879 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(09/24/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>The Drug Enforcement Administration must be wiping the egg from its face after it was announced last week that pot cures cancer. Okay, that isn’t exactly true. But the discovery by two scientists at California Pacific Medical Center that a compound found in marijuana can stop metastasis should still pry the legalization debate farther open.Pierre Desprez and Sean McAllister have likely demolished a barrier in the search for a cure for cancer. They found that a compound called Cannabidiol (CBD) can switch off the gene that causes metastasis in many aggressive cancers. CBD is derived from marijuana; it is nontoxic and does not cause psychoactive effects.Marijuana is indeed acknowledged to have medicinal effects that relieve symptoms of many diseases, including glaucoma, HIV/AIDS and cancer. Although this might be seen as another strike against the DEA’s assertion that marijuana has no medical value, proponents of legalization should not seize this as an opportunity to run around saying “Pot cures cancer! Let’s legalize it and light up!” That would technically be untrue.Desprez and McAllister used injections to test CBD on animals because merely smoking marijuana would never deliver a sufficient dosage of the compound. To say that the result of the experiment is a reason for relaxing our attitudes toward laws regarding drug use would discredit and embarrass the legalization movement.Rather, it’s the procedure of the research that should cause us to reexamine our values and laws on drugs. The pair of scientists synthesized CBD in a lab to stay out of trouble while trying to get their experiments approved.Handling marijuana in a lab is not like handling plutonium or nerve gas. When substances are strictly controlled, the cost and controversy that goes into approving them for use can make research an arduous, expensive and sometimes impossible proposition. Given the cost and time required by medical research — Desprez and McAllister’s work consumed 20 years — those barriers might make many institutions skittish about funding and carrying out studies of controlled substances.Many drugs, both illegal and legal, can do wonderful things in the fight against disease while simultaneously posing substantial dangers for addiction and harm. LSD has been shown to help alcoholics give up drinking, and ecstasy can help people cope with PTSD. Shady reputations, socially-cultivated stigmas and disputable scheduling regulations should not hinder scientists from researching any substance that could save, extend and improve human life. That’s a goal we can say yes to.
(09/20/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Tucked deep within the folds of the New York Times was a story that was harder to stomach than it was to find.In Karachi, Pakistan, at least 289 people, including one boy as young as 10, were killed when a boiler exploded and caused a fire in the garment factory in which they worked.According to the Times, the factory’s managers had to choose between unlocking doors to save more workers or evacuating piles of stone-washed jeans headed for European stores.They chose the jeans.It really should come as no surprise that such a horrendous act received such lackluster press in the United States.Notwithstanding the fact that this country had just lost its first ambassador to violence abroad in more than twenty years, American consumerism has never had much room for the living conditions of those who make it possible.As an IU economics professor once eloquently stated in class, “The average gross domestic product per capita on this planet is about the same as Mexico’s. Now I don’t know about you, but I don’t much like the idea of living like the average Mexican.”In other words, if somebody is going to live well, somebody else has got to lose out.And ignorance is bliss. Cheap jeans don’t fit quite as well when the pockets are stuffed with the stories of overworked, maltreated Pakistanis.Pakistan, however, has relatively strong laws in defense of laborers. Work weeks cannot be longer than 48 hours unless the occupation is seasonal, women receive both six weeks pre- and postnatal paid leave, and the right to unionize is entrenched in the Pakistani Constitution. Pakistan also has numerous occupational health and safety regulations.But, in what has become a disturbingly common trend in the developing world, enforcement of these laws and regulations is extremely underwhelming.Fire extinguishers in the garment factory were missing or disabled and signs gave directions to emergency exits that turned out to be locked.One Pakistani labor activist insinuated that state inspectors were receiving money under the table when he said, “They have lifestyles that go beyond their wages.”Pakistani laborers are also frequently forced to lie to state inspectors or risk losing their jobs.In 1911, an eerily similar incident occurred. Almost 150 workers perished in a fire because managers had locked the doors leading to the stairwells to prevent unauthorized breaks. Like those in Karachi, many of these workers jumped from ninth and 10th story windows to escape the flames.That fire took place at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in New York City.In the aftermath, a public outcry led to sweeping legislation in this country that created stringent factory safety standards.International trade does not provide for the same transmittance of domestic public opinion that was possible after the factory fire in 1911.That is no excuse to continue the hypocritical attitude of protecting laborers at home while profiting from their exploitation abroad.
