12 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(07/14/05 6:37pm)
The highlight of my life as a teenage computer geek came when Chris Wilson, head of the Microsoft Internet Explorer team, told me he owed me a beer.\nDisclaimer: it was only a figure of speech -- he was not offering alcohol to a minor. Let me explain the context a little better.\nI've believed for years that the World Wide Web is the only mass medium that truly belongs to the masses. If it belonged to corporations, they wouldn't have screwed it up for us.\nWhat if 35 mm film was not always exactly 35 mm and it wouldn't always fit into your camera? This illustrates the frustrating problem with the Web as a medium: inconsistent implementation of specifications.\nVirtually every other medium has a strict set of specifications and standards. Compact discs have a specific size, and data is encoded onto them in a standardized way. If you look at CDs, film, print or other mass media, they are all implemented to rigid specifications to make sure you get the same picture, song or page, every time.\nNot so with the World Wide Web. The official specifications for the Hypertext Markup Language and Cascading Style Sheets are available to the public, but not all Web browsers implement these specs correctly. Because of this, a Web page can look radically different from one Web browser to another. Even Web designs with the cleanest HTML and CSS code can be mangled by a bad browser.\nOne of the worst browsers available today is also the most common one: Internet Explorer for Windows. Back in 1998, Microsoft had the best browser on the market, hands-down. The problem is that the Web has changed a lot in seven years, and Explorer hasn't.\nLike many Web developers, Wilson wanted to see a better implementation of HTML and CSS in Internet Explorer. Unfortunately, the list of priorities handed to him by his superiors made correct implementation impossible.\nMicrosoft had invented some proprietary features that would not work in any other browser. With later versions of HTML and CSS, Microsoft's proprietary features contradicted some parts of the official specs, making correct implementation impossible. They sold technology using these proprietary extensions to other businesses, mostly for use in their corporate intranets. Microsoft could not afford to drop these extensions -- and resulting revenue stream -- in favor of a correct implementation of HTML and CSS.\nWhen other zealous computer geeks started harassing Wilson in a mailing list I used to be on at the time, I stepped up and pointed out it's not fair to lash out at him for decisions he didn't make. Then Wilson said he owed me a beer.\nThis summer, Microsoft is set to finally release a new version of its flagship browser. Wilson has stated in a blog entry that there will be a lot of bug fixes for Explorer's implementation of HTML and CSS. If Wilson delivers, and helps finally fix the Web for all of us, I would gladly accept Internet Explorer 7 in place of that beer.
(06/27/05 6:27pm)
Ten of IU's finest students and faculty members were honored for their extraordinary work in the classroom, campus groups and achievements during the Spring Recognition Banquet in April.\n"This occasion has always seemed to me one of the best illustrations of how a university works, because it gives the faculty an opportunity to acknowledge, and perhaps more crucially to say thank you to several outstanding seniors," said IU-Bloomington Chancellor Ken Gros Louis at the event.\nThe ceremony awarded five students the Elvis J. Stahr Award for earning excellent academic marks while also serving the campus as leaders in extracurricular student activities. Also recognized were five faculty members who won the Student Choice Award for Outstanding Faculty.\nWinners of the Elvis J. Stahr award were nominated by faculty members and selected by committee.\n"It was a really well-done ceremony," said alumnus Kieran Farr, one of the five winners. "It was really cool, because they took quotations from the people who nominated the winners."\nFarr, whose degree is in business marketing and telecommunications with a minor in French, is the founder of IU Student Television, and served as an IU Student Association senator. Gros Louis said in his speech that one of Farr's professors said, "Kieran is not just an excellent student and moral individual. Rather, Kieran is of the caliber I seek in my colleagues."\nAlso recognized at the event were alumni Sarah King, D'Andre May, Matt Mindrum and Scott Shackelford.\nKing, whose degree is in journalism and political science, was president of the Panhellenic Association, where she encouraged women in the Greek system to avoid fraternity parties and worked to see existing alcohol policies enforced, according to the chancellor's Web site.\nMay, an information systems and business management major, has led many student organizations, including the IUSAA and Board of Aeons, as well as acted as a chairperson of the Student Athletic Board.\nMindrum, whose degree is in vocal performance with a minor in business, has performed in eight operas in the past four years, and has also served as the customer relations manager at the IU Auditorium.