39 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(04/25/05 4:21am)
China and Japan have been on even worse terms than usual for the past month. Recent developments in Japan and the United Nations set off an outcry of anti-Japanese sentiment from Beijing. In the past two weeks, thousands have taken to the streets of the Chinese capital to fight over past wrongs, present ambitions and the future balance of global power.\nThe conflict dates back to July 7, 1937, the day Japan invaded the Chinese mainland. China claims Japan never adequately apologized for atrocities committed in World War II. For this reason, Beijing became outraged at the start of April when the Japanese education ministry approved a new history textbook. This book, Beijing claims, glosses over Japan's horrendous treatment of the Chinese during the war years, according to The Economist, April 16.\nThis egregious error sent thousands of furious Chinese into the streets. Protesters threw eggs and stones at the Japanese embassy and looted Japanese-owned shops. The Chinese government, usually quick to quell public protest, has let the demonstrations continue with relatively little interference.\nOf course, this is all a bit silly. History is always written with a bias and "facts" vary dramatically depending on who one asks. Japan's interpretation of history is most likely as accurate as the version condoned by the People's Republic of China. As usual, the truth lies somewhere in between. History is not worth fighting over, and the Chinese will have to accept that not everyone sees events in the same light.\nIf historical renderings were the only reason for April's bickering, then Japan and China would not get a news analysis all to themselves. However, there is also the little matter of global power. At the end of World War II, China received a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council and Japan lost its military. This arrangement, which has lasted for 60 years, might change in the near future.\nU.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan will propose enlarging the Security Council in September, and Japan is already champing at the diplomatic bit for a permanent position. China is loath to see Japan encroaching on its current power.\nThis attitude is ridiculous. Countries with the most political and economic clout in the real world should wield the most power in the United Nations. Japan's economy continues to grow at astounding rates, it donates more aid money than most other countries, and it plays an increasingly active role in peacekeeping missions despite its lack of a military. Japan deserves a seat with these credentials alone. However, there are two additional reasons to give the nation a permanent seat: honor and balance.\nSimply put, China does not trust Japan. Beijing never again wants Japan to accumulate the power it held in the 1930s. It follows that China wants to keep its island neighbor out of the security loop. While the Chinese prejudice is understandable, the world cannot indefinitely exclude Japan from global affairs because of past transgressions.\nWhether China likes it or not, Japan has once again risen to prominence in the world. It would be an insult to the new generations of Japanese workers if the United Nations did not recognize the power they have earned. We should never forget the mistakes of the past, but we should not continue to punish the new Japan for its predecessors.\nFinally, it behooves the United Nations to plan for the future by adding the competitive Asian nation to the Security Council. China and Japan will soon become the most economically powerful countries in the world. The best way to curtail that power is to have them watch over each other. Within the next 50 years, we will be glad we did.
(04/04/05 4:27am)
United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan is not pleased with his organization, and it is easy to see why. Member states make empty pledges of aid, Annan's own son is at the center of the U.N. oil-for-food scandal, and Libya, of all countries, oversees the U.N. human rights division. Thus, Annan has decided to clean house.\nTwo weeks ago, he proposed implementing a series of ambitious reforms over the next decade to rebuild the credibility of the United Nations and give it a more appropriate role in the modern world.\nFirst on Annan's list is for member states to actually do what they promised. Many years ago, the United Nations laid out The Millennium Development Goals, an eight-item prioritized list of human strife, and spoke of pursuing aggressive remedies. The list includes such noble tasks as halving extreme poverty and hunger within the next decade, reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS, and dramatically reducing the child and maternal mortality ratios -- all by 2015.\nAccording to Annan's report, "In Larger Freedom," there has been progress, primarily in Asia, but drastic action is needed to fulfill the goals within the next decade. Developing countries are supposed to construct viable development strategies and combat corruption, while developed countries are supposed to provide full assistance to these pro-active countries.\n"All of this has been promised but not delivered," Annan's report said.\nIn the 1990s, developed countries promised to increase official development assistance to 0.7 percent of gross domestic product. That has yet to happen. Currently global ODA sits at 0.25 percent of GDP, or about one-third of the pledged amount.\nThe United States is at the forefront of international assistance, but the federal government can surely reach deeper into its pockets. According to the USAID publication "Foreign Aid in the National Interest," the United States ODA in 2000 was $9.9 billion, only 0.1 percent of its $9.8 trillion GDP in the same year.\nU.S. private assistance, from John Doe up to Bill Gates, is nearly four times that amount at $33.6 billion. However, even when you take that into account, we still fall short of the 0.7 percent benchmark.\nIt is in the interest of the United States, which has become obsessed with terrorism, to turn kind eyes on the poorest parts of the world. Destitute regions produce desperate people, al-Qaida's cannon fodder of choice. Additionally, as countries develop so do economic markets -- a relationship our capitalist society should always encourage.\nAnnan also addressed the need for collective security as a major priority in his new United Nations. "This year, if ever, we must transform the United Nations into the effective instrument for preventing conflict that it was always meant to be," Annan said in his report.\nWith this ideal in mind, Annan proposed revamping the travesty of The Commission on Human Rights into a smaller council with a direct voice in Security Council deliberations. He also proposed expanding the U.N. Security Council from 15 to 24 seats in order to create a more representative council, according to The Economist (March 26).\nThe changes will be an improvement, but not a perfect solution. Diverse representation is always a good thing; however, more voices will not keep countries from acting outside the United Nations when it suits them, as the United States and its allies did in the war in Iraq.\nUnfortunately, the underlying problem of obedience to U.N. regulations has not been solved. Professors teach of "social contracts" in introductory political science classes, which, in effect, mean each citizen in a democracy obeys all the laws of the governing body, even though an individual might not agree with everything. Until governments are willing to accept a similar social contract with an international body, the United Nations will always be flawed.
