-Nexis, which provides advanced electronic research capabilities, may not be renewed at the end of this academic year. Fee increases are being used to justify the downscaling or removal of this important service.
In the next few weeks, Gelman Library administrators will meet to evaluate how to spend Gelman’s portion of the University budget.
As graduate students, we strongly urge that the Lexis-Nexis contract in Gelman be maintained. Graduates and faculty use this tool regularly and it is integral to the demands of our academic research. Lexis-Nexis has capabilities other research services lack.
Maintaining our access to Lexis-Nexis is vital to our continued professional development. We feel that the needs of graduate students are being overlooked in this policy decision. The loss of Lexis-Nexis would seriously harm the potential of our research projects by reducing Gelman’s resources. The achievements of GW faculty and graduate students are the basis for GW’s strong academic reputation.
-Jon M. Rodeback, Daniel Else,Athina Kouri and Emily Cumminspolitical science graduate student caucus
To control or to serve?
I was reading an article in the Feb. 5 edition of The GW Hatchet, and was extremely disturbed by a quote from Student Association presidential candidate Patrick Macmanus (“JEC could impose retroactive fines,” p.3).
Macmanus was commenting on the Joint Elections Committee rule which holds the candidate responsible for the actions of his or her campaign staff. He stated, “If you can’t control your campaign staff, I don’t know how you can control your whole constituency.”
The role of the SA president is to serve the GW community, not to “control” them. Things like these make myself, as a member of this constituency, doubt Macmanus’ sincerity and wonder if he is seeking office to serve the students of GW or to forward his own agenda, which may be quite different from that of the constituency which he seeks to “control.”
-Laura Nodelmanjunior
Lighten up
In a Feb. 5 letter to The GW Hatchet, a writer sarcastically belittled cartoonist Rob for portraying expensive black clothes as an Arab fashion at GW and wrote, “So my suggestion to (Rob) is to diversify brother, and keep up those lofty standards,” (“Limited originality,” p.4).
I have a suggestion for the writer. My suggestion to you brother is to read a self-help book if you want lofty standards, not Rob’s cartoons.
And where do you get off saying Rob has targeted the Arab community? Do you ever read the letters to the editor? There is a letter from some hyper-sensitive, holier-than-thou person like yourself complaining about Rob every other week from a variety of cultural groups.
In the “GW Fashions” cartoon alone there were a number of cultural groups singled out, including Rob’s. The stereotypes expressed in Rob’s cartoons and writings are never malicious and usually are based in truth. To the writer, I seriously doubt you are blind to GW’s cultural groups and their markings.
If you do concentrate on how every person you see is unique in their own special way, then I salute you and your moral integrity. But if you don’t, stop being a hypocrite and stop insulting Rob for entertaining us.
-Christopher Lobecker senior