\nShackelford majored in economics and political science, and minored in Spanish, international studies and psychology. He has served a wide variety of roles on campus, including a justice on the IUSA Supreme Court, writer for the Indiana Daily Student, president of Blue Key and director of community service at the Area 10 Agency on Aging.\nThe award is named for Elvis J. Stahr, the 12th president of IU, according to a press release issued by the IU Alumni Association. Stahr's presidency saw the formation of the joint IU-Purdue University, IU Northwest and the School of Library and Information Science, according to the IU Web site.\nAdditionally, the Student Choice for Outstanding Faculty award was bestowed upon five faculty members. They are: Phil Carspecken, professor of counseling and educational psychology; Mehmet Dalkilic, assistant professor of informatics; Zaineb Istrabadi, visiting lecturer in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures; Michael Molenda, associate professor of education; and Irene Vlachos-Weber, lecturer in psychology.\nJason Russ, vice president of University relations for IUSAA, estimates about 675 votes were cast this year, the majority of them online. Much of the voting occurred at the close of academic advisement appointments, when students were asked if they wanted to participate. \n"Voting online only takes a minute," Russ said.
(06/06/05 12:15am)
Freshmen coming to IU this fall will be the first to arrive after a new federal recommendation that they be vaccinated for meningococcal meningitis.\nIn January, a new vaccine for the disease, Menactra, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of patients 11 to 55 years old. Following this approval, the Centers for Disease Control recommended that all college freshmen living in dorms receive the new vaccine, according to a report by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.\nThe report also recommended that young adolescents, 11 and 12 years old, be immunized with the new vaccine, as well as 15-year-olds entering high school.\nMenactra is "new to the general population for now," said Anne Reese, director of Health and Wellness Education at the IU Health Center. Because the new vaccine has never been available before, freshmen arriving in the dorms this fall have not been treated with it. \nThe new vaccine is longer-lasting than the previous meningococcal meningitis vaccine, Menomune, Reese said. It is also more effective. The ACIP report says that patients treated with Menactra had more infection-fighting antibodies present after three years than those treated with Menomune.\nLast year, the IU Student Health Center administered about 440 doses of the old vaccine, according to Chief Pharmacist Cheryl Thomas. Currently, the health center has about 410 doses of the new vaccine, which Thomas expects to last through the fall semester, despite the CDC's new recommendation.\nAdditionally, there are still more doses of Menomune on hand, for patients treated at the health center who fall outside of the 11 to 55 year old.\nIn response to the new CDC recommendation, the health center is working to inform new students and their families about meningococcal meningitis. A new brochure prepared by the health center explains that meningococcal meningitis poses a threat to students living in dorms because the bacterium that causes the disease can be spread by coughing, sneezing, or sharing tableware.\nThe bacteria might also reside harmlessly in a host for months, according to the brochure. There could be a population in which 95 percent host the bacterium, but only 1 percent may became ill, suggesting an individual's overall immunity determines whether or not they contract the disease.\nThe majority of nationwide cases are in infants, whose immune systems have not yet fully developed, but the second-most common place to find these infections are in college dorms.\nAlthough the disease is rare, it is difficult to diagnose, because early symptoms are easily mistaken for a case of the common cold. By the time a diagnosis of meningitis can be made, patients often die, or survive with brain damage.\nReese estimates that there has been an average of less than one case of meningitis at the health center per year for the past decade. \n"Because the CDC has strengthened its recommendation, there is more interest"
(03/25/05 5:03am)
Liberals need to watch their mouths. After the build-up to war and the presidential election, it's as if they got drunk and said some things they shouldn't have. On www.sorryeverybody.com, liberals have posted messages such as "We're sorry half our country is a bunch of morons." That translates from drunk-speak to English as "Hey, I'm not going down without a fight!" It's as if now, instead of sobering up and apologizing for their indignation, they're just getting drunker in their bitterness.\nIt's gotten so out of hand, columnist Jay Ambrose recently wrote that liberals' lack of tolerance for conservative or moderate ideas amounts to "New McCarthyism."\nThis is an ironic choice of words, because the phrase is usually used to describe radical liberals being visited by Secret Service agents, investigating reports of "Un-American behavior." If liberals are so intolerant that someone would flip "New McCarthyism" around on them, it's a good time to stop and think about it.