I’d like to take the time to clarify the Northern Star’s editorial, “Rainey’s rejection flawed by conflicts.”

The Star really jumped to conclusions this time. You suggested that Senators Zur and Annunzio were opposed to Rainey’s appointment because they knew all along that they were planning on running for the position themselves.

This accusation is totally ridiculous and unfounded. First of all, the ROTC committee usually only meets twice a year and could be called unimportant. Tom Rainey could have been appointed and probably even done a good job because he’s a dedicated individual. The reason that I voted against the appointment (and I think I speak for many others who did likewise) is that appointing someone to a position he publicly admits shouldn’t exist makes a mockery out of the whole system.

Futhermore, at the time I didn’t think Tom wanted the position that bad because he didn’t take the questions asked at the Senate meeting very seriously. After talking to Tom later, I confirmed my belief.

Zur and Annunzio are also dedicated individuals. It is for this reason that when they saw that there was no one else to fill the position (since as you reported a day earlier only Tom Rainey applied for the position) they volunteered to do it instead of leaving the position unfilled.

I’m glad that the Norther Star scrutinizes the Senate’s actions because that keeps everybody on their toes. However, you are drawing conclusions on second-hand information—not very professional.

Dave Stern

SA Senator