(03/07/05 4:38am)
It would not be wise to place any bets on the Middle East right now. Unprecedented and unexpected events are unfolding across the entire region so quickly it boggles the mind.\nWhen Hussein's statue fell in Baghdad, it knocked over the first piece in the political domino game that weaves across the Middle East. The democratic catalyst the Bush administration hoped to unleash when it attacked Iraq seems to be working, one domino at a time.\nThe pieces fell violently in Lebanon when former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri died Feb. 14 in a car bomb attack in Beirut. The world quickly blamed Syria, which denied the charge, but nonetheless Damascus is more isolated than ever from the international community.\nThe death of Hariri hit the Lebanese where it counts, and now many are demanding change. Thousands sit in Martyr's Square as you read this, chanting slogans and waving flags, according to Associated Press reports -- the so-called "cedar revolution," named after the tree in the center of the Lebanese flag.\nSyrian troops entered the country in 1976 at Beirut's behest to quell the civil war. In 1989, Syria and Lebanon signed the Taif Agreement, in which Syria agreed to withdraw to the Bekaa Valley in central Lebanon after two years and then discuss its future role in the country. It did not require a complete withdrawal from the country, a mistake often reported by the national news media.\nHowever, Syria never consolidated its forces in the Bekaa Valley. Instead, it became the predominant military presence in Lebanon and cultivated a pro-Syrian government in Beirut. Its governance by proxy is about to end. \nThe first victory for the Lebanese opposition came March 1 when Prime Minister Omar Karami resigned and dissolved the pro-Syrian government. President Emile Lahoud, who is also backed by Syria, remains in office. However, his favor should be checked by the incoming parliament after the elections in May. More importantly, Arab and Western governments came together, ordering Syria to leave Lebanon and not return. \nSyrian President Bashar al-Assad's response was in Lebanon's favor. In an address to parliament Saturday he said Syria would re-deploy to the Bekaa Valley and then head home. \nSkeptics say he's stalling, but Assad would be foolish to bluff. He needs to get out while he still can. The United States, which has already sanctioned Syria, is pushing for Europe to do the same. It would devastate the Syrian people if they were completely cut off from Western trade. Another concern for al-Assad is the possibility that someone might decide to remove the Syrians by force.\nSyria is understandably hesitant to leave its powerful position. Lebanon is a conduit to international trade for Syria and provides jobs for hundreds of thousands of Syrians, according to AP reports. Also, the civil war might re-ignite without the Syrian military cooling ethnic tensions.\nThere is no reason for Syrian workers to leave along with the military. Immigrant workers are commonplace in wealthy Arab countries. And, from a trade perspective, the threat of economic and political isolation from Europe far outweighs Lebanon's current value as a seaport.\nA second civil war is certainly a possibility. To keep this from happening, the United Nations and the Arab League should keep a close watch on the country and offer assistance where necessary. In January, the United Nations extended the mandate of its interim force in Lebanon until the end of July at the request of the Lebanese government. Theoretically, U.N. troops will mitigate any repercussions from the Syrian redeployment.\nSyria needs to jump on board as the Middle East evolves, otherwise it will quickly get left behind with devastating consequences. It's time for Damascus to give Lebanon back to the Lebanese.
(02/14/05 5:09am)
No one could accuse Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas or Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of not trying. At the risk of alienating themselves from their own peoples, both men have taken definitive steps toward a peace that has eluded the region for nearly 60 years.\nA lot has happened in the past month. Abbas banned civilians from carrying weapons in public, deployed police throughout Gaza and coaxed violent groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad into observing an informal cease-fire, according to Associated Press reports.\nHis utmost priority is to reassert the rule of law in the Palestinian territories. Without it, his administration will be disastrously impotent against militant groups. Israel will never concede to a two-state solution until it feels safe, and unfortunately for the Palestinians, Israel holds all the keys to their nationalist dream.\nSharon also took steps toward peace. Now, the Israeli army chief must personally approve any operation against Gaza or the West Bank, Palestinian militants who put down their weapons will receive conditional amnesty, and 900 Palestinian detainees will be released from Israeli prisons.\nEven Egypt has offered to help secure its border with Gaza to curtail weapons smuggling. \nThe goodwill gestures from all sides prompted Abbas and Sharon to meet Feb. 8 in Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt, and announce a truce to end the past four years of bloodshed.\nThus far, the peace has been strenuous at best, non-existent at worse. Within 48 hours of the official truce, members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade opened fire on an Israeli car in Nablus and Hamas launched volleys of mortars and rockets onto a Jewish settlement in Gaza. The groups claimed to be responding to Israeli attacks against Palestinians, according to the AP. \nA year ago, this would have been enough to bury the infant truce before it took its first step. Abbas, desperate to convince both sides of his resolve and authority, fired three security chiefs for failing to stop the attacks. And Sharon is proving surprisingly tolerant. He understands that the rookie president needs time to assert his power and bring militant groups in line.\nPersuading organizations like Hamas to lay down their weapons will be Abbas' biggest challenge. He refuses to confront them with force, preferring to co-opt them and bring them into the political process. This is a good decision. Hamas is a powerful and popular group among the Palestinian people, and he would find it a formidable opponent if he were to go against it.\nFor this reason, Sharon needs to alter his current policy and accept Hamas' place at the negotiating table. Hamas is as much a political party as it is a militant group. It attacks Israel with one hand, and with the other it controls 10 of 17 Palestinian municipal councils and provides schools and welfare to much of Gaza.\nBoth Hamas and Israel see each other as illegitimate entities that should be destroyed. Realistically, neither is going anywhere anytime soon. What's more, Hamas knows the infitada is not working. With the ratio of Palestinian to Israeli deaths sitting between three to one and five to one, Hamas could be persuaded to play ball with the right incentives. Gaining its support is crucial because, as the recent mortar attack demonstrated, Hamas feels no obligation to any cease-fire unless it takes part in the negotiations.\nAbbas and Sharon agree they have a rare opportunity and should exploit it. To that end, Abbas will visit Sharon on his ranch in southern Israel in the coming months, and both leaders accepted separate invitations to visit the White House in the spring. With a lot of luck and even more tolerance, they might make it this time.
(12/13/04 4:39am)
The Esan Thai Restaurant opened to little fanfare last October across the street from the Monroe County Public Library. Two other Thai restaurants, Siam House and Maung Tong Thai, are within the same downtown area. Nonetheless, Esan Thai survived the-make-or break first year, and now business is thriving.\nOthers have not been so lucky. Nearly 80 restaurants in Monroe County closed during the past four years, according to the Monroe County Health Department. Despite this forbidding atmosphere, new restaurants keep popping up to replace those who have permanently turned off their stoves.\n"There are 86 restaurants in the downtown area alone, in a 10 by 10 block area," said Talisha Coppock, the executive director for the Downtown Bloomington Commission.\nIn comparison, Coppock added, the downtown area of northern Indiana's Fort Wayne claims only three full-service restaurants.\n"There is so much that's offered," Coppock said. "We have people from all over the world opening restaurants."\nRuangthong Schoonover, who owns Esan Thai with her husband Don Schoonover, says customers pack her small entranceway on Friday and Saturday nights because she cooks for them the way she does at home.\n"I cook like I eat," Schoonover said. "If you stick to traditional, people will notice the difference."\nMelissa Cocco and Patrick Mitten, one of the two couples having dinner at Esan Thai late Monday night, agreed. Mitten said he eats there about once a month.\n"The food is pretty distinctive," Mitten said. "It's always good quality for the price."\nCocco said she likes it for the fresh ingredients and creative dishes, especially the curries. In front of her was an empty plate that once held red curry with shrimp.\nDespite the close proximity to the other Thai restaurant, Ruangthong Schoonover, 37, said she would only feel the competition if it were literally next door. She is safe for now, as the business next to her is an Indian restaurant.\n"I don't want to compete with them," Schoonover said. "(Siam House) is stable because they've been there so long. (But), I think I can survive."\nIt also helps, she said, that her food comes from the northeast region of Esan, Thailand, while Siam House concentrates on the foods found in Bangkok. The distinctly different tastes keep the restaurants from overlapping each other.\nEsan Thai is breaking even, which is a step up from the 30 percent losses Schoonover suffered for the first few months. Turning a profit is difficult with five employees and freshman status. On average the restaurant generates $16,000 to $20,000 per month. During October, Schoonover turned a profit of $300, she happily reported.\nWim Pok, the owner of Siam House, might in theory be competing for Esan Thai's business. But, like Schoonover, she adamantly claimed otherwise.\n"When you ask about competition, no!" she said.\nSiam House, which celebrates 15 years this month, has an established client base that assures Pok her business is not in jeopardy.\n"Mostly they tell me, 'don't worry about it,'" Pok said. "I have confidence in myself; I've been here for 15 years."\nPok also has other reasons to remain confident. Siam House's monthly revenues doubles that of Esan Thai, averaging $35,000 to $40,000 a month.\nEsan Thai's menu also does not compare to that of Siam House in either complexity or variety, Pok said. Her menu features about 90 distinct menu items.\n"I want you to see what I eat at home is more than the red curry and green curry that everybody knows," she said.\nTime will tell if Esan Thai can stand up to Siam House in the long run. Regardless of the outcome, Schoonover is grateful for the opportunity Bloomington residents afford her.\n"The people of Bloomington are very nice to give me a chance."\n-- Contact staff writer Cameron Thibos at cthibos@indiana.edu.