\nIn his column, Ambrose wrote about the leftist intellectuals standing up to defend University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill. The "mad professor" is most infamous for saying the thousands who died in the World Trade Center on 9-11 were "little Eichmanns," referring to Adolf Eichmann, who helped Hitler exterminate Jews during World War II.\nWhile many were initially offended by the comparison, when one looks at Churchill's essay, to place his statements in context, his argument is nothing new: "the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved," he said, to the "mighty engine of profit." That doesn't seem too hard to swallow. The same thing happened with the British, French and Spanish back in their heyday.\nIf capitalism drives war, maybe it's just one small step to imply that those who work for "the man" are guilty by association.\nMost people I know who have asked themselves this question don't want to answer it, so they get up and fix themselves something to eat. I guess Churchill was hoping to preempt the snack attack by tossing the phrase "little Eichmanns" in there.\nUnfortunately, this use of hyperbolic rhetoric tainted the credibility of his entire argument and of anyone defending him.\nGranted, Churchill is entitled to his opinion, and others are entitled to debate him; that's how things work in the marketplace of ideas. But should he be fired from his job?\nIf Churchill wasn't fired for his views, what about DePaul University professor Thomas Klocek? He was suspended without a university hearing after he debated against students who believed Israel is Nazi-like toward the Palestinians. Many believe Klocek was fired for not fitting into the cookie-cutter mold of what a liberal is "supposed to believe."\nWhy does it seem as though left-wing radicals are more entitled to their opinion than those on the right -- or even in the middle?\nA lot of radical opinions are more emotional than they are intelligent. It's easy to get emotional about things such as tyranny and war, but those who argue about it in public must understand the role they play in the big picture. When they let emotion drive their arguments, they're accidentally using one of the techniques Hitler used to rally support behind the Third Reich.\nIt is possible to engage the public's humanity without appealing to its emotions. Liberals hate to admit it, but President Bush does this all the time. We need to follow Bush's example and bring our political discussion back down to the level we can talk about at the dinner table, not the level that's liable to start a drunken bar brawl.
(01/11/05 6:09am)
Spring break is a time to enjoy exotic destinations -- or drink enough exotic drinks you can at least pretend the semester is finished.\nDuring spring break, American males take in an average of 18 drinks each day, and females average 10 drinks, according to the Journal of American College Health. Although this amount might not be much different from an average college party weekend, the type of drink you are holding during spring break can say a lot. Exotic locations require exotic drinks -- and cheap beer usually doesn't cut it.\nBut if beer is your favorite drink, there are some ways to make even beer drinking exotic. First, try drinking an imported beer, or a beer that doesn't come in cans, like Corona. \n"I always think of those commercials when I'm drinking Coronas," said junior Megan Crain.\nWhile some might stick to beer on spring break, others venture out to try new tropical and exotic drinks. And knowing what's out there to order on your vacation is half the fun.\nFruity drinks are always popular during spring break, according to Kilroy's bartender Jess Saylor. Rum runners, pina coladas and Sex on the Beach consistently remain at the top of the request list, he said.\nSex on the Beach, because of its ocean-related name, is one of the most popular beach drinks. To make it, mix cranberry juice, pineapple juice, a shot of vodka and three-fourths of an ounce of peach schnapps.\nShots are another partying favorite. Tequila shots are always popular at spring break, Saylor said. But for experienced drinkers looking for new thrills on vacation, there are other more extravagant shots.\nCrain, for example, likes to see shots like the so-called "Red-headed Slut" or "Liquid Cocaine" in her glass. These drinks are nicknamed because of their contents and color. Red-headed Sluts contain a half ounce of Jagermeister and a half ounce of peach schnapps in a shot glass, with a splash of cranberry juice on top for color. Liquid Cocaine has equal amounts of Grand Marnier, Southern Comfort, vodka and amaretto poured into a cocktail mixer with a splash of pineapple juice. \nFor those with a sweet tooth, a "Buttery Nipple" is another choice. To create this drink, pour a half ounce of butterscotch schnapps in a shot glass and add a half ounce of Bailey's Irish Cream so it forms a layer on top.\nWhether you're looking for something new to drink at home or on the beach, there are plenty of places to find ideas, whether from a local bartender or online. For a large listing of drinks, visit www.webtender.com, where users have submitted hundreds of recipes for a variety of drinks. The site has everything from cocktails to shots, from "Abba" to "Zorro."\n-- Contact Staff Writer Daniel Hiester at dhiester@indiana.edu.
(01/10/05 4:39am)
My New Year's resolution is to stop whining about last year's presidential election. What happened in 2004 should stay in 2004. Instead, I'm going to whine about other people who whine about the election.\nIt's time to face the music, liberal America: they won. Nothing you say will make a difference now. That means there's no reason to say that Republicans are prone to in-breeding, Christianity or historical involvement with the Ku Klux Klan.\nOver the break, one of my friends told me that if you rank the average IQ of those who live in each state, the red states dominate the bottom half of the list. I smiled and nodded, asking myself in my mind, "So what?" I do believe our nation has a serious problem and that the neo-conservatives' reign of power has made our nation notably more evil than usual, but name-calling is not going to solve the problem. If anything, it makes things worse.\nThe Republicans' power over the government is derived from their power over the people, and when liberals resort to name-calling, it strengthens the conservatives' resolve to see their politicians squander homosexual rights, abolish abortion and wage pointless wars to remind the world that we really will bully it around if we don't get what we want.\nIt's kind of like when a Christian walks up to a non-Christian and says these all-too-familiar words: "If you don't confess your sins and turn your life over to Christ, you are going to hell." Most of the time, people become even more determined to never be Christians when they hear this speech. Similarly, if those on the left say the right-wing is full of what the liberals would call "mentally challenged" pencil pushers, it assures that those on the right will remain strongly set in their wicked ways.\nA few nights later in my vacation, I told someone what you just read in the paragraph above, and a French girl sitting nearby overheard some of the discussion. Later, she started talking to me, and I think she was being a little confrontational, but it was hard to tell because of her seductive French accent. Apparently, she heard me mention the word "Christianity" and tuned out the rest of the conversation. She told me that she thought I was "another one of 'them.' One of those conservatives! I swear, they're everywhere!"\nThis charming young woman is living proof that there is such a thing as an ignorant liberal. When I said that America didn't do any favors by being so insistent on sanctioning Iraq after the Persian Gulf War, she corrected me: We weren't sanctioning Iraq, we were sanctioning Saddam. Iraq itself isn't evil, only Saddam is.\nI think I got too lost in her eyes to tell her that we really were sanctioning Iraq.\nThe moral of the story is that even though liberals like to think they're smart and that conservatives are "mentally challenged," there is still plenty of stupidity, stubbornness and ignorance on both sides of the political spectrum. When you point out the obvious and choose not to do provide any ideas of what to do about it, nothing is going to change.\nIf we really want to make the world a safer place, we have to challenge partisan punditry from the inside. Liberals can't expect to stand on the sidelines and yell at the conservatives on the field to make them change their gameplan. To get inside and make a change, we need to use some basic people skills. When you think about it, that's what today's Republicans have that the Democrats don't.
(12/03/04 4:05am)
No one gets why depressed people stay depressed for so long. For example, Nine Inch Nails front man Trent Reznor has been a sort of poster boy for angst since 1989, and where is he now, 15 years later? In his studio, working on a new record -- and judging from his Web site, there's still no indication that he's learned how to write a song in a major key. \n"What's the deal?" some ask. "How can anyone stay that gloomy for that long?" I argue that the answer is simple: For depressed people, depressing things take on a very high aesthetic value.\nThe best example I can think of is a personal one. On a peculiarly cloudy evening last spring in Santa Ana, Calif., I was entranced by the sky. I was so fixated on the clouds, I even stared as I crossed the busy streets, barely minding the traffic around me. The more I looked, the more I felt depressed, but it still didn't stop me from staring.\nLater I wondered why I always got depressed when I looked at something beautiful. The inescapable conclusion was that the sky was never beautiful -- it was depressing, and only a depressed person can see any beauty in it.\nThat seems to be the disconnection between those who have been through major depression and those who haven't. People on the inexperienced side of the depression divide don't understand that melancholy people hold onto melancholy feelings because they're seen as amazing, wonderful things. As much as I hate quoting pop songs, Frou Frou really said it best: "There's beauty in the breakdown."\nOther artists seem to be on the same wavelength. For example, look at the title of Switchfoot's breakthrough album, "The Beautiful Letdown." One of the highest-grossing films of all time is "Titanic," a film that uses very graceful camera work to depict a tragedy. The idea of looking to perceive beauty in depressing things is not at all uncommon; in fact, it perpetuates the stereotype that creative people often tend to be depressed in their personal lives.\nUnfortunately, these people try to live in that "beautiful" state of mind all the time. They have a hard time understanding that tragedy and drama are a lot like some beach cities in Florida: They're great places to visit, but terrible places to live. \nMost people try to indulge in the drama of books, movies or music in order to escape from the mundane plainness of reality, but depressed people are exactly the opposite. They need the ordinary as a venue to escape from the extraordinary. At first it might seem like an alien concept, but after you think about it, it just makes sense. Why are blogs all the rage? It's millions of melodramatic people over-medicating themselves on the mundane.\nJust because someone seems aloof doesn't mean they're not an interesting person to talk to. In my experience, depressed people are thinking all the time, and unless they're in a particularly nasty mood, they're always game for a little conversation. It may seem trivial, but sitting down and chewing the fat helps distract them from whatever idea they're playing in their head like a broken record. Talking about the mundane offers them an important break from their mind.\nRemember, it doesn't always take a reason to feel depressed; for some people it just seems natural. But as fall turns to winter and the clouds roll in over Bloomington almost every day, if you want to know who the depressed people are, all you have to do is see who's looking up.
(11/12/04 4:12am)
With Tuesday's long-anticipated release of the new Web browser, Mozilla Firefox 1.0, now is the perfect time to tell you why you should ditch Internet Explorer. But it's not my job to tell you about Firefox's cool features. Just talk to the first nerd you see and ask him about "Firefox," "extensions" and "tabbed browsing." The nerd should be able to hook you up.\nMy job is to argue that using a new browser is a matter of good Internet citizenship. You see, everything that sucks about the Web exists only because you've been using a crappy browser. It's all your fault.\nThe World Wide Web is the only mass medium that truly belongs to the masses. Anyone can publish him or herself on a Web site inexpensively. This is our turf, and we have to defend it ourselves.\nEveryone's familiar with the old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." With Internet Explorer, the slogan should read: "If everyone uses it even when it's broke, don't fix it." According to www.WebSideStory.com, almost 93 percent of Web-browsing Americans use Internet Explorer.\nUnfortunately, its support for HTML and CSS -- the computer languages of which the Web is made -- hasn't seen any major updates since 2001. That's right. Your browser supports an obsolete version of the entire World Wide Web. That means Web designers are prevented from creating some fresh, innovative sites for you to use because Internet Explorer can't view them properly.\nBut there is even worse news from the United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team. This agency, which falls under the Department of Homeland Security, has stated that Internet Explorer's bugs are such a threat to our security, one possible solution would be to use another browser.\nWhat does this mean? It means that when you use Internet Explorer, the terrorists win.\nWell, OK, not really. It means that, for example, a malicious Web page author could potentially install a virus on your computer through Internet Explorer that could steal your credit card information, delete your files or use your computer as a weapon in an organized attack along with thousands of other computers, targeting anything from Yahoo! and Microsoft to IU or even the Central Intelligence Agency.\nThese pop-up ads and viruses exist only because so many people have been vulnerable to them. For those who write viruses, Internet Explorer is a great delivery platform because everyone has it and it has more security bugs than its competitors. Kind of like how sex is a great way to transmit diseases because virtually everybody does it.\nHowever, when you have sex, you use protection not only because you want to keep yourself free of sexually transmitted infections, but you don't want to spread anything to future partners either. So, think of getting a new browser as a free condom for your Web-surfing "activities." It doesn't only keep you safer, it keeps others safer too.\nThe same thing applies to those pop-up ads that everyone hates so much. If everyone had a pop-up blocker a few years ago when the feature was common in non-Microsoft browsers, these nuisances wouldn't have corrupted the Web in the first place.\nSeven years ago, when Internet Explorer 4.0 was released, it allowed the Web to move to exciting new places as a new medium. But now the new kid is an old hack, and the Web can't move on until you switch to something new. To learn more, visit www.browsehappy.com.\nIn order to let Web designers create those bold new Web sites, tell purveyors of pop-up ads that they're not welcome and rob virus-writers of the thrill of victory, all you need to do is use a Web browser that doesn't suck. It's simply a matter of citizenship.
