79 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(01/31/08 4:12am)
As an IU and IDS alumna, I am extremely proud of Editor-in-Chief Carrie Ritchie’s firm response to the “off-the-record” request by the Student Alliance for National Security during Meghan O’Sullivan’s speech. It was outrageous for O’Sullivan and the student group to ask for a public lecture not to be reported in the press. How would people who are unable to attend such lectures due to prior engagements, disabilities, lack of transportation or for any other reason learn about what was said? Reporting the details of these events reflects a core journalistic principle: telling people in this community what happened in a public space. The group’s eventual cancellation of the speech is a victory for the First Amendment, for student journalists and for the IDS. Former Student Media Director Dave Adams, too, would be proud.
(04/26/06 3:54am)
In 10 days, after I stuff the final contents of my room into boxes, I will put on a funny hat and robe and be done. Like thousands of you, I too will be marching into Assembly Hall wondering if my family can spot me in the sea of graduates. \nAs I write this -- my last column and piece in the Indiana Daily Student -- on my Toshiba that's lasted me four years, I wonder if any of you are thinking the same things.\nWho will I stay in touch with? How will my first day of work go? Isn't there a cheaper health care plan out there? When will I be able to visit Bloomington again? The future is daunting. But for now, as I study for my last finals and read my last textbooks, I cannot help but replay the last four years in my mind.\nThe world was a much different place when we entered this University. As the first class to enter IU in a post-Sept. 11 world, we have had to deal with much more than just term papers and hangovers. We, the largest freshman class ever at IU, knew what we were getting ourselves into when we took on the world.\nSince the fall of 2002, we have witnessed a long-lasting war in Iraq, a disaster in the Gulf Coast, a divisive yet momentous election, a heartbreaking shuttle disaster, a beloved governor's death in office, deadly terrorist attacks in London and Madrid, an unexplainable tsunami and the sad passing of our childhood president. \nAnd, of course, we have watched this University change. Remember the first floor of the then-Main Library as a freshman? Nothing like the Information Commons now. We received a No. 1 party school ranking and subsequently dealt with Playboy, porn in dorms and Teen Keira scandals. For one year, we enjoyed "free" buses, and we began to save the Athletics Department with a $30-per-year involuntary donation.\nWe had some hard times. We lost Ashley Crouse and Christine Wampler, among other classmates. We witnessed a plane crash, a suicide attempt at Ballantine Hall and the recovery of Jill Behrman's body. But we had some great times, too. We brought in James Earl Jones, Jimmy Fallon and Ann Coulter. We got Facebook. We rode some historic Little 500s and ran some great IUSA elections.\nThe world has changed, IU has changed, and so has our perspective. Life as an 18-year-old standing in front of a freshman dorm on a hot summer day seems like a lifetime away. Though we have shared all these events together, we without a doubt all have individual experiences that will also define our college years. For me, it has been meeting my future husband, late nights and long hours at the IDS, fun-filled nights at the Jif and pulling all-nighters with friends and Polar Pops at the library. Ask yourself. What defines your four years?\nSo now we flip our tassels and we change our statuses on Facebook. Geography: Chicago. Year: Alumna. Relationship Status: Married. Let us take on the world with the same conviction, vigor and humility we did four years ago. Be fearless, class of 2006, and let us change the world for the better.
(04/19/06 3:55am)
Times like ours are complicated, and complicated times come with complicated issues.\nAbout a week ago, a half-dozen retired generals began speaking out against Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and demanded his resignation. The charge: \nmismanagement. \nWait, some people don't like the way their bosses manage things? Sound the alarm!\nSounds quite silly, doesn't it? Look, publicly venting your beef is something no mature person does to their boss -- before or after retirement, military or non-military. I learned this the hard way during my first semesters at the Indiana Daily Student. But I was 19. These generals are much more experienced than that.\nSome would say because the Defense Department's actions monumentally affect so many, we should praise these generals for voicing their dissent, and that speaking out against a policy-maker is more justifiable than speaking out against, say, a CEO of a financial company. I, too, have nothing against dissent. It is essential to a democracy. But I say their timing is way off.\nNot only are we in the middle of a war in Iraq, but we're now facing immediate action with Iran, too. The trials of Saddam Hussein and Zacharias Moussaoui are also reminding us how psychotic these radicals really are. And the Palestinian government just praised a bombing that killed nine Israelis. In other words, we have much bigger fish to fry than complaining about the secretary's management style. \nIf their point is to get a change of leadership, they're not going to get it. Through all the changes in President Bush's cabinet, Rumsfeld has remained on the most solid ground -- Bush has never indicated he wanted a change at the Pentagon. He recently released a statement saying Rumsfeld has his "full support and deepest appreciation." Surprised? You shouldn't be, and neither should the generals. If they knew anything about the administration for which they worked, they would have known their dissent was not going to faze the president.\nIs there a better time to voice such opinions? It seems to me that the presidential election of 2008 would be a much better time to discuss management style matters because there is actual potential for change, politics are heightened and the people have a chance to react. Right now, all their comments can do is damage the Defense Department's reputation and hurt morale. Or, they could just get over it. Like any other boss, the secretary cannot please everyone. \nThe bigger problem is why we pay so much attention to stories like these. I know many colleagues would disagree with me on this one, but part of the fault lies with journalists who, once presented with such information, go gaga over yet more criticism of the Bush administration. I don't think journalists seek out stories that damage the administration's reputation, but they sure don't mind the implications their stories have.\nLook, I don't like Rumsfeld all that much either. Out of all of Bush's cabinet members, his arrogance bothers me the most. Yes, he's made mistakes, and I wish he would at least acknowledge them, too. But I'd rather have someone firm like him than a wishy-washy idiot who caters to every whim of dissent -- internal or external.