(09/18/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Twitter, known mostly for starting fights between useless celebrities and making #YOLO a thing, was the center of a diplomatic debacle last week. The Muslim Brotherhood, the current democratically elected party in Egypt, received some well-deserved criticism concerning what we regard as a two-faced Twitter account. What followed was proof that the new Egyptian government does not support freedom of speech as well as it should. The situation began after the U.S. Embassy in Cairo was attacked. Individuals of the Islamic faith were angry about an American film depicting the prophet Muhammad as a child molester. While the film is quite disgusting and poorly made, its creators had every right to make it. After the attack, the Muslim Brotherhood’s English feed tweeted they were relieved that no one was hurt and hoped U.S. relations in Egypt would stabilize.This would have been a sweet sentiment had it not been undermined by a tweet from their Arabic feed.The tweet in question translated to “Egyptians revolt for the Prophet’s victory in front of U.S. Embassy.” Unlike the English tweet, this one shows the Muslim Brotherhood hinting the attackers had some sort of victory against statements opposing Muhammad.The U.S. Embassy in Cairo fired back with the snarky tweet, “Thanks, by the way, have you checked out your own Arabic feeds? I hope you know we read those too.”It’s sad, really, that foreign diplomacy is now handled on the same forum as middle school breakups. Regardless, this exchange tells us that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood wants to display to the Western World a deceptive view regarding its opinion on free speech. This tweet alone doesn’t exactly put the Egyptian government on the side of America’s enemies, something that has been reflected in statements by President Barack Obama.Apparently feeling that Spanish was left out in this mess of language, the president said in an unrelated statement to Telemundo that while Egypt isn’t currently being viewed as an enemy, they aren’t being viewed as an ally, either. The tweet the Muslim Brotherhood sent certainly wasn’t a declaration of war. What it does represent, though, is that America needs to keep a watchful eye on the repression of free speech in the region, regardless of whether the oppressed are American or Egyptian. The United States gives the post-Hosni Mubarak regime $1.5 billion annually and at least has the right to examine the budding Egyptian democracy. Responding with the same scorn shown by a wronged teenage girl with her first iPhone, as the U.S. Embassy did, may not have been the best way to deal with this situation. But America has to stand up for freedom of speech of all peoples. The U.S. must take the stance that violent attacks on free speech, regardless of the speaker, will not be tolerated and that a government that does anything but reject such attacks will not be left in America’s good graces.
(09/18/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>At a Republican rally last week, reporter Ari Shapiro tweeted, “As a reporter, I’m torn about joining in the Pledge of Allegiance/national anthem at rallies. I’m a rally observer, not a participant.” He followed this thought with, “Yet most reporters around me stand for the anthem and pledge. I’m one of the few that didn’t. Setting myself up for accusations, I guess.”His tweet was followed by a small, relatively polite debate in the Twittersphere, begging the question of whether it is appropriate for reporters to participate in the pledge and national anthem at rallies.While on the political campaign trail, it is easy to get caught up in the partisanship of sides facing one another. The far more important element is the continuity of national identity. The few parts of each rally that focus almost exclusively on national pride should not be a source of consternation or deliberation. It should be a singular opportunity for all participants in the rally — candidates, participants and reporters — to take the opportunity to remember what sparks this conversation in the first place.For a member of the press to feel uncomfortable joining in the pledge is a failure in the system of government to create a difference between political ideologies and national identity. Shapiro should not only feel comfortable standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. He should, in fact, be part of the impartial, non-biased attendees who lead such a reminder of the reason such rallies take place and the place they serve in our country’s existence.
(09/17/12 4:00am)
Americans should not feel forced into extremist activity simply because
they are concerned that their voices will not be heard otherwise.
(09/11/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Participation and awareness are two of the major problems for the IU student body regarding the IU Student Association.
Approximately 400 students voted in the election that named the current
IUSA executive team when it ran unopposed last spring. In the previous
election, the winning ticket alone received 4,811 votes.