(04/30/04 4:27am)
George W. Bush has kept his public relations team busy for the past three years. They have had the monumental -- and unique -- task of selling two separate wars during the same presidency. As we all know, they didn't encounter many problems during the lead up to Afghanistan. But they ran into all sorts of protests for the Iraq war. Now they must sell the peace to the Iraqi people.\nBut some people just aren't buying it. This, of course, is for many reasons. Some are former Ba'athists lost loved ones in the war, and many simply do not like having their country occupied.\nAn important aspect in all this is the media. It has the capacity to bring photographs, information and opinions into every city and every home. And it has the ability to shape peoples' views with the way it spins events. In some instances, media outlets have been instrumental in inciting, and dissipating, conflict.\nFree access to independent news outlets is a new-found freedom to the majority of Iraqis. Until now, Saddam Hussein was the only legal source of information. These days, it is a slightly different story. One of the perks of the American invasion and occupation is Iraqis can draw from thousands of news sources from around the world.\nIsn't it ironic that a freedom we gave them is now causing us so much trouble? The problem Bush's PR team faces is a diversity of opinion. When an average Iraqi logs on to the Internet, he or she can see much more than the British Broadcasting Corporation extolling the virtues of democracy. They can also see photographs of blood-soaked children and listen to the advice of Osama Bin Laden on Al-Jazeera's Web site.\nIt is not hard to see how Al-Jazeera's slant could generate some animosity toward the Americans. It is also not hard to see how much easier life would be for the coalition if it began to tote the official line coming out of Washington, D.C. So, as the military occupies the country, why don't we shut Al-Jazeera down?\nA student posed this question to my Middle Eastern history class last Tuesday, and I must admit, I was shocked. Never mind that Al-Jazeera is based in Qatar, and, as far as I know, we have not invaded it yet. And disregard the fact that, as a journalism student, I have had "freedom of the press" beat into me with a sledgehammer.\nThe point still remains -- this is an insanely bad idea. \nFirst of all, it would look incredibly suspicious and raise even more hell if the military suddenly began to control the news. \nSecond, we are trying to install a democratic system of government. The only possible way for democracy to function is with an informed populace. Limiting information would doom the infant Iraq before it ever takes its first steps.\nMost importantly, I sincerely doubt Al-Jazeera makes up its stories. The New York Times may not run front-page photos of dead babies, but that does not mean they don't exist. Like ABC or FOX News, Al-Jazeera has the right to publish stories with any spin it wishes. We have no right to silence its reporting simply because the spin does not agree with Washington's agenda.\nThe U.S. Supreme Court verified this for America in Gertz v. Robert Welch. In short, the court ruled there is no such thing as a wrong opinion and, therefore, nobody could be silenced for having one. So, in America it is extremely difficult to censor a medium for the way it portrays events.\nI realize Iraq is not America and does not have the First Amendment. However, we should give the country we are building the same rights we expect.
(04/23/04 4:26am)
Ned Lud had a mission. His life, as the tale goes, was a crusade against technology. In the 1780s, he attacked a stocking factory and destroyed his most dire enemy -- the loom. This act spawned the Luddites, an anti-technology activist group that went around breaking machinery that lowered employment.\nI have to admit I'm becoming a bit of a Luddite myself. It's not that I care about employment or that I am a pantihose arsonist, I simply think our personal little digital worlds are getting a bit out of control.\nThe idea of complicating one's life with personal organizers began a few decades back with the Filofax. It was, in essence, a glorified notepad that could keep track of names, addresses and other tidbits of information. At first glance, it seems like a simple, useful innovation. However, according to a professor sitting next to me, they were so complicated that there were actual classes on how to properly use one.\nThen came the classic keypad watch. My dad still wears one, but only because it is excellent at keeping time. The keys are so small it is impossible to enter any data into the machine, but I have to admit, it looked impressive 10 years ago.\nThese early items were child's play in comparison to what we have now. Honestly, the sheer volume of high-tech gadgets on today's market is astounding.\nFirst on the list is the cellphone/ walkie-talkie. What, I ask, is the point? They both perform the exact same function -- talking with someone else -- except the latter makes every conversation public. And they don't let you ignore the call if something more important is going on. I cannot imagine why anybody would want such a disservice, but apparently they do because I cannot count the number of times a walkie-talkie has screamed out in the middle of class.\nThese days, manufacturers deck out cell phones with so many bells and whistles that calling while walking seems to be a secondary rather than a primary function. My phone is full-color, surfs the Internet, takes pictures and could probably fly to the moon. But, it cannot make a high-quality call from the middle of campus.\nItem two on the list is the PDA. In the beginning, these were really just glorified notepads as well. They now run Windows and Microsoft Office, hook up to desktop projectors and surf the Internet (even though your phone -- which is in your other pocket -- already does that).\nI have to admit, I bought a PDA a while back thinking it would make my life easier. I then realized a piece of paper in my back pocket provides the exact same service with infinitely less hassle. \nWe also have PDAs that can make phone calls and cell phones doubling as PDAs. Naturally, they all plug into a computer and sync with everything else, thereby making the whole kaboodle redundant. I ask again: what is the point?!\nThe latest and most mind-boggling invention is the upgrade on my dad's keypad watch. This watch has a USB port and copies data directly from a PDA. The sales pitch is for people who keep their lives on a PDA and then forget it at home. And of course, it automatically changes time zones, checks stock quotes and receives instant messages.\nAssuming you remember everything, you now have a PDA, cellphone, watch and Filofax that all contain the exact same data, all worth about $700. I have to admit, marketers are amazing people.