(10/29/04 4:09am)
The hoopla over the presidential elections sank into the "you can't make that shit up" category years ago, but every four years, it manages to get worse. In the midst of the confusion, chaos and outrage, all I know is that this drama is somehow centered around an American institution called the Electoral College.\nSay what you will about the "winner-take-all" Electoral College system, but there is only one thing that matters: We stand fanatically behind this system because it is part of the American spirit to be a poor loser.\nFor example, look at Coloradans Against a Really Stupid Idea. They're leading the fight against splitting up Colorado's electoral votes based on the percentages of popular votes won by a candidate. So, for example, if 51 percent of Colorado's voters choose Bush, and 49 percent side with Kerry, the incumbent will win five out of that state's nine electoral votes, and Kerry will take four.\nNow, most people I've talked to over the past eight years tend to agree that something like this is a really smart idea, not a really stupid one. But according to the Rocky Mountain News, these Coloradans believe that splitting up the electoral votes fairly will lead candidates to ignore the Centennial State and instead focus on other states that offer to give them all their electoral votes.\nIn other words, sucking up to politicians is more important than fairly representing the voice of the people. Why not offer them a foot rub and a blow job to go with their electoral votes? Is anyone confused about who's really stupid?\nFor the rest of us struggling to escape the wiles of the Electoral College, the Internet offers us another option. At www.votepair.org, you can "trade your vote" with someone from another state. If you live in a battleground state like Ohio, and you want to vote third-party, you could get someone in a "blue state" like Illinois to vote third-party for you if you vote Kerry for them. This way, your third-party vote is cast in a "safe" place. "United, we can all vote strategically to prevent a Bush presidency and build a progressive majority," the site says.\nOf course, I could tell someone I'll vote for Kerry and then vote for Bush. Their vote would be "punk'd." And I can think of a trash dumpster in Nevada full of torn up registration forms for would-be Democrat voters that says anyone is willing to punk the vote.\nThe more I read about this election, the more I become disenfranchised with my very existence. All the deception and drama ... when neither of the candidates are fit to run this country! My body mass is composed of the same particles of energy as the twits running for office! What does it all mean?!\nSeriously, an election is this: you go to a polling place, and you say, "(Candidate's name here), I choose you!" They say these words on "Pokemon" all the time! How hard can it be?!\nWhat it all comes down to is that if we had three serious presidential candidates, there would still be only one winner and twice as many losers. That means more American voters would feel defeated, and defeat isn't an American virtue, now is it? But if you cower in fear and stand behind one of two candidates, even if they're both a discredit to your intelligence, you have a better chance of not feeling like a loser next Wednesday.\nGrow up, America! This one idea, the Electoral College, is the reason why we have ripped up voter registration forms, destroyed ballots and invented a host of ingenious schemes for democratically screwing over our fellow citizens. It brings out the worst of our humanity every four years. Is this one idea really worth it?
(10/15/04 4:34am)
"The Daily Show" anchor Jon Stewart shared an unsettling revelation about his job on a recent episode of Comedy Central's acclaimed news program. You see, Stewart has always jokingly implied that his audience was fond of smokin' the reefer, and the assumption was reinforced by automatic applause from the studio audience to any pot-related joke. But when Fox News icon Bill O'Reilly made a crack about the marijuana usage of Stewart's audience when he was a guest on "The O'Reilly Factor," Comedy Central wasn't laughing.\nThe network commissioned a study, and found that Stewart's regular viewers are not, in fact, "stoned slackers," to use O'Reilly's words. In fact, Stewart explained on "The Daily Show", his regular viewers are more educated than the average cable news network viewers and are also more knowledgeable about international affairs.\nStewart pantomimed sheepish intimidation. The people watching him every night are practically a bunch of geniuses and he rewards them with fart and poop jokes. "I feel like a poopy-head," the anchor said.\nNow, the problem with this quasi-controversy is that everyone is assuming that there are two different categories of people: stoned slackers and smart, internationally-minded individuals. My question here is, can't someone be both at the same time?\nIn fact, how better do you explain the past four years than to assume that the most internationally-minded people in this country are a bunch of stoners? It almost makes sense that they would only stay tuned-in long enough to know what's going on and then hit up their good friend Mr. Bong to help them keep their sanity.\nTo prove this hypothesis, I had to do some research. I knew what kind of people watch "The Daily Show," so all I needed to do is find what kind of people smoke pot. Easy!\nOr not. Thanks to the war on drugs, it's hard to find statistics that say nice things about stoners. Most of it was propagandistic mush designed to make me afraid of weed. I found wildly varying facts and figures, some saying that over half our population has smoked marijuana at least once, or worse, that pot has four times as many carcinogens than tobacco. So maybe the smart people can't do anything about the miserable state of the world because they're all on chemotherapy. \nThat's when I remembered a brief news report I heard on the radio about a year ago. It said that one study showed that white suburban males smoke more pot than anyone else. So I could argue that these are the people who went to better schools, got better jobs and are just plain smarter than everyone else, right?\nAbsolutely not. I just transferred from a community college in Orange County, Calif., and you could not get more exposure to the white suburban culture anywhere else in the world. Trust me, suburban white males are not that smart. They almost made me racist against my own race. The missing link between smart, internationally-minded people and marijuana is not going to be found there.\nWith my deadline approaching, I was running out of time, and I had to use up one of my lifelines: phone a friend. "Pot generally diminishes your motivation, not your intelligence," she said. When people smoke marijuana, she told me, they're much more comfortable with having an intelligent conversation. But when not-so-smart people smoke it, she says, it's just not fun.\nSo what have we learned? Although "The Daily Show" viewers might not be stoners, they'd certainly be welcome to join in on a blunt and some conversation; the effects of smoking marijuana are exactly the opposite of drinking rum and Coke; that pot might be the only way to get the public interested international political fun; and if you want someone interesting to talk to, look for chemo patients.
(10/01/04 4:13am)
As a Californian, I look at the Bush administration offering aid money to the states recently hit by hurricanes, and I can't help but feel a little bitter.\nThree years ago, Bush gave my state the cold shoulder in the midst of an energy crisis, for which one of his biggest campaign contributors was partially responsible. In the end, the administration ignored the pleas of publicly elected officials and consulted the private sector to decide America's energy policy. For this error, the men and women in Bush's administration are enemies of democracy.\nAccording to the Los Angeles Times, one-eighth of our nation's population has chosen to squeeze itself into the state of California. The demand for resources, like water, electricity and gasoline is very high. Unfortunately, because environmental regulations in that state are so strict, it is almost impossible to build new power plants. Additionally, older plants are forced to shut down as their pollution emissions exceed acceptable limits. Because of this predicament, California has to buy energy from other states, and it makes these transactions through energy traders like those who worked for Enron.\nMaybe you know where this is going.\nIn 2001 Enron started gouging California, increasing prices by more than 1,000 percent, for no legitimate reason. The truth was Enron rewarded its energy traders for closing as many deals for as great a profit as possible, with all sorts of perks, benefits, vacations and such. They manufactured excuses to increase prices -- like sending surges on power lines, effectively making those lines useless. After extracting an extra charge to "perform repairs" on the lines, Enron stopped the surge so energy flow could resume as normal.\nPrices were so high and electricity was so scarce, California couldn't keep the lights on. With rolling blackouts, there was no way to keep cool, and some Californians died in the summer heat. Businesses could not guarantee they'd be able to serve their customers, and they had to either shut down or leave the state.\nIn the midst of all this, a number of senators and representatives from California wrote letters to the president begging him to intervene and impose a federal price cap on electricity sales -- pleading for the lives and livelihoods of their constituents. Their pleas fell on deaf ears.\nMonths later, after news of the Enron scandal broke, word got out that Dick Cheney was meeting with Enron officials while making decisions about America's energy policy.\nWhat is fundamentally wrong here is California's senators and representatives are supposed to represent the people of California. Our government claims to be, after all, a representative democracy. By ignoring these elected officials, the Bush administration chose to neglect the voice of one-eighth of the population instead favoring the voices of a few wealthy businessmen.\nAlthough wealthy businessmen do have the freedom to share their opinions with the government, they should be allowed to do so only through proper democratic channels. If Ken Lay wants to share his opinion about energy policy, he should send his elected representative a note, just as I have a right to send one to my own.\nWhen public officials fail to serve the public, catering instead to private interests, they assault on the democratic system that placed them in power and should be impeached.\nNow I look at the president offering a helping hand to the Southeastern states when he never offered one to my state. I know it's an election year, and the Bush campaign will try to help the states hit by hurricanes to win more votes.\nIf the public wants to entrust its votes to an administration that would rather the public didn't have a vote, they can go right ahead and do that. Throw your vote away.
(09/17/04 5:06am)
Happy Sept. 11," the voice in my cell phone said.\nI paused, awkwardly. "That might be one of the most disturbing things I've ever heard," I replied.\nHappy Sept. 11? How did that turn "happy" in just three years?\nA friend of mine says Sept. 11 is a national holiday. How did I miss this? I had to look into it. Apparently, Sept. 11 was dubbed "Patriot Day" only months after the terrorist attack. On this holiday, the American flag is to be flown at half-staff.\nBut for some people, that just isn't enough. Or maybe they just didn't get the memo. A petition with more than 200,000 signatures calls for Congress and the president to declare Sept. 11 "Unification Day," to celebrate how getting the crap scared out of us united us with the rest of the world -- for a few months.\nSo why all the confusion about Sept. 11 being a holiday? What about that day do we want to celebrate? Was it the triumph of the American will to keep going to work and go shopping? Was it okay for one week to walk up to a total stranger and give them a hug? Did we finally learn that we had to exercise caution with our foreign policy? Or were we merely liberated from the court of international opinion?\nMaybe Sept. 11 is "happy" because it's become an excuse. The White House can do whatever it wants because telling it what not to do would let the terrorists win, or something. I could see how that might make some people happy.\nDon't get me wrong, I don't hate America, I just love excuses. They're funny.\n"Mr. Hiester, your paper was due two days ago."\n"Shush! Remember Sept. 11!"\nIndeed, it's a fantastic excuse. If only I was as lucky as the Bush administration.\nBut what if Sept. 11 really is more than an excuse and becomes a national holiday? What would it be about? I would like to think that it would be a day to remember all the people who've given their life to serve their country: from brave New York firefighters, to our soldiers overseas, all of whom put their lives on the line regardless of whether they wanted to or not. If commitment means dedicating the entirety of one's self to something, these men and women are the very definition of the word and deserve to be honored.\nOr maybe we could remember the innocent civilians whose lives were taken that September morning; they were just regular people like you and me who had an unfortunate date with history. Everyone could take time to pause and reflect upon their own mortality and reaffirm the beauty of their fragile lives. It could be a nice holiday.\nThe problem is, America is really bad at holidays where we're supposed to remember dead people. Most of the time we distort the holiday beyond comprehension. Santa Claus? The Easter Bunny? I think Christ would be turning in his grave if he was still in it. What about the way we send silly "I love you" notes to commemorate the beheading of St. Valentine? Or the way we get drunk on St. Patrick's Day? Do we seriously remember any of these people? Sept. 11 would become the day when young children smash model planes into buildings so they can scurry to grab the "freedom candy" from shattered wreckage.\nIf we don't distort these holidays, we celebrate them by not remembering anything at all. We go to big movie premieres on Memorial Day weekend or skip town for Veteran's Day. There's no point in making Sept. 11 just another day off work.\nNo, perhaps the most honorable way to remember Sept. 11 would be to leave it to the historians. Remembering things is what they do. Then we can keep on doing what we do. After all, if we didn't keep doing what we do, wouldn't the terrorists win?