(04/12/06 5:22am)
I have been at the Indiana Daily Student for a while now. Four years to be exact. Every year, we get the same complaints -- our coverage of minorities sucks, a new reporter misquoted an important source, the Opinion page is too far to the left and we pay too much attention to one party over the other during the Student Association elections.\nBut the complaint that runs through our office the most (and is sometimes the most credible) is that the IDS unfairly represents the greek community. \nIn our coverage, it's difficult to strike a balance between the controversies -- hazings, being kicked off campus, alcohol violations, etc. -- and the good things -- recruitment, philanthropy events and campus involvement. Sure, some IDS staffers are members of sororities and fraternities, but on the whole, greek life is foreign to most of us in Ernie Pyle 120, and for most students at IU. \nTake Facebook, for example. The anti-greek groups include Gamma Delta Iota: God Damn Independent; Oh Boy I'm Not Greek and Damn Proud of It; and I Was Popular in High School So I Don't Need the Greek System. Perhaps the divide between greeks and non-greeks is as wide as the one between East Coasters and Midwesterners. \nNah.\nBut, really. The greek community takes a lot of flak. An alcohol violation? How could they?! Like we're supposed to be shocked that people in the greek community like to party. Yes, we laugh at the frat tuck, sweat bands and aviator glasses. Yes, we sometimes evaluate the sanity of people who desire to live with 200 people of the same sex. And yes, sometimes it's enjoyable to make fun of their frattiness and sororityness. But when it comes down to it, the greeks aren't so bad.\nThey raised $677,000 for Riley Hospital through IU Dance Marathon last year. In 2003, they donated $45,000 and 16,000 hours to the community. Basically, they're involved on campus and in the community. And that's more than many IU students can say about themselves. \nThis week is an especially difficult week for them. They have lost Nichole Birky of Delta Zeta, Christine Wampler at a Phi Kappa Sigma formal in Louisville, Ky., and are remembering Ashley Crouse, a Kappa who died one year ago in a car wreck. Somehow, tragedy strikes this community ever year. And they come together.\nNo matter what squabbles or rivals they have with other houses at the time, fraternities and sororities support each other no matter what. They show class. They show solidarity, and not because they have to. Their strength and involvement is genuine in every way.\nI didn't always think like this. But last year when I saw thousands of students donning greek letters marching down Jordan Avenue to remember just one of their fallen members, I realized this group of people deserves more than they often get. \nSo when you run into a greek, ask them how they're doing. Let them know, for once, that we care about them as much as they care about this campus.
(04/05/06 5:00am)
I love Bloomington. It's the only city I know where you can find an elderly man in overalls wearing an NRA cap and a slew of obnoxious East Coast girls in the same restaurant. \nIf you haven't noticed already, Bloomington has changed quite a bit in the last 15 years. We got another movie theater, an Olive Garden, and best of all, a Chipotle. \nWe also have Smallwood.\nThe more recent economic boom in Bloomington has allowed builders to create such luxury-living monstrosities as Pavillion on Seventh Street, Omega on Walnut Street, 10th & College, Kirkwood, the Mercury, and yes, Smallwood. It's a brilliant business plan, but it kind of sucks for the rest of us.\nThese luxury apartments are geared toward out-of-state students who have parents with beaucoup bucks. Like I said, brilliant. But the problem is they are practically the only ones who live in these places, and well-off Bloomingtonians who want a downtown living experience are discouraged from them. Why?\nTake Smallwood, for example. It's basically an off-campus dorm where everyone can drink alcohol and smoke weed without getting caught. (Ironically, it sits across from the Justice Building.) It's loud. It's the East Coast fraternity. A mini Long Island. Do you think affluent Midwesterners want to be around that?\nIn no way am I anti-development. I want to see Bloomington grow and flourish. What I don't understand is why these people choose to attend school in Indiana, yet live as if they're still at home. My problem with these people is they don't understand Midwest culture because they don't try to. And believe me, it's baffling to most of us who are from here. Before the Smallwood boom, these people settled for North Jordan Avenue or the nicest houses they could find. At least they mingled with, gasp, Hoosiers. \nDo you want to know what else sucks about those places (besides mostly everything)? It creates an IU version of the Haves and Have Nots. You know, the students who work hard for scholarships, good grades and who have part-time jobs versus those who are just at college for four years to screw around and get stoned. I earned my degree to get a real-life job, not one that my daddy picked out for me. \nRegardless of what you are thinking right now, I am not a hater. I have some great friends from Long Island and New Jersey who live in these monstrosities, but I know what they do with their free time: not much of anything. There are so many needy people in Bloomington who could use your services. If you are not going to get a part-time job or fully concentrate on your studies, at least volunteer. Possible options: Middle Way House, the Monroe County Public Library, or the Community Kitchen. They would be more than happy to use you.\nNot everyone on the Haves side is selfish. Not everyone from the East Coast is rich. And of course, some of these people actually care about school. But I've lived in Bloomington nearly all my life, and I cannot stand by and watch snobby, rich, temporary residents take over our beloved, Midwestern-esque downtown.
(03/29/06 4:43am)
If only we were all as sensible as Bill O'Reilly.\nNo, really. I'm not joking.\nAmid this much-needed immigration debate, so many solutions are being tossed around that Americans are left spinning in dizzy circles wondering what the hell is going on. Terms like amnesty, guest-worker program and "catch-and-release" aren't helping matters, either.\nLeave it to old Bill to help us out.\nAfter reviewing the U.S. House's plan, the Senate Judiciary Committee's recommendations and the president's proposal, I wondered what my pal Bill thought of the situation. And he actually has the best ideas I've heard so far.\nFirst, O'Reilly suggested the National Guard be deployed to back up the U.S. Border Patrol. Why? The number of illegal immigrants crossing the U.S.-Mexican border would decline and there would be no need for a multimillion-dollar wall, which some House members actually believe in erecting. Plus, National Guardsmen's salaries are already paid for by the government, and utilizing them instead of hiring more Border Patrol would be fiscally sound. \nSecond, O'Reilly calls for an end to the "catch-and-release" program, which is pretty much a joke. The current policy is when illegal immigrants are caught, they are "released" to leave the country on their own accord. Obviously this hasn't worked, and we now have almost 12 million illegal immigrants living here today.\nThird, and perhaps most important, is Bill's assimilation program. He proposes to give illegal residents 60 days (I prefer 90) to register as foreign residents without penalty. These "registered foreign residents" would receive temporary working papers and be fined $3,000 for their crime over the next three years' worth of paychecks. Failure to register by a certain date would be a felony and would mean deportation. After three years, these residents can apply for citizenship, though it will not be guaranteed. They stand in line like everyone else.\nAt the end of his proposal, O'Reilly, shrugging, predicted Congress won't be as reasonable as him and the complicated debate would rage on ... complicatedly. \nOf course it will. Right now, all politicians are concerned with something other than the long-term effects of new immigration legislation -- they're concerned with how it will affect their chances at re-election in 2006 or their presidential prospects in 2008. At a time like this, when we need bipartisanship, swift action and comprehensive, intelligent legislation more than ever, it seems as if the country is completely politically distracted. To call it unfortunate is a gross understatement.\nLook, don't discount my perspective because I'm a white girl who lives in Indiana. My family came over from Greece in the 1930s, but they came over the right, lawful way. The courage of my great-grandparents, Theofilos and Maria Galoozis, will never be forgotten. I've seen the effects of immigration then, and I see it now. My father once lost his job because a General Electric plant moved to Mexico. My mother, a fifth-grade teacher in Palatine, Ill., deals with Mexican immigrants every day because she teaches them. \nWith this debate, a lot is at stake for a lot of Americans -- whether you're a citizen or not. For our generation's sake, let's get this one right.
(03/22/06 5:07am)
Caution seniors: Real life is approaching ... and quickly.\nIt's funny how that graduation date sneaks up on you. And if you are somewhat frightened by the fact that in seven weeks we will be for real finally on our own, you are not alone. If you were searching for, interviewing for or visiting a new job while most underclassmen were lying on a beach in Florida during spring break, you are not alone. If you just don't care about writing that last 10-page research paper, you are definitely not alone. \nIt's hard to believe the journey is almost over. Remember when, four or five years ago, standing in front of your freshman dorm with all that unnecessary crap from Target, you thought, "Finally, freedom and the real world. I'm going to be a real adult now!" Not exactly.\nCollege is, in fact, a pseudo world. For the past four years, we have truly lived in a bubble. When we encounter someone on campus who's younger than 18 or older than 30 (minus professor types), we are puzzled for a moment. Most of us have someone paying our bills -- whether it's via loans, parents or scholarships -- and we sort of live in a socioeconomic vacuum. We all have 24-hour access to tech nerds and a library; we have tons of free services, like career counseling and disability services; and most people, regardless of ethnicity or background, interact and get along while doing it. \nSure, we've had more responsibility since graduating high school. In a way, college is the buffer zone between the first 18 sheltered years of our lives and the full-blown real world. But now we must face the music. No more free health care. No more paid cell phone bills. No more it's-OK-to-stay-home-and-be-sick weeks. No more four-month summer vacations. No more winter breaks. \nIt's kind of scary to think that we will be the ones running the show now. For so long, we've claimed we're capable, responsible adults who can take care of ourselves. Now that the time has come, I kind of want to retreat to my childhood shell. I want to be 7 years old again, when my biggest fear was being picked last in gym class and my biggest letdown was Disney canceling "Kids Incorporated" (best show ever, by the way). Is it difficult for anyone else to grasp that our childhoods are over? That we are the ones becoming and doing what our parents, aunts and uncles did when we were kids?\nI still feel like there's something else I need to do, that I can't actually be ready for this real-world stuff. Isn't there another class I need to finish my degree? Isn't there something else I need to know before living on my own? Did my parents feel this way when they left the nest?\nI know journalists are supposed to answer more questions than they pose, but I'm banking on the fact that most of you reading this column feel the same way as I do. And I won't feel so alone.
(03/08/06 4:39am)
Something is happening in North Carolina, and we should all be paying close attention.\nOn Friday, 22-year-old University of North Carolina alumnus Mohammed Taheri-azar rented a Jeep and plowed into a populated gathering place on the Chapel Hill campus, intending to kill. He injured nine people instead. \nMoments after committing this act, he dialed 911 to confess, telling the police, "Come arrest me." When the dispatcher asked why he wanted to kill people, Taheri-azar replied, "It's really to punish the government of the United States for their actions around the world." He later told investigators he wanted to "avenge the deaths of Muslims around the world."\nNow a debate has been sparked about whether or not the act should be labeled terrorism. Should it?\nSome might argue this is a case of stereotyping -- that just because Taheri-azar has a "Middle Eastern-sounding" name and committed his crime in the name of Islam, he is more likely to be labeled a terrorist than if he possessed a "white-sounding" name and committed the act in the name of something else. Some might say his act is trivial compared to other terrorist attacks -- past and future ones -- that he has no connections to terrorist groups, and his attempt at mass murder was a poor one.\nAll these things may be true, but that doesn't that discount Taheri-azar's actions are consistent with the actual definition of terrorism, which is, according to Dictionary.com, "the unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."\nClearly, Taheri-azar wants to intimidate the U.S. government -- with death, mind you -- based on political reasons. He didn't snap and drive through a crowded area because he was having a bad semester or because he was suicidal -- he explicitly stated he was punishing the United States government and avenging deaths of Muslims.\nWhat's even scarier than people disagreeing with me on this matter is Taheri-azar himself. If you have seen any media coverage, you know the guy is bizarre. Who rents a Jeep, plows into a crowd and then calls 911 to say "come get me"? He has a permanent, creepy smirk and has chosen to represent himself on the 18 felony counts he now faces. He's not exactly bright.\nWhat needs to happen now is we must recognize the seriousness of this case and prosecute Taheri-azar on federal terrorism charges. If he isn't charged with committing an act of terrorism, it would send the message that this incident is not considered terrorist in nature. This is entirely dangerous and frightening. Think about if this had happened at IU, which is not far from being possible. What would you think if someone ran over your best friend in the name of punishing the United States? \nLike the UNC College Republicans, we must protest terrorism at our universities. We must follow this case, and make sure Taheri-azar is labeled a terrorist. We're fighting the war on terror abroad. Now we must do the same at home.
(03/02/06 5:33am)
As a longtime staffer at the Indiana Daily Student, I'm embarrassed to say our newspaper has not yet run a story on Rep. Mike Sodrel's new bill, H.R. 4776, unlike most other papers in this state. Finally Monday, the editorial board decided to break the news to IDS readers on this very page through the form of a staff editorial.\nUnfortunately, I can't make it to "Ed Board" meetings because I have a Friday class, so I couldn't be there to disagree. And oh boy, do I ever disagree.\nLet's talk background. In May, the Indiana Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the state, asking the court to prevent prayers in the Statehouse that endorse a particular religion. In November, federal judge David Hamilton ruled in favor of the ICLU, and essentially, the words "Jesus Christ" were banned from invocation at the General Assembly.\nSpeaker of the House Brian Bosma is enthusiastically appealing the decision, obviously. In the mean time, Sodrel has joined the fight against the ridiculous ruling and has proposed another remedy: limiting federal court jurisdiction. In other words, if Sodrel's bill passes, federal courts would not be able to hear any cases involving the content of speech within state legislatures. \nA drastic move? Sure, you could call it drastic. But it's also extremely warranted.\nThe original ruling seems unconstitutional on two grounds: the 10th and First Amendments. Since when does a federal court have the right to rule on what goes on within our state legislature, much less on the content of its speech? It's quite dangerous to allow the federal government so much power over our state business.\nIn its critique, the IDS editorial board inferred that Congress cannot change judicial jurisdiction based on Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution. Yet it's not a question of whether or not Congress can -- it clearly can. In September 2004, Congress voted to prevent federal courts from hearing cases that challenge the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance. So the argument that Sodrel's bill oversteps Congress' powers is a waste of space. Civics 101: The Constitution provides each branch with checks and balances.\nDoes anyone else see a pattern? The bigger question is about removing God -- and yes, Jesus Christ -- from the public sphere. To some, this is OK. Here's a newsflash, though: it might be this way in other parts of the world, but the United States is unique and its people will not let the government be godless. This is a government of the people, for the people, by the people, most of whom believe in God. \n"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Did Congress pass a law that says, in the Indiana General Assembly, the prayer must include a worship of Jesus Christ? Obviously not. What Sodrel is rightly doing is focusing on the second half of that sentence: "Or prohibit the free exercise thereof." \nIf stripping the courts is the way to go, then so be it. I voted for Sodrel in 2004 and I will vote for him again in 2006, if only for his efforts with this bill.
(02/22/06 4:47am)
Like some of my Indiana Daily Student colleagues, last week I was surprised to hear only two tickets are running for the IU Student Association elections. In years past, the IUSA election seasons have been much more, let's say, colorful, than this year's looks to be.\nFor all freshmen (and those who have never paid attention to IUSA before), I would like to offer a bit of insight into the significance of this oh-so-fun two-week period when tickets will do almost anything to win. My advice is: Don't get your hopes up. Candidates will make promises and tickets will get you hyped up about how much students can make a difference in University affairs. \nBut believe me, this is not so.\nCall me a pessimist, but IUSA just can't do much. I don't hold anything against people involved with IUSA, nor do I think they're selfish or naïve. My problem is with the institution's original purpose -- students taking time out of their lives to represent the student voice.\nIU is run by people who often forget about the student perspective, even though nearly every decision they make affects us. Just like faculty, staff and schools have bodies to represent them in official University business, students have representatives, too. They sit on committees and offer our perspective on issues like tuition and the athletics fee. What's so wrong with this? It shouldn't be our job to look out for us.\nWe all decided to attend IU not just because it's the best place to pursue a well-rounded, excellent education, but because we believed our best interest as students is a top priority for the administration and trustees. I'm not asking for administrators to read our minds about our preferences on issues, but to require students to represent their peers because officials can't seem to keep students in mind is detrimental to our education.\nSimply put, students do not have the time to run the University. We read, on average, a textbook per week, not to mention papers and other class work. We also have households and lives. In a country where a college degree is becoming a basic minimum, we are forced to find other areas to stand out: working part-time jobs, finding internships and volunteering. We nearly kill ourselves just to get a job after graduation. Is it too much to ask for our University to remember us during decision-making? I guess so. \nInstead, we are forced to ask some of our peers to set aside precious college time to represent our perspective in institutional affairs. Running a university is not our job. IUSA is a great idea, and I admire my fellow students who strive to represent us. But we need a different kind of representation -- one measured with intent. We need a university that has us in its best interest regardless of how many students sit on committees. Student presence shouldn't be measured in numbers. Rather, it's a state of mind. Will IU ever have it? It hasn't in my four years, and don't expect these next two weeks to change anything.
(02/15/06 5:47am)
I love the Olympics. \nWhen my sister asked me to the opera Friday night, I hesitated to agree because the opening ceremonies in Torino began at 8 p.m., the same time as "Barber of Seville" at the Musical Arts Center. Thank God my six-year-old programmable VCR is still chugging along. I taped it.\nAfter fast-forwarding through all the Bob Costas banter and learning about the history of Italy and the Alps region (with some fairly odd displays), the 2006 Olympians marched into Stadio Olympico. And I asked myself (with the help of my boyfriend) why I love this so much. It dawned on me when Yoko Ono read her late husband's "Imagine" lyrics. The Olympics represent an ideal world order.\nAt the Olympics, everyone supports and respects one another. Yes, there is a heightened sense of nationalism and everyone wears a flag on their sleeves. Yes, we view ourselves as citizens of our countries, not of the world. But this type of nationalism is entirely healthy.\nWe help each other. We encourage each other. We don't beat each other when we're down. For example, during couple's figure skating, China's Zhang Dan fell and hurt her knee pretty badly. As the last pair to skate, the fall was extremely disappointing for Dan and her partner Hao, but they reskated the program and ended up with a silver medal. Overcoming obstacles is definitely a true Olympic story, but in a way, everyone helped her recover from her fall, and she achieved success. If only our governments worked that way.\nYou want to know what else is great about the Olympics? The athletes are regular people. They aren't politicians, ambassadors or government officials. They have no agenda other than to succeed at their sports. Everyone might not get what they want (the gold), but an American athlete won't declare war on a Swedish athlete if he fails. No one is competing for market share or jobs. No one is trying to change another's way of life. No one protests political cartoons. We're all respectful and, for lack of a better pun, we're good sports. (Except for some nasty French judges now and then.)\nIsn't it funny that someone like me, a political science major and political junkie, loves so many things that are apolitical? Politics and government are necessary to get things accomplished in this world, but it seems as though the world is a better place wherever they're absent.\nI think the Olympics are an indicator that in this free world we have created for ourselves, the global political situation needs a makeover. Our governments need better people with less personal agendas, more understanding and competence -- and for God's sake, less bickering. The Olympics show us how the world's nations could act toward each other if the governments actually represented the people's will, because it's obviously goodwill.\nThe Olympics always seem short-lived and not often enough. I must feel this way because for two weeks every two years, I can pretend the world actually lives in harmony.
(02/08/06 4:55am)
I should be happy. The Senate's confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court last week was supposed to rest my fears about the judicial nominating process and revive my faith in the Senate. Yet despite the pleasing outcome, something still bugs me about the way things went.\nNevermind the unforgivable behavior of some senators during the hearings. Nevermind the disappointing polarized vote. The filibuster is what calls my attention. \nLed by Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, the filibuster was almost finished before it began. So why did they, along with many of their fellow Democrats, think it would be a good idea? Like my mother says, whenever the motives of a person are unclear, money is almost always the answer.\nInterest groups like MoveOn.org offer big bucks to senators and congressmen who conform to their agendas. The last-ditch efforts of the filibuster weren't intended to actually block the Alito confirmation, they were a way to say "Hey, I did everything I could, so give me your money in 2008." \nBy no means am I uncovering a revelation: It is well-known that interest groups have huge political influence, partly because of their wealth and partly because of the absence of the average voter. But the extent of their power is ballooning into an uncontrollable, well, balloon, and the Alito filibuster is a wake-up call to the state of our democracy.\nThe Founding Fathers never envisioned a government like we have today -- run by unelected wealthy extremists. The fact that we're all too busy with our daily lives to continually check the government's actions doesn't mean that we are lazy or that we don't care. But being busy is no longer an excuse. While we, average American citizens, are occupied with daily life, extremists with narrow interests are wooing our elected officials, and we're losing our precious representative government to an elite few.\nTheir influence is beginning to extend beyond policy initiatives -- interest groups and lobbyists are now affecting the way our government conducts its business, too. Just look at the filibuster. Last week, senators nearly stopped a perfectly qualified judicial candidate from being confirmed because they're concerned with possible presidential candidate contributions that may or may not be given two years from now. Putting aside the Founding Fathers' vision, is this what we the people believe an acceptable way to conduct government affairs? \nUnfortunately, no law will fix this. And ironically, no Supreme Court decision will fix this. It's up to us -- the people -- to fix the mess we are in.\nThis is a much more complicated issue than I let on. Ordinary voters are faced with so many obstacles when it comes to overcoming factious interests (like money, time, resources, etc.), and changing the institutional milieu in Congress is daunting. But to start, we must recognize the problem, acknowledge it exists, and do what we can to change things.\nInterest groups might have the cash, but the people have a greater power: voting. In America, change begins at the bottom.
(02/01/06 5:05am)
As a columnist, there is no better compliment than hearing someone say, "I disagreed with your column, but you argued your position very well." Fortunately, I heard that a lot in January. But last week, I heard something quite different. Apparently, some people think I "enjoy being close-minded." \nOh, really? Let's step back and evaluate this claim, and finally take on the question, What exactly is an "open mind" at IU?\nI'll start with an anecdote. Back in 2002, while every other freshman was applying for a residential neighborhood suited to their lifestyle, I chose to be placed in Collins Living-Learning Center. Now, why on Earth would a conservative George W. Bush-supporter like me want to live in such a place? To learn. I wanted to learn about people who weren't like me. I wanted to find out about how they understand the world, their motivations and their reasoning. \nInstead, I encountered intolerance. I was teased for being a Christian, berated for being a patriot and not taken seriously because I vote Republican. I learned that the students who live in Collins are the least open-minded on campus. If only they realized their precious word "diversity" includes people like me.\nThe next telling incident involved business professor Eric Rasmusen when, in late 2003, his weblog featuring anti-gay remarks was found on the IU server. Consequently, much of the IU community wanted Rasmusen's comments stripped from the server, fearing they would somehow be associated with University policy. The weeks following this incident were grossly indicative of IU's real stance on open-mindedness. Although Rasmusens's opinions weren't exactly politically correct or well-stated, they should at least have been able to be expressed. But most people, including some top officials, wanted them to be suppressed. They cried out for the need to "educate" such an "ignorant" point of view. I'll put it simply: To people like me, it's OK to disagree. To people like them, it's not. Which side do you think sounds more tolerant?\nOne of the last straws for me occurred last semester when Pat Connor, executive director of Residential Programs and Services, commented on a Christian Student Fellowship profile story. He said students living in the CSF house are missing out on an opportunity to be exposed to students of different cultures and religions because they choose to live together.\nOh, those close-minded Christians. Don't bother to mention the fact, Pat, that everyone else at IU lives with people like themselves. You know, like in Jewish sororities and fraternities, black sororities and fraternities, Collins and Smallwood? \nAm I close-minded because I don't like Hollywood telling me how I should think? Am I close-minded because I don't believe in affirmative action, abortion or gay marriage? Am I close-minded because I don't think the criticism of IU President Adam Herbert's presidency has anything to do with race? \nIU preaches diversity and tolerance, but in my four years here, it's shown me neither. If you disagree with my opinion, that's OK. But if you think I'm close-minded or intolerant, you're wrong. Look in the mirror to find such things.
(01/25/06 5:15am)
I love the Oscars.\nAs a kid, it was the only other school night besides Election Day I was allowed to stay up past bed time. Women in beautiful gowns and gorgeous men in tuxes parade down a red carpet, and little gold men are held by those who make us laugh and cry for $9-a-pop, 20 times a year.\nBut this year, I'm a bit nervous. The show will be more political than ever, and even worse, it will be more liberal than ever. For starters, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences named Jon Stewart as the official Oscars host. Yuck. Unlike my college student peers, I don't find Stewart or his faux news show amusing. The show will most likely be filled with his notorious Bush bashing, and I just don't know how much more of that I can take.\nThe liberalism doesn't stop with Stewart, or even start with him, for that matter. For a few years now, the acceptance speeches and host banter have become increasingly political, like Chris Rock's opening monologue comparing the president's job with managing a Gap store and Sean Penn's comment that "If there's one thing that actors know, other than there weren't any WMDs ..." You get the picture.\nPerhaps my biggest problem with this year's show is the overall Hollywood attitude that 2005 American cinema should be honored for one reason: "to change the way people think," as director Ang Lee said. You know, the attitude that films cannot be valued individually and that they must have "progressive" political implications.\nFor example, "Good Night, and Good Luck" is a fantastic film about brave news men who take on McCarthyism. But somehow, Hollywood must hint at its applicable status to today's politics; that somehow McCarthy embodies 21st-century Americans who believe it's unpatriotic to criticize government. Actually, it's about George Clooney's admiration for his father's peers and the complicated political situation of their time, not ours.\nLikewise, "Brokeback Mountain" is a film about two gay lovers who, though married to women, continue a sexual relationship. Since when does every movie containing a gay individual need to be labeled "political"? I would see this movie if it weren't hyped up (even by its Golden Globe-winning director) as a way to "educate" and "open minds." Why must Hollywood continually seek to "open the minds" of people who hold conservative views? If I walk out of that movie still opposed to gay marriage, does that mean Ang Lee and Co. failed? By just reading a description or watching the trailer, I wouldn't get an ideological vibe from the film. Hollywood adds that unfortunate stigma, and celebrates it with the Oscars.\nThe awards should go to the best movies of the year, not the ones that best fit Hollywood's political agenda. Sometimes they fit both categories, but this year the potential nominations just seem too intentional. Hollywood would do better if it just made the movies and left us, the viewing public, alone. That's when the thinking really begins.
(01/18/06 5:17am)
Confirm\nAfter watching hours of confirmation hearings on C-SPAN, I concluded the 18 hours of interrogation probably could have been squeezed into two. But, unfortunately, voters in Massachusetts, New York and Vermont elect senators who spend half their "questioning" time grasping at straws to attack the upstanding federal judge. Sens. Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Pat Leahy and their voters should all be ashamed of such behavior. \nSamuel Alito, a so-called "right-wing extremist," should not only be confirmed, but by a disgustingly large margin. The notion that President Bush should nominate another moderate like Sandra Day O'Connor to maintain the status quo is laughable at best. If American presidents had not changed the Court's makeup throughout time, it might never have rightly decided ground-breaking cases like Brown v. Board of Education and Griswold v. Connecticut.\nSince when does the Senate only confirm or even decide to vote on judges based on their ideology? No one threatened to filibuster the confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who also refused to answer questions regarding her personal views and potential cases, and only three senators voted against her in 1993. That was a mere 13 years ago. It's funny to see what happens when the tables are turned.
(01/18/06 5:12am)
Stable is definitely not how I would describe the current situation at IU. This weekend, we lost yet another leader when President Adam Herbert announced his intended departure in 2008. Whether that's sad or glad news for you, the fact remains that the IU board of trustees will be searching -- again -- for a new face of the University.\nIn fact, IU hasn't been stable since I started here in 2002. A month after I came to IU, then-President Myles Brand announced he was leaving. We had a bland interim president for a while, then the board chose Adam Herbert to join in 2003. And now he's leaving -- along with the IU-Bloomington chancellor and the College of Arts and Sciences dean.\nThe fact is that good, stable leadership has been scarce at IU for a while. And though the most affected people are faculty and staff, students are affected, too. A constant change of leadership makes us think something is wrong with the institution we attend and love so dearly.\nWith that said, I propose four new traits the next IU president should have -- mainly for future students' sake. Students understand the president's job is a big one and that we have other leaders we can count on, like the dean of students, but the following points would have tremendously impacted my undergraduate experience.\nFirst, we want someone who is visible to students. Although Herbert was the most invisible of the three, the others weren't so present either. When I say "visible," I suggest just walking around campus for one hour every other week -- that enough would be an improvement. I also mean talking to student media, not just to the big-name newspapers and TV stations.\nSecond, the new president should have IU, or at least Indiana, roots. As a native Bloomingtonian, I think we've had enough outsiders for a while. Now is the time to hire someone who doesn't just know where Indiana is, but someone who loves and knows everything about it. If our president is proud of and excited about Indiana traditions, the students will be, too.\nThird, students want a president who is likable and has a good sense of humor. It's difficult to live up to the jovial Herman B Wells, but the last three presidents have the most anti-HBW personalities. Just as Americans want a likable person for their president, students want a likable person for theirs -- to minimize the pomp and circumstance and to represent what's fun at IU, too.\nLastly, we want someone who won't search for another job during his tenure. During my four years, this has been my experience. Someone comes in and changes a lot, but we quickly find out they never intended to stay at IU for very long. Students need a president who actually wants to be here, who wants to make a lasting impact at IU, and not just administratively.\nI know these aren't the primary traits to look for in a new president, but given a choice, they should be the deciding factors. Future IU students deserve better than what I got.
(01/09/06 5:15am)
Not many news stories come out of Sweden. So when I actually saw one prominently displayed in the business section of my local newspaper, I was interested to see what the Swedes were up to. Here's the disheartening news: The Swedes are up to no good.\nApparently, a new line of anti-Christian jeans are selling like hotcakes. Their logo, which features an upside down cross on a skull's forehead, is an intentional statement against Christianity. Logo designer Bjorn Atldax told The Associated Press that the design is supposed to make young people question the religion, which he believes has been a force of evil throughout history.\nWhy should we care? The Cheap Monday brand is starting to go global, and the company eventually plans to sell the jeans in the United States.\nI hope I am not the only young American who sees something dreadfully wrong with this. To be clear, it is not offensive that some are against organized religion or Christianity. Nor is it offensive that these people speak their minds. It is the double standard that's offensive. If these jeans held an anti-Jewish or anti-Muslim message, the media would be all over it in a negative way. And the American Civil Liberties Union wouldn't be able to wait until the jeans appeared on American shelves before it pounced on a lawsuit.\nQuestioning religion is something we all do at some point in our lives, and that's OK. It's also OK not to believe in organized religion. But promoting and spreading an anti-Christian, hateful message just for the sake of it is not. It's disrespectful to the 2.1 billion who practice it, and more people should be in an uproar.\nDoesn't this story sound familiar to anyone else? Designing and wearing a logo against a religion that someone believes has been a "force of evil" throughout history? Hitler, anyone?\nMaybe the jeans will be popular in Sweden, where the percentage of churchgoers is only single digits, or France, which seems to be \nanti-every religion. But not in our country. Americans are better than this on so many levels. \nIf Americans want to promote a political message, they certainly don't slap it on a pair of jeans. They do something effective, whether it's protesting on the Washington Mall or writing a letter to the editor. Americans should realize wearing a pair of these jeans is just a cheap way of saying, "Hey, I hate Christianity. But I won't debate you, because I'm too ignorant." \nIf Cheap Monday jeans do reach the United States, I think we all know what type of person would buy them: a young, college-aged "activist" who thinks it's trendy to don clothes that have an anti-culture message. Damn the man, right? No, damn you. Not respecting other people's beliefs, especially religious beliefs, is unacceptable in this country. Americans are better than that.\nYes, Cheap Monday has a right to sell these jeans anywhere they wish. Yes, anyone should be able to buy them. It's un-American to be anti-freedom of speech. But it's even more un-American to disrespect the rest of the First Amendment. You know, that part where it says, "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?
(12/02/05 2:04pm)
While most students and Bloomington residents were gearing up for the men's basketball game versus Duke Wednesday night, I was at the IU Auditorium witnessing the best dance show in the world, literally.\n"Michael Flatley's Lord of the Dance" came into town for one night only, but the house wasn't close to packed. As soon as the lights dimmed, I bullied my sister into moving to a closer section. Unfortunately, Wednesday was the first time I didn't watch "LOTD" from the front row, which accounted for less enthusiastic audience participation on my part. Having seen the show twice before, I wasn't expecting any surprises.\n"Lord of the Dance" is a classic tale of good versus evil. The spirit of dance, personified in character "Little Spirit," dons a sparkly, elf-like costume and opens the show by playing the classic psalm "Lord of the Dance" on her flute. All is well until the Dark Lord and his minions attack Little Spirit and steal the spirit by breaking her flute. The Good Lord -- the Lord of the Dance -- rescues her and repairs the flute, essentially reviving the spirit. From this point on, the Dark Lord and the Good Lord are arch nemeses. \nThe seductress, Morrighan, who wears a revealing, deep red dress, tempts the Good Lord with her sexy dance moves to turn away from the "good girl," Saoirse. The Dark Lord and the Good Lord battle in a dance-off (the women have their own version, too). Eventually, Morrighan betrays the Good Lord by "giving up" his position to the Dark Lord. He captures the Good Lord, strips away his belt and hoists it into the air (much like a WWE scene). Just as the Lord is about to be defeated, Little Spirit gives him the strength to triumph over evil. The Lord gets the girl, and all is well again. \nOf course, all of this is interpreted through excellent choreography and music. Irish dancing is a tough sport that requires strength and endurance -- my best friend Katherine, a former "LOTD" groupie, tried to teach me six years ago, and I ended up with a sprained ankle. But with pure grace, the seasoned dancers of "LOTD" make it look easy. \nThe costumes are a variation of traditional Irish dance garb and fun outfits (the dancers wear neon accentuated by black light during "Siamsa"), which are all very pleasing to the eye. The show includes about five music "scenes," too, featuring two violinists and a singer. \nAs an "LOTD" veteran who owns the video and CD, I think I can be a good judge of last night's performance. The two Lords were especially charismatic and precise. I, along with the crowd, was astonished by the amazing footwork. They are talented, and you can tell they enjoy every minute of the show. On the whole, it was worthwhile and very enjoyable.\nLike many other students on this campus, I love IU basketball. So why did I attend "LOTD" instead of supporting my Hoosiers? It's simple: Exactly three weeks from today, my best friend Katherine is getting married, and I'm her maid of honor. We met in eighth grade because I thought she was a freak for plastering photos of "LOTD" all over her locker. But she educated me, and I came to love it, too. \nWhen I heard the troupe was coming to IU, I knew I had to attend the show. At certain points during the performance, my eyes welled up because the music and dance reminded me of another time in my life and of our friendship. "LOTD" might be a little cheesy (as my sister noted at the end of a performance with a fantastic impression of Little Spirit), but it has brought together more than just the world's greatest dancers, and for that, I love it.
(10/27/05 5:51am)
Crushing by elephant: a form of execution used in India for more than 4,000 years.\nThat's the most random entry Wikipedia founder Jim Wales said he has ever found on his own Web site. \nFor many IU students, www.wikipedia.org has all the answers, even to the most obscure questions like "What is crushing by elephant?" Some students visit the online encyclopedia every day, some have cited its entries for research papers and others -- and not just a few -- surf it for hours at a time.\nBut there's one thing students might not know about Wikipedia: Wales, who is revolutionizing the information industry on the Internet, went to IU.\nIn the mid-1990s, Wales spent three years in Bloomington as a doctoral candidate in finance at the Kelley School of Business. He didn't graduate, however, choosing instead to become a successful stock trader in Chicago. \n"Jimmy will now be our Bill Gates story for Harvard," said Bob Jennings, chairman of the finance department at the Kelley School. "(He was) the student who chose to drop out to become famous."\nWales, now 39 and living in St. Petersburg, Fla., said he kept busy as a student at IU, but remembers Bloomington as a "fun town" -- perhaps because he lived next door to Jake's Bar (which is now Axis Nightclub). Though Wales hadn't thought of the idea for Wikipedia until after he left IU, he knew from being a student that a greater information source was lacking for college students. \n"I can't even imagine how much something like Wikipedia could have helped me in college," he said.\nBesides the fact that it's a quick and easily accessible resource, college students love Wikipedia for perhaps the same reason they should be weary of it: anyone can update the site.\nWales calls these contributors "volunteers," or "Wikipedians," and said they typically tend to be geeky, smart people in their 20s or 30s.\nThis community and collaborative creation is exactly what makes Wikipedia so intriguing to college students because it is a chance for them to be involved in generating information, not just consuming it, said Associate Professor of Information Science Howard Rosenbaum.\nRosenbaum is even using the concept of wikis -- Hawaiian for "quick" -- for his class. Students use software that functions similarly to Wikipedia's and update each others' entries. Rosenbaum said it's a great group project and his students enjoy the collaborative effort.\nThe fact that anyone can contribute or edit an entry is the founding principle of Wikipedia, which is part of a non-profit organization with only two official employees. Of course, the online encyclopedia has some regulations, including a strong neutral point of view policy and other guidelines that don't allow certain entries, such as ones that feature "you or your bicycle," as Wales puts it. But there's more to "Wiki" than just the "pedia." Wikipedia, which has grown to 200 language editions since debuting in 2001, is part of something even bigger: the Wikimedia Foundation. The foundation also runs Wikibooks (for e-notes), Wiktionary (an online dictionary), Wikiquote (an online quotations database), Wikinews (a news source), Wikispecies (a directory of species) and Wikijunior (e-notes for children and teenagers), to name a few.\nSome say Wikipedia is beginning to compete with Web giant Google. Although Google is not showing signs of suffering (it posted a 96-percent revenue increase for the fourth quarter), some students find Wikipedia is a better source for background and general information than Google.\n"I've always been a big fan of Google, and I'm still a big fan," said sophomore Allison Walker. "But in terms of searching for stuff for school, Wikipedia is a great resource to find out anything I want to know."\nJust days after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, the online encyclopedia already had an entry about the storm, its context in American history and a projected death toll. \nNot everyone is optimistic about the site and its up-to-date content. Rosenbaum warns students to be cautious of some content on Wikipedia.org, especially when using it as a primary source for academic work. Rosenbaum said he never cites the site in his research and always double-checks the facts.\n"When you are thinking about using this source, it almost makes you have to cite the exact time that you accessed the source because it can change in a minute," he said. \nWales frequently travels overseas to meet distant volunteers. Currently, Bloomington is not yet one of his named "tour" cities. But he's definitely not opposed to the idea.\n"I want to come back," he said. "I just need an invitation"
(03/07/05 5:16am)
The Bloomington Fire Department responded to a call from Read Center at about 1 p.m. Thursday after numerous electrical items, including an Xbox video game console, had been plugged into a power strip and overheated, causing smoke and sparks, according to an IU Police Department report. A dry chemical extinguisher was used prior to the fire department's arrival.\nThe smoke and sparks on the fifth floor of Read-Curry were caused specifically by a power cord belonging to a student's Xbox, according to the police report. On Feb. 17, Microsoft announced a recall of all power cords made on or before Oct. 23, 2003, except for cords in continental Europe. Microsoft claimed that less than one in 10,000 consoles have been affected, but the BFD is concerned about the cords.\n"This recall greatly concerns us because of the fire potential with reported scorched carpets, entertainment centers and smoke damage," BFD Chief Jeff Barlow said in a press release. "With almost 60 percent of the city's population between the ages of 15 and 34, this represents a significant target audience that could be impacted by this recall. We want our citizens to be aware of how they can prevent this hazard from becoming a problem: get your power cords replaced."\nThe BFD advises users to turn off and unplug their Xboxes when not using them as well. Students and Bloomington residents can request a new power cord at www.xbox.com or by calling (866) 271-0450.\n-- Contact Staff Writer Christina Galoozis at cgaloozi@indiana.edu.