Dear Editor:
I find it unfortunate that David Roberts cannot seem to construct a valid argument when writing an article that is supposed to be persuasive ("MLK Day against 'The Dream,'" Jan. 18.) It is difficult to imagine how a rational person might be convinced that observing Martin Luther King Jr. Day by canceling classes is wrong, seeing how the author included no truthful supporting information for his conclusions. Rather, he seems to have decided that unfounded attacks on the character of the student body, loads of hyperbole and fallacious information are better strategies to convince people that his point of view is worth considering. How is the national holiday "halting education?" I am not sure that "...kids are getting our of class to that they can go party" is the only result that observing Martin Luther King Jr. Day will yield.
If Mr. Roberts is in such outrage about losing a day of classes, maybe he should have attended the all-day symposium held on campus to educate the public about the ideas and vision of Dr. King. Had he done so (and I'm inferring that he didn't, since the event wasn't mentioned once in the article) he might actually have some authority to make comments concerning Dr. King's feelings about education. Maybe he could have even cited some real evidence to support his ill-conceived "arguments." Instead, he seems to feel that ranting is an adequate substitute for cohesive writing. In my opinion, the "intelligent" reader rather than agreeing with the author's "conclusion" is likely questioning whether or not it would even be worth the time to read future columns written by Mr. Roberts. I certainly am.
Kyle A. Enevoldsen
Music Performance Senior