(04/16/04 4:19am)
I had been searching for an internship for months. Finally, with less than four weeks of school left, I got a call back from The State Journal in Frankfort, Ky.\n"Come on down for an interview with the rest of the editors next Friday," the editor said.\nI'm raring to go, and come Friday morning, I'm off and pacing. This has been my only callback the entire year, and I'm desperate to make a great first impression. I cruise the 160 miles down to Frankfort and arrive an hour late.\nWhose fault was it I nearly throttled my chances before I got there? Well, I suppose technically it was my fault, but I prefer to blame Benjamin Franklin.\nDear old Bennie, I discovered in my quest to find a scapegoat, was a bit of a night owl. He liked staying out until 4 a.m. and resurfacing slightly after noon. One day, he was rudely awakened at the ungodly hour of six in the morning and made a startling scientific discovery, which he subsequently detailed in a letter to the Journal of Paris in 1784.\n"Your readers," Franklin wrote, "who with me have never seen any signs of sunshine before noon, and seldom regard the astronomical part of the almanac, will be as much astonished as I was, when they hear of (the sun) rising so early; and especially when I assure them that he gives light as soon as he rises."\nFranklin followed this lightning bolt of observation with a resounding thunderclap of an idea.\n"Every morning, as soon as the sun rises, let all the bells in every church be set ringing; and if that is not sufficient, let cannon be fired in every street, to wake the sluggards effectually, and make them open their eyes to see their true interest."\nThe interest Franklin refers to is thrift. His idea was to beat people into open-eyed submission at the wee hours in order to save on candles. If people utilized free, natural light and slept through the entire night, this would cut the cost of candles immensely.\nFranklin should have known better than to start thinking as soon as he woke up at 6 a.m. In a fit of bleary-eyed analysis, he gave us Daylight-Saving Time version 1.0.\nWayne's World time warp to present day: All of America switches to DST the first Sunday of April.\nAll except Indiana, that is.\nSo, there are three possible solutions to my problem. The first is I personally keep track of the world's idiosyncrasies, but that would be entirely too easy. The second is Indiana finally catch up with the rest of the world and move to DST like everybody else. The third option, by process of elimination, is for America to acquiesce to Hoosier stubbornness, drop 60 years of tradition and stop using DST.\nYou're damn right we choose option three!\nYou see, in reality, we've perverted Franklin's idea by moving our clocks forward. His sole suggestion was to get up with the sun. I hate to break it to all those die-hard DST users, but you're fooling yourselves. You got up at 8 a.m. April 3 and you're getting up at 7 a.m. April 4. I know it; you know it; everybody knows it. So stop playing tricks; leave the clocks alone and just get up earlier!\nSee? Problem solved.
(04/12/04 2:21pm)
Diet, definition one, taken from "The Concise Macquarie Dictionary": an intransitive verb meaning "to select or limit the food one eats to improve one's physical condition or lose weight."\nDiet, definition two, taken from American pop culture: to neurotically refrain from random food items with little benefit to overall health.\nAmerica is absolutely amazing in this regard. Every week, it seems some food is good for you while some other food is suddenly the health equivalent of Satan. Even the rather benign egg caused quite a stir when it triumphantly returned from the nutritional blacklist a few years ago.\nI once read a report from a reputable source claiming vitamin C had no nutritional benefit and, conversely, was quite effective at hardening the arteries. This is after centuries of using o.j. to chase away colds! What's depressing is I'm sure somebody swore off the dastardly juice the day that report came out.\nWe are currently anti-carbohydrate, and everybody is jumping on the band wagon. From Subway to Burger King, restaurants now offer menu items that are "Atkins Approved." I've been to hamburger shops where they offer to wrap your greasy, grade F, cheese-coated meat in a sheaf of lettuce in order to make it healthier. Does anybody see the break in logic on this one?\nIn waging this healthy-marketing war, one restaurant in particular has taken the food service industry down to an all-time low. Drum roll please …\nI give to you the one, and hopefully the only, Donatos No Dough Pizza! This unique cuisine advertised as a pizza costs more than a pizza and resembles a baked salad.\n"This new pizza gives low carb dieters more of what they really want," www.donatos.com explains. "Donatos famous Edge-to-Edge toppings without the dough!"\nWhich begs the question, where is the edge of a no-dough pizza?\nSilliness aside, eating a doughless pizza is not going to do anything for your pants size. Why? Because later on that night, your stomach will realize it didn't have anything substantial for dinner, and you'll end up with a tub of ice cream right before going to bed. \nLet's refer back to the Macquarie for a much better idea. "Select and limit the food you eat" does not mean hiding from bread. It means don't eat at McDonalds every day, regardless of the menu item, and don't supersize it for an extra 59 cents. As my T'ai Chi instructor says at the end of every class, "Do eat some fresh food, do drink plenty of water and do try and get some sleep."\nThe other fundamental flaw in all this is we do not burn off the food we take in, yeasty shell or not. From what I can tell, the main complaint with carbohydrates is they are high in energy. And, if one consumes more carbohydrates than one uses, the excess carbs convert into fat for storage.\nOf course, there are two ways to balance energy intake and energy output. The first is this idea of lowering your energy intake to meet your minimal needs. The second, which I advocate, is raising the level of exercise instead.\nThe weather is wonderful outside, and simply walking around will do you loads of good. I'm specifically admonishing the people who take the elevator to the fourth floor of Ballantine Hall while holding a diet Coke and walk back down to the third floor. I'm giving equal criticism to the people who ride the campus express from outside the Indiana Memorial Union to all the way up the street to the Auditorium.\nStand up, move your legs and take some pizza with you!
(04/02/04 4:30am)
Every once in a while, it is heartening to unfold a copy of The New York Times and see only happy headlines and happy pictures. This happened Wednesday when page one spoke of increases in congressional child care, barroom pancakes for early-bird Yankees fans and a Buddhist monk who had his bag of string stolen but got it back from a hairdresser who found it on the street.\nRight at the top was a great headline: "Bush allows Rice to testify on 9-11 in a public session."\nThis is a gratifying turn of events and not simply because I like seeing Bush defeated. Condoleezza Rice needs to testify because it forces the Bush administration to remember it works for the people. For far too long, Bush and his cronies have acted with the utmost impunity. Combined with his staff's top-notch ability to keep mum, it is hard as hell to know what they're actually up to.\nAn honest president is an open president, and Bush has been anything but open. One of "The Daily Show's" favorite games is to see how many times White House spokespeople repeat the same one-line message in a single news conference. The Bushies are notorious for avoiding questions from the press and for not deviating from the official message of the day. Can someone infer anything good from such secrecy?\nI doubt anything Rice says will be terribly earth-shattering. Still, Bush's zeal in gagging her makes it plausible she knows one or two things of interest. Up until now, Bush had invoked executive privilege to keep those items quiet. This little caveat keeps cabinet conversations confidential in order to allow candid speech between the president and his secretaries.\nThese political games are all fine and dandy in most circumstances. But there is only one thing Bush can fear would force him to strain his credibility in an election year. And that, of course, is if he learned of the threat and ignored it.\nIf that's the case: damn executive privilege. I want to know about it.\nAccording to the Times, Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney will also testify before the commission, but not under oath. Thomas Kean, the commission's chairman, has decided not to press the issue.\n"(Kean) suggested that it would be improper to try to place Bush and Cheney under oath, noting that they had already made a major concession by agreeing to appear," the Times said.\nFor some reason, Kean thinks Bush is being accommodating just by showing up. Back in the 1960s, Kean said, the Warren Commission asked Lyndon Johnson to testify about the Kennedy assassination. Johnson refused, saying in a letter: "Presidents don't do that."\nIn other words, Johnson said presidents don't have to stand before their bosses and be held accountable. He was wrong then and is still wrong now. It's time for Bush to learn that lesson, as well.\nThe president and vice president should be placed under oath. Why should we give them the loophole to not tell the truth? The American people are their superiors, and as our representatives, the commission should stop at nothing to find out who was responsible in 2001.\nKnowing who is at fault will not change the death count of Sept. 11. But, if we discover a negligent president, we might lower the body count from 2004 through 2008.
(03/26/04 4:12am)
The spring breaks I've had in the past have always been relatively uneventful. They usually consisted of staying in Bloomington and sleeping. This year, I made slightly more interesting plans and joined the hordes of college kids bound for Mexico.\nI never realized it before, but we really do invade the country. According to the U.S. Department of State, more than 100,000 students travel to Cancun alone. That's 20 percent of the city's entire population! And Cancun does not bare the brunt alone. Acapulco also brings in battalions of credit card-wielding students, all ready for a raucous good time.\nWe all know the main goals of spring break in places like these. Get drunk, show some skin and come home more tired than when you left. A combination of bearing witness to this mayhem and talking with my sister, who lives there, led me to wonder: What do the natives think?\nBy all rights, Mexico is a pretty conservative place. I freely admit spandex is in fashion and soft-core porn is sold at newsstands. Nevertheless, most of the Mexicans I saw did not show much in the way of skin themselves. It's the mentality of "showing off is fine as long as neither I nor my daughter engage in it personally."\nBeach towns are slightly more lax about these social rules. However, if your eyes weren't too blurred from the free-flowing Corona, you probably noticed all the beach peddlers wore long pants, button down shirts and shoes -- not sandals. Women wore either long pants or full-length skirts. The single exception I saw to this rule was a rather freaky-looking guy in sparkly glasses and a shirt that read "Massage Terapy."\nMy sister explained why Mexicans dress this way in their perpetually hot climate. Apparently, shorts and T-shirts are for boys. When you become an adult, you are supposed to look respectable. \nSo take this generally conservative atmosphere and inject a several thousand uninhibited Americans fresh out of winter, and what do you get?\nI imagine, to a lot of Mexicans, our spring break is an offensive, ridiculous fantasy. For sure, heads were turning as this rare breed of blonde-headed creature waltzed down Main Street with no pants on. But they were turning for two reasons. No man on Earth -- regardless of upbringing -- would deny the qualities of spring break scenery. But, they also were turning with that one eyebrow cocked stare explicitly asking, "What the hell was that?" Even if it happens every year, I can't imagine they get used to the idea.\nDo you think taxi drivers felt comfortable driving ladies to the pajama party at the Palladium Nightclub on St. Patrick's Day? These women weren't exactly wearing high school pajama-day flannels. Instead, they were stepping out of little faux Volkswagen Beetles in nothing more than heels and select items from the Victoria's Secret catalog. Now, I always advocate wearing lingerie whenever the occasion arises. However, it seems to me it would have been prudent for these girls to at least wrap a sarong around themselves en route to the club.\nYes, yes, yes, as the providers of enormous amounts of tourism dollars we are entitled to do whatever we wish. They need the money, therefore they need to deal with our whims. This was the pervading attitude of the spring breakers in Acapulco, and we need to show a bit more respect for our hosts.\nBy all means, have fun. Show skin on the beach, in private clubs and hotel rooms. Immerse yourself in a drunken sway of lecherous debauchery for all I care. But next time, remember you're guests of Mexico. Think about the locals from time to time.
(03/22/04 6:11am)
Saturday marked the one-year anniversary of the second Iraq war. Protesters around the world turned out en masse to denounce the continued occupation of Iraq by coalition forces. In an effort to sway public opinion, Secretary of State Colin Powell traveled to Iraq to highlight the progress since bombs first fell on Baghdad.\nThe largest measure of success Powell pointed out was the recent adoption of the interim Iraqi constitution. March 8, the Iraqi Governing Council signed the document dictating the conduct of the Iraqi government until a permanent constitution replaces it in late 2005, according to The Associated Press. The interim constitution will take effect June 30.\nFeisal Istrabadi, 41, was the principal legal drafter of the interim constitution. Istrabadi works as a private-practice lawyer in Indiana and Illinois. He became involved in the process through one of his clients. Doctor Adnan Pachachi, the former foreign minister of Iraq and a member of the Iraqi Governing Council, employs Istrabadi as a legal affairs advisor.\n"It was a very intensive and rewarding experience," Istrabadi said.\nThe constitution recognizes Islam as the official religion of the state and allows the government to call upon it for legislation. Still, it guarantees free religious practice to all Iraqi citizens, according to the BBC Web site.\nSome of the main problems were addressing Kurdish interests and the role of Islam in the future government, Istrabadi said. The document tries to narrow the divide between the Kurdish and Arab ethnic groups.\n"(The document) recognizes that there is a regional government in Northern Iraq that had had de facto independence for 12 years," Istrabadi said. "The document attempts, during the interim period, to reintegrate that portion of Iraq into a unified Iraqi state."\nFor Istrabadi, the most important part of the three-month project happened March 8.\n"The biggest success is that the document was eventually agreed to by 25 out of 25 members of the governing council without a single dissenting vote," he said.\nThe final vote was unanimous, but members of the governing council expressed reservations about the interim constitution. Some Shi'ite members made the most noticeable complaints, which ultimately delayed adopting the document.\nStill, Istrabadi is quick to point out that these complaints came from only five members of the council. Hence, they were a minority within both the 13 member Shi'ite party and the governing council as a whole, Istrabadi said.\nJohn Walbridge, a professor for the Near Eastern Languages and Cultures department, expressed concern with the outcome of the interim constitution. Without addressing the aforementioned problems, the document will not affect much change in Iraq, Walbridge said.\n"It is an interim law to make Iraq officially an independent country again, but it hasn't solved any of the fundamental political issues," Walbridge said. "All it has really done is put off those problems so we can say the country is independent, which of course it won't be in any real sense."\nBut addressing those issues is not the purpose of the non-elected interim government or the interim constitution, said NELC Professor Zaineb Istrabadi, the sister of Feisal Istrabadi. She argued their sole purpose is to prepare for the elections later this year or in early 2005.\n"It makes common sense that an elected government would deal with the problems of the people." Zaineb said. "In other words, you need representatives to talk about the problems of the people and not appointed or self-appointed leadership."\n-- Contact staff writer Cameron Thibos at cthibos@indiana.edu.
(03/12/04 5:20am)
All right girls, all together now, stick your heads in the sand. One. Two. Three. Go!"\nPlop!\n"Hey," a garbled voice shouts. "It's dark down here. I can't see what's going on!"\n"Very true dear, but what you can't see can't hurt you. Blissful ignorance is much better than looking around and learning what really happens in life. Now just stay down here until you are 65 and can handle the world."\nWhose conversation do you suppose I am depicting? What group would voluntarily allow their heads and their asses to switch places? Why, the Girl Scouts of Waco, Texas, of course!\nIn the past couple of weeks, Waco's Girl-Scouting population has dropped to a less than robust two members. One troop closed down while the other dwindled in the face of record withdrawals. Now, the two remaining members must stalwartly trudge on under the financial siege of a cookie boycott.\nIt was the ever-vigilant members of Pro-Life Waco who started the Brownie exodus. According to these guys, the Girl Scouts made a mistake worthy of Judas himself when they began supporting the heathen concept of sex education.\nSatan-run Planned Parenthood provides the half-day program "Nobody's Fool." It provides an overview, for anyone interested, of the sexual continuum awaiting these youngsters in later years. The devilishly-named Bluebonnet Council, which administers several troops in the Waco area, endorses the program but does not require attendance by the scouts.\nThe complimentary booklet was a cause of great offense. According to London's Sunday Telegraph (March 7), it illustrated various techniques, such as condom application and intercourse. It contained chapters on masturbation and homosexuality.\n"It embarrassed me to look at it with my husband," one mother said. \nI'm confused. This woman is so uptight about sex that educational pamphlets embarrass her? You would think she is used to the whole idea by now, considering it is a prerequisite to motherhood.\n"It's not that we're a bunch of activists," concerned mother Lisa Aguilar said. "We're just a bunch of moms who care about their kids."\nNo Ms. Aguilar, you don't care for your children. \nCaring parents do not promote the ignorance of reality, such as the existence of homosexuals. In fact, they do not deny their children education on any subject.\nCaring parents are not against the onset of puberty. They do not make adolescents feel bad about experimenting with masturbation or experiencing sexual urges. Good parents find ways to teach their children what's happening.\nMost of all, caring parents are not in self-denial about sex in middle and high school. They then make every effort to keep their child safe if he or she engages in such activities. Regardless of religious ideals, it is too big a risk in today's world to only preach abstinence. Not everyone will listen, and without the knowledge of proper safety equipment the results can be disastrous.\nParents like those in Waco need to start living in reality. By condemning the notion of planned parenthood (which means both abstaining from sex and practicing safe sex), they are, in effect, promoting the idea of unplanned parenthood. This nightmare alone should cause parents to embrace sexual education, not shun it.\nI'll say it again: the sex will happen, but it should not happen in ignorance of the consequences or the mitigators. \nMs. Aguilar, get your head out of the sand.
(03/05/04 4:19am)
I received a letter last week requesting immediate aid for an extremely important cause. The situation is dire and requires the unlimited attention and monetary donations from humanitarians like myself. I am devoting this column to that cause in the hopes fellow IU students will be moved to open their wallets and help those in need. Here is the situation:\nPrincess Jane Etete, the daughter of King Oti Etete of the Ogoni Kingdom in Nigeria, is in trouble. Her father's untimely death following a military coup left her destitute. According to Nigerian tradition, she cannot take possession of her father's wealth, valued at $23,560,000, because she does not have a male sibling.\nThankfully, her father was a noble man. He secretly gave her the relevant documents needed to invest the money overseas. In order to achieve this, she needs our aid in purchasing a bungalow for her and her mother to live in while the transactions take place.\n"By the special grace of God," she begs, help her in this trial and she will reward you with a portion of her father's riches.\nRight next door in the Cote d'Ivoire, Felix Kamara sends an even more urgent request. The son of the director of finance for the Sierra Leone Diamond and Mining Corporation now lives in exile because of his military service to the former Sierra-Leone regime. The new government of Sierra Leone requested that the Cote d'Ivoire expel Kamara and freeze his assets totaling $9 million. To keep this from happening, Kamara will give $1.35 million in exchange for your account name, account number and bank address.\nKamara's e-mail came from a Hotmail account. Princess Etete's request originated from either the United Kingdom or Italy, depending on which version you read. \nThe princess's plea causes me to ponder the benefits of the 37-cent stamp.\nStamps provide checks on the flow of mail washing up against our doors. When mail costs money, you at least know the sender is serious even if the proposal is ridiculous.\nThese days, any random Joe Schmo can conjure up the most bizarre fantasies and then share them for free with the rest of the world. There are no checks on the content or on the validity of the producer. Subsequently, the amazing possibilities of mass communication via the Internet deteriorate rapidly as rubbish proliferates cyberspace.\nTeachers warned you throughout high school that Web sites cannot be trusted, and it is easy to see why. Nine out of 10 have no redeeming social value whatsoever. I'm sure there is plenty of useful information out there somewhere, but how can you discern the important kernel from the surrounding garbage?\nThe above buggery is an extreme example, and I pray no one is gullible enough to fall for it. But what about the more subtle forms of fraud? If a Web site is maintained by a Ph.D, is it accurate? What if the Ph.D lives in prison and is a doctor of phooey?\nThe point is, you can put anything in a Web site or e-mail message and claim it as fact. I admit you can do this in printed media, but the costs act as a filter for the filth.\nYeah, yeah, it's everyone's right to put out information, even if it is false. But do we really want to exercise that right? The Internet could be absolutely invaluable as an educational tool, but by polluting the waters so much we're making a mockery of mass communication. If we want the Internet to have a shred of usefulness in 20 years, let's exercise some discipline and take out the trash.
(02/27/04 4:17am)
Good morning! It is going to be a beautiful, sunny Friday today with temperatures reaching the upper 40s. But it won't be around for long, so take this newspaper outside! The park beckons.\nTo celebrate the week's end, we're going to play one of my favorite Friday games. It's called "Guess the Irony," or "How on Earth Did They Miss Such a Blatantly Obvious Point?"\nHere's the situation -- I woke up last Monday morning on a couch that I didn't entirely remember going to sleep on. Bleary-eyed, I rolled over to find a CNN anchorwoman confronting me from the television set. It was Headline News, and the immaculately bland face of a woman who didn't really want to be up at 8 a.m. was pitching the stories coming up after the commercial break.\nOne story in particular piqued my interest. Apparently, a new study had come out linking television to the enlarging problem of enlarging children. I sat up chuckling as the advertisements fluttered past, waiting for the martyred anchor to condemn her own profession. In my head, the eulogy ran something like this:\n"The American Such-and-Such Association announced today a child's rear end is directly proportional to the amount of hours it spends flattened in front of the television."\nBut did this happen? In short, no. According to the new study, food advertisements on television cause children to demand the salivating double quarter pounders their parents subsequently buy for them. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, television is an innocent relay in the dastardly game of marketing. It's a classic case of don't shoot the messenger.\nThe Kaiser Family Foundation's report found "the number of ads children see on TV has doubled from 20,000 to 40,000 (per year) since the 1970s, and the majority of ads targeted to kids are for candy, cereal and fast food," (The Associated Press, Feb. 24).\nI have one incredibly simple question for the Foundation. How long (they can use scientific notation if need be) did these kids spend in front of the tube to see 40,000 ads per year?\nLet's do a bit of math. Assuming there are 20 ads in a half-hour program, these children watched 2,000 shows. That's 1,000 programming hours, or approximately six weeks of solid television.\nIs there any great wonder the Foundation went on to report "15.3 percent of children aged six to 11 were listed as overweight in 1999-2000?"\nHere's an idea -- get up! The advertisements are only a fraction of the problem. The child is still sitting there all day every day without moving. If, instead, the television was off, the ads would cease to be a problem, and he or she would get some exercise.\nBrilliant!\nBut this isn't the route they're taking. A collaborating report from the American Psychological Association called on the Federal Communications Commission to restrict ads aimed at children. The report claimed small children do not understand the intent of advertising and therefore cannot ignore it.\nOf course, this skirts the underlying issue. Both the Kaiser Foundation and the APA missed the fact that a sedentary lifestyle is bad for children, regardless of what they're watching. Kids have an enormous amount of energy, so yank them away from the boob tube and take them outside! May I suggest the time-honored Frisbee? Above all, go enjoy the sun!\nLike I said, the park beckons.
(02/20/04 5:03am)
This week, I have the opportunity to say something I never thought possible in a column -- Rhode Island, the smallest state in the union, is pissing people off!\nYes, ladies and gentlemen, the College Republicans at the Roger Williams University of Bristol announced the one -- and the only -- white scholarship! Any bona fide RWU caucasian is eligible for the single $50 prize. But, don't come on down if you're even slightly tinted because you will never make it past the photo verification of whiteness. The Republicans are pros at disgusting displays of trickery, so don't try anything shady. They will immediately disqualify you at the first "evidence of bleaching."\nAnd that's not all. As a contestant, you will have the opportunity to tell your future benefactors "Why you are proud of your white heritage and explain what being white means to you" in a 100-word essay. The fabulous prize will be awarded right before the guest lecture, "How the Civil Rights Movement Destroyed the Black Community," in honor of Black History Month.\nThe Master of Ceremonies is Jason Mattera, the scholarship's spokesman. The New York Times ironically describes him as a 20-year-old Hispanic who pays part of his tuition with a $5000 minority scholarship.\nWhew. This reminds me of a cracked-out version of the anti-affirmative action bake sale held by IU's own Committee for Freedom last December. Amazingly, RWU's Republicans garnered national support for their scholarship, making it a much more lucrative parody for that one lucky white person. Their Web site boasts more than $2000 in donations from across the country.\nNow, the world has a long history of making political points through ridiculous satire and parody -- hence such antics should not surprise us greatly. But race is one of those topics in America you do not touch with anything but the most serious of 10-foot poles.\nRegardless, Mattera and the RWU College Republicans believe they have a serious point to make, which he elaborated for the Times.\n"If you are a white student on campus, you don't have anyone helping you," he said. "Why is it that only students of color have this?"\nHe's right -- to a certain extent. Locally speaking, this version of white racism (ineptly termed reverse racism) exists at IU, as well, but it is neither absolute nor without reason.\nA successful diversity program at a public university proportionally mimics the state's demographics. Indiana was more than 90 percent white in 2000 and approximately 8.3 percent African American, according to the US Census Bureau.\nBut IU's Web site claims African Americans made up 3.8 percent of the 2002 enrollment. Therefore, the logical step for IU is to aid African Americans who are academically sound but financially unable to attend the University. Indiana University also has low-income financial aid and an affirmative action program for the low-income demographic.\n The RWU College Republicans err in thinking universities are mainly to blame for the skewed playing field. Their warped perception comes from the abundance of privately-sponsored scholarships for minorities. These, unlike state scholarships, have every right to restrict access to the funds.\n Conversely, most state-sponsored, specialized scholarships are not aimed at minorities because they are minorities. Rather, administrators direct their help at groups needing assistance, whoever they may be. It just so happens these two factors often coincide.\n Unfortunately, any aid system is bound to have faults. The current problem is well-off individuals with minority status can still apply for specialized scholarships even though they do not need the aid any more than well-off whites. To remedy this, the IU diversity office needs to focus its affirmative action programs on the individual applicants that need the funds, regardless of race.
(02/13/04 4:16am)
Something truly bizarre showed up in the news last week. An American Airlines pilot wanted to know which passengers were Christians on his Los Angeles to New York flight last Friday. So, he did what any amateur social researcher would do. He asked them to raise their hands.\nTo add to the oddity of the situation, Rodger Findiesen, the pilot in question, queried over the public address system so he couldn't even see the results of his impromptu survey. According to one passenger quoted in Tuesday's Vancouver Sun, he then suggested all of those with their hands in their laps should have a chat with their Christian neighbors to find out what it is all about.\n"(Findiesen said) you can use your time wisely on this flight or you can sit back and watch the movies."\nHe then stopped talking and decided to fly the plane, much to the relief of the many who were upset by this outburst of airborne evangelism.\nOn the face of the situation, Findiesen's question was relatively innocuous, albeit a tad oddball. American Airlines spokesman Tim Wagner said Findiesen wasn't trying to cause a disturbance in any way. So he did not get on the P.A. and grimly order all Christians to the front of the plane. He didn't say, "I'm going to blindfold myself and trust in Jesus for this landing."\nOn the contrary, he was in a rather jolly mood. He recently returned from a week chock-full of Christian fishing in Costa Rica and wanted to share the love, Wagner said in Tuesday's New York Times.\nSo why did people get upset by Jesus' happy fisherman? According to the US Statistical Abstract, 87.2 percent of the world's population was religious in 1998. So most people have a faith, most are proud of their faith and I imagine most would gladly attest to their beliefs if prompted. So what is the problem with asking?\nLet's try a little experiment. Given the following situation, deduce the outcome.\n"Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We're on runway four heading east to Des Moines. While you're waiting, would all Muslims please raise their hands?"\nThat would certainly create a bigger row. I envision extremely uneasy passengers, loud protests and costly lawsuits for American Airlines, Findiesen and his mother for bearing such a terrible tot. \nHowever, since Findiesen asked about Christians, none of this happened. He was grounded for a few days, but other than that he emerged unscathed.\nThis doesn't make any sense. Logically speaking, the two questions are fundamentally the same. It is only our inane connotations that make them different. And that's just wrong.\n Unfortunately, the first thought that would spring into many of the passengers' minds in my example would be, "Oh hell, what am I going to do now?"\n I hope most people got off the bandwagon of 'Muslim equals terrorist' some time ago, but it would be interesting to see how many still feel uneasy sitting next to a person that "looks Muslim."\n Worldwide, more than one billion people would raise their hand to my question. Out of that one billion, a handful might pose a threat to American lives. No one should fear an innocent person because of his or her faith, and no one should need to hide their faith out of fear.\nWe need to ask ourselves: "Why do we care what religion to which somebody belongs?" If you know the answer, please raise your hand.
(02/06/04 4:26am)
Houston, we have a wardrobe malfunction."\nAnd now, CBS has a problem. MTV has a problem. The National Football League has a problem. The Federal Communications Commission has a problem. And of course, the American Family Association has a problem.\nThe logic is simple. Premise: There was a breast on network television. Conclusion: The world is going to hell. Frankly, I think the worst we can expect is a 10-day stint in limbo for this one.\nI personally witnessed the episode from a comfy couch, and I would state under oath it wasn't that impressive. The stage encompassing shot, i.e. far away, lasted for a few seconds at most. Centered in the frame, Justin Timberlake yanked at Janet Jackson's D-cup until, by some miracle, it came off in his hand. A 12-year-old boy's dream-come true.\nAnd herein lies the problem. There were millions of 12-year-olds in attendance. In response, outraged parents "flooded [the CBS switchboard] with angry phone calls," according to ABC News Online, in an attempt to salvage their children's virgin eyes post facto.\nTheir complaints were over-the-top by any standard.\n"That was the most disgusting thing that I have ever seen at a sports spectacle," baseball coach Tommy Lasorda told the BBC. "They just absolutely ruined the fact that it was one of the greatest Super Bowl games that I have ever seen."\nOh please! When did a glimpse of a woman's body ever ruin a guy's day? I certainly hope Lasorda never once looked at the cheerleaders -- his entire week would be destroyed!\nAnd people complained about more than the tumbling tit. The American Family Association details all of the show's sexual offenses in its rather indignant Web site. It lists, in order, "Janet Jackson grabbing her breasts, Sean P. Diddy repeatedly fondling his crotch, striptease cheerleaders, gyrating transvestites (gyrating transvestites!?), simulated lesbian sex and Jackson and Timberlake groping each other."\nIn a footnote, it also condemns the Bud Lite chimpanzee for making advances on his attractive female owner. Bad monkey!\nSomething seems incredibly backward about this.\nI simply cannot understand America's aversion to sex when it simultaneously embraces violent entertainment. Why do parents choose to expose children to senseless, counter-productive violence over enjoyable, wonderful sex? Why prefer hurtful acts to the greatest physical pleasure in nature?\nI have a suggestion. Let's listen to Europe and company for once -- they figured this out long ago. Across the big pond, a harmless breast is just that -- harmless. But you certainly cannot keep an AK-47 in your flat with a $10 collector's permit.\nTo exemplify the difference in mindsets, I hunted the Internet for a photo of what Janet actually bared. There were plenty of pictures on reputable American Web sites, but they were all covered before or after shots. In fact, I had to go all the way to New Zealand to find an uncensored close-up of the offending orb.\nThey printed it in the newspaper.\n America needs to stop kidding itself. Sex is about as natural as it gets, so don't worry about it so much. Just because a child sees a body part on television does not mean he or she will lead an any less moral life than they would otherwise.\nPlease don't misunderstand, I'm not advocating slipping a porno into the child's VCR. What I am asking is for parents to re-evaluate their priorities. Watching a "Lord of the Rings" slaughter on a 50-foot screen will damage your child more than an inch-wide, middle-aged breast on a two-foot television ever will.
(01/30/04 5:03am)
President George W. Bush threw a bit of a shocker to us two weeks ago. He wants to go to the moon.\nIn the immortal words of Han Solo, "I've got a bad feeling about this."\nWhen Bush made the announcement Jan. 14, skeptical commentators immediately pounced on it as a pre-election carrot that will be dropped into a JuiceTiger after the November elections. \nAt this point, Darth Vader Bush counters, "I find your lack of faith disturbing."\nBut, the lack of faith is justified. The thought that Bush is digging for some hype with yet another grand plan for America isn't exactly far fetched.\nThe reason is reflected by what one person said in an Associated Press poll, as quoted by The Economist, Jan. 17.\n"You can't have a war, cut taxes, have the economy in a garbage pail and spend billions going into space."\nHow terribly true. Unfortunately, we do have all of the above except for space exploration, so by process of elimination, Mars won't show up anytime soon.\n"So what?" one may ask. One's rationale might be that Big Bush proposed a similar idea in 1989 and nothing came of that (hint, hint). If this one crashes and burns as well, we won't be any worse off than we are now.\nBut, that's not quite correct. With this plan comes the death of NASA.\nLet's look at the facts. According to his speech, Bush offered to donate a paltry $1 billion over the next five years to a project that NASA estimates will cost about $170 billion. Keep in mind NASA's history of grossly underestimating costs, which means the final price tag will most likely be several times that amount.\nBut Bush doesn't have to worry about the final cost. If he is re-elected, he will make it through his second term in office by spending only an extra billion on space exploration. That's not a hard promise to make or fulfill. After that, it is out of his hands.\nLet's assume he does keep this plan alive until 2008. The timeline says complete the space station and retire the space shuttle by 2010, land on the Moon between 2015 and 2020 and get to Mars at some point after that. None of this will happen before he leaves office. After that, there are three more presidencies in which the plan can die a slow death on a shelf.\nBut what Bush has done with this plan is put all the eggs in one basket. According to the Jan. 26 TIME magazine, NASA scratched the Hubble Telescope, one of its most successful projects, because it cannot afford to maintain it with this new Mars priority. The shuttle system will be decommissioned in 2010, so all of our other neat space toys will sit in orbit without anybody to look after them. \nThe shuttle, telescopes and probes account for 65 percent of NASA's budget and nearly all of its current projects. Now, it has lost or will lose its funding in order to concentrate on the moon.\nThe only way this won't happen is if a proposal with mixed popularity can survive four presidencies, 16 rounds of legislative budget cuts, a war, tax cuts and an trash-compacted economy. To get through this gauntlet, NASA would have to be really lucky.\nAnd as Obi-Wan Kenobi said, "In my experience, there's no such thing as luck"
(01/23/04 4:22am)
I have a bone to pick with the Democratic candidates. It stems back to something I learned during my first-ever government lesson in the fifth grade. I seem to recall Mrs. Heffernan mentioning something about mud-slinging.\nHowever, when she talked about it, mud-slinging was something inept candidates did against the other party in order to make themselves look good. She never mentioned anything about digging up dirt on your own party's members.\nBut the way these little Democratic boys are acting on stage these days is quite revolting. Take a gander at some of these headlines. "Democratic rivals step up attacks on Dean" (The Frontrunner, Dec. 11), "Who's the meanest of them all" (Salon.com, Oct. 27), "Kerry criticizing Dean's criticisms," (Boston Globe, Dec. 22).\nIn the end, of course, all of this infighting only hurts the Democrats. Voters want a well-oiled, cohesive package that will work together to get things done. With every candidate attacking every other candidate, it becomes blatantly clear that the party is in tatters, and cannot work as a group anymore. If a party cannot function within itself, how well do you think it will function with the opposition?\nThe Democrats began to lose their focus after the 2000 election fiasco. They became even more disoriented when they lost the House of Representatives midterm elections. The non-presidential party has only lost seats three times since 1862 according to Vital Statistics on American Politics. The upshot was that the only battle cry the Democrats could come up with when the 2004 race began was "We hate Bush."\nThis proved a relatively effective, if juvenile, platform that most of the candidates used during the beginning of their campaigns. However, I naively assumed that once we moved closer to the primaries all that rhetoric would change. Candidates would focus on their solutions to the problems, not on the drawbacks of the competition.\nWhich would you prefer? Choice one: "Because those options are bad, choose me." Or choice two: "I believe I am a good candidate, here are my goals, I hope you agree."\nInstead, rivals have focused on blunders. For example, they attacked Howard Dean when he said he wanted "to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," as quoted by the Associated Press, Nov. 4. John Kerry picked a fight with Dean about his stance on the war with Iraq. \nBoston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi was dead-on in her Dec. 9 column.\n"[Kerry] can't reverse his fortunes by blaming Dean for pushing Democrats to the left on war. Kerry must sell Kerry."\nCandidates need to let the ire and indignation to comments like Dean's come from the public and the media. Their time is much better spent promoting their own ideas.\nTheir new battle cry, "everybody in my party sucks except me," amuses me to a certain extent because some candidates are bound to drop out and endorse someone else before the primaries are over.\nOnce a nomination has been made, most of the Democrats will vote for him in November, regardless of their prior preferences. Once that happens, the Democrats will be back to the "We hate Bush" slogan, and we'll be back to where we started.\nLearn from Mrs. Heffernan. Stop screaming and act like respectable politicians. Otherwise, you'll have to pout through Bush 2004-2008 as well.