The individuals now controlling IUSA faced no viable opposition in their
campaign, a topic that more than once graced this very page. The
hastily made student campaigns that attempted, at the last minute, to
oppose them all floundered and ultimately dissolved.
Recently, IUSA released its budget for the 2012-13 school year.
This year, that budget includes salaries for that same executive team.
Individuals elected without contest awarded themselves a $3,000 salary each.
Taken together, the $18,000 in salaries represents the largest expense for IUSA.
In contrast, they proposed $17,000 be spent on Hoosier info kiosks, a
central point of the Movement for IUSA administration’s original
campaign strategy and the next-largest expense in this year’s budget.
The Indiana Lifeline initiative, a major victory for the last
administration which will be continued this year, recieves nothing when
compared to the kiosks. Lifeline is an initiative to change state law to
legally protect intoxicated 911 callers who seek medical attention for
those around them.
The salaries represent approximately 19 percent of the budget for IUSA, which is funded by fees paid by enrolled students.
In their defense, the move is not entirely unprecedented.
In the past, IUSA executives have drawn salaries, although the previous administration didn’t seem to find them necessary.
But IU students are now faced with a tough question. How comfortable are
we with paying almost a fifth of the money set aside for our student
association to individuals who faced no real competition in their
campaign to receive it?
On one side is the argument that Movement for IUSA is not to blame for
the fact that no one else was interested in running for their offices.
But one might also contend that individuals elected unopposed have a
heightened responsibility to fully represent their constituents and
avoid any semblance of corruption.
The situation certainly won’t create an outpouring of confidence in the
current administration nor is it entirely immoral on its face.
In the future, a ticket for such an influential student group must never be elected unopposed.
It is time for the members of the IU community to drop their sense of
apathy and take an interest in how almost $100,000 of their money is
spent.
Look for our guide to assembling a ticket for the IUSA executive board later this fall.
(09/10/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Inspired by the new Kilroy’s tattoos some on campus are sporting, the Opinion staff have compiled a list of six things at IU that mark you as unfit for survival.Going to a frat aloneThis one is for the ladies: Never go to an off-campus fraternity alone. Well, actually, never go to any frat alone. Maybe just avoid frats altogether, and you won’t have to witness various horrors the Opinion staff has seen. For example, a curtain held up with duct tape is not an appropriate solution for a missing bathroom stall door. Wearing blackface just because you’re at a costume party and wearing the jersey of a black basketball player is never acceptable, either. A free shot is a free shot unless that free shot is grape-flavored McCormick’s. And no matter how many times you request Kanye West’s “Monster” to try to start twerking, the DJ will keep ignoring you. There might be one actually good song during your two-hour visit. But by then you will have already called your roommate to come pick you up, because there is no way in hell you’re hopping in a car with six other drunk girls and a baby-faced 18-year-old pledge.Getting lost on the busIt’s raining, and class starts in 25 minutes. That’s plenty of time to get on the bus and ride all the way, jog to Ballantine and slide into a desk right on time. Except, lo and behold, you got on the wrong bus. The B Bus doesn’t go to Ballantine, you find out as you drive further and further away from your destination, nervously contemplating if you should pull the “next stop” rope. Instead of arriving in class with time to spare, you look like a stooge walking in 25 minutes late, drenched and ridiculed. This is only slightly better than the time you will inevitably try to take the bus to College Mall and end up somewhere on the south side of town, lost and scared and thanking God for smartphone directions and the Internet. Being a confused freshmanThis one goes out to the #college tweeters, the pack-runners, the W131-takers whose major is undecided. Freshmen, this one goes out to you. Sorry, but we cannot be friends. We would have to explain everything to you and try to keep you from hurting yourself as you act like an Amish youth on Rumspringa. If we invited you over, you would come. So would your 30 floor mates. Just talk to us next year when you are (hopefully) less terrible. Educate yourself on how to live your life without being ridiculous and kind of obnoxious. We were all there once, but we overcame it, and we have faith you can, too. And if you’re thinking, “But with my credits, I’m technically a sophomore,” you are the lowest of them all.Trying to do all of your class readingSuccess in college follows a bell curve. At one extreme are the fools who don’t do any of the readings, and at the other are those who try to do all of them. Those five chapters of pseudoscientific jargon you’re supposed to read tonight are an academic sausage — mostly filler you won’t use. The guys who wrote the textbook know this. That’s why they bolded some of the words. It’s not impossible to do all of your assigned readings, but you might founder socially, starve and go blind. Open up all your syllabi right now, turn to the “Class Goals” section and pencil in: “Manage time. Pick out important stuff. Detect BS,” lest you graduate a miserable and sleep-deprived shell of your former self. Using sidewalks...badlyThere’s an unspoken rule that sidewalks should work like roads. Stay on the right. Watch for bikes and other walkers if you’re crossing the street. Don’t walk arm in arm with three other women and block others from maintaining their fast pace. Leave space for runners, those late for tests and the occasional rogue bike. Cyclists should stay off the sidewalks unless they’re walking their bikes to a parking area. If you’re texting and talking with two of your besties and blocking the whole path while slowly moseying toward Kirkwood without a care in the world, please keep in mind that many of us have many cares as we walk on campus. The most pressing of these is not being more than 10 minutes late to lecture for the third class in a row. We know you’ve been rushed before. Don’t participate in this vicious cycle of lateness. Getting a Kilroy’s tattooJust when we thought frat-tanks were the perfect way to spot morons in a crowd, Kilroy’s Bar and Grill now offers free cover for life to anyone who gets the Kilroy’s logo tattooed on their body. You might as well get the word “tool” tattooed directly next to it in Comic Sans and all caps. This is the single most idiotic thing anyone could ever do at IU. By tattooing the Roy’s logo on your body, you’re making as big a mistake as the guy who decided to impregnate Snooki. Once you’ve gone there, you can’t go back. The mark of your idiocy and college shenanigans will survive for the rest of your days as a working professional, unless you decide to splurge on laser tattoo removal.
(09/05/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Three weeks ago, in Vice magazine’s fashion section, columnist Annette Lamothe-Ramos published an article titled “I Walked Around In A Burqa All Day (And I’m Not Muslim).”In what could have been a potentially interesting and eye-opening social experiment on how Muslims are perceived and treated within our culture, especially in New York, it ended up being the intellectual equivalent of the time Tyra Banks walked around in a fat suit. Lamothe-Ramos describes her romp around New York, stopping to pose idly at various touristy landmarks, as an adventure in “scaring tourists.” In some kind of preemptive strike to say exactly what everyone was thinking, she writes, “I didn’t realize the significance of visiting one of the tallest buildings in New York dressed in Islamic garb until we reached the entrance.“ The real cringe-worthy line comes just after, when she states, “I felt like a jerk.” Yes, Annette, you should feel like a jerk, but for a much different reason.Among other things, she described the garment as “resembling the Grim Reaper,” “the least-revealing piece of clothing of all time” and looking “like Batman.”Even if we were to view this piece as exclusively fashion-related, as existing in an alternate reality devoid of cultural or racial bias, Lamothe-Ramos still managed to be wrong. The garment she wore was not actually a full burqa but rather a niqab, a veil that covers the face, except for the area around the eyes. Sure enough, the publication received a large amount of attention, much of it negative. What was Vice’s response? A follow-up article with the telling tagline, “Spoiler: We’re not sorry.”Thank you, Vice, for perpetuating ignorance in a country already wildly uncomfortable with Islam. In its rebuttal, Vice cited other disgustingly insensitive pieces that, in a lame and poorly executed attempt at satire, featured two reporters who wore blackface and spent a day using a wheelchair. Following the recent controversy surrounding a shooting at the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin, one assumes people would think twice before making negative commentary on Islamic dress like this. However, it seems that in popular culture, even among “educated” individuals, the culture of Islam is thoughtlessly mocked. In its rebuttal, Vice said, “The point was to treat these articles of clothing as any other — completely secular and devoid of higher meaning.”A naïve sentiment, considering that Muslims and those who are interpreted as being Muslim are frequent subjects of violence and discrimination in our culture. It is not possible to treat these pieces as devoid of higher meaning. Rather, we should seek to understand and sympathize with the experiences of others before making careless judgments on something as simple as the way they dress.
(04/29/12 11:53pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Despite its misleading name, the anti-bullying site Bullyville recently shut down a website called Is Anyone Up, an “identity porn” site used primarily by the brokenhearted and spiteful to get back at their exes by publicly posting nudes they had exchanged prior to break-up. Its creator, Hunter Moore, called “the most hated man on the Internet,” made the statement that he was finally burnt out from the process, the reporting, the “legal drama” and constantly being called “sleazy.”Can’t imagine why.In buying the amateur porn site, Bullyville challenged Moore to channel his social networking expertise into a better cause. So, he now organizes crazy parties for good causes and turns to charity in an effort to clear his image.His farewell letter exudes little to no regret regarding the site he had created to exploit individuals’ private pictures, and in a classic non-apology apology, he thanks all his contributors and commemorates the site for his current success. Opinion news media don’t need another article regarding how despicable, irresponsible, trashy, low-lifed and unbased Hunter Moore is (you deplorable cyber insolent).But we’d like to call attention to the reality of bullying in the adult world. What’s important here is that Hunter got away with it at $13,000 a month. The site survived a year and would have continued had Bullyville not given Moore a chunk of cash.Is Anyone Up served no good. That’s a no-brainer. But paying our bullies for their offenses, trying to conceal the identity of a bully with charities and foreclosing upon the cases of millions that contributed to the damage the site created — that’s a problem.Adult bullies under criminal punishment are another issue, but in the closure of the site, Bullyville has trivialized the efforts of anti-bullying and everything the organization is trying to prevent. If a child shoves another child on the playground, we don’t hand them a check, erase their shortcomings and give them a job.We reprimand, put them in a corner and tell them, “Don’t do it again.” Moore received these backlashes. But after the slap on the wrist, he’s being sponsored. Not that many bully survivors will be quite so eager to attend an anti-bullying party put on by a former bully proprietor.Moore deserves (well, has the right to) a second chance and different name. But his support came from the wrong source in the wrong form. And in creating a guise for the identity of a bully, we’re condoning the bully. Adult bullies are out there, in homes, schools, businesses and online. Moore has recognized his mistake, but the effort to turn around bullies still persists.
(04/25/12 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Well, it’s about time somebody put those nutty nuns in their places.According to the Washington Post, the Vatican recently “launched a crackdown on the umbrella group that represents most of America’s 55,000 Catholic nuns,” the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, for “not speaking out strongly enough against gay marriage, abortion and women’s ordination.”Those silly Sisters of ours — always getting into trouble. Next thing you know they’ll be throwing ragers in the convents or trying to ditch their beautiful, black-and-white habits for miniskirts and tube tops. The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has appointed Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain to oversee the process of revamping the LCWR, yet as a casual observer, it is difficult to see exactly what needs to be changed.Ostensibly, the LCWR has not made any statements contrary to the beliefs of the Catholic Church, yet it is being admonished for what it hasn’t said.This would appear to be true, as an announcement released by the Vatican stated, “While there has been a great deal of work on the part of LCWR promoting issues of social justice in harmony with the church’s social doctrine, it is silent on the right to life from the conception to natural death.”This seems like a strange point of contention for Rome to pick on our nuns for. Come on, aren’t there much worse things they could be doing? What if they were caught breaking their celibacy or slapping kids with their “nunchucks”? (Pretty good, right?) At least they haven’t behaved as badly as a few Catholic priests have in the past.One group specifically targeted in the Vatican’s criticism is Network, which is a “social justice lobby created by Catholic sisters” in 1971. Sartain will be charged with reviewing LCWR’s relationship with Network and other groups the Church might question.Sister Simone Campbell, Network’s executive director, said she was concerned that “political differences in a democratic country would result in such censure and investigation.” Preach on, Sister, preach on!Though it might be the right of the Vatican to form its own beliefs and uphold those beliefs, we believe the Church should focus on tackling other issues within the organization rather than reforming groups that have only helped support religious women in the United States.
(04/18/12 8:48pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Alright kids, here’s the thing. Little 500 is a tough week for everyone. It’s tough for the racers, it’s tough for your professors, it’s tough for your poor, worried parents. It’s tough for the auxiliary police flooding into campus, and it’s tough for your own young, frail bodies. But we still go through with it every year, in spite of previous arrests, in spite of injuries, in spite of embarrassments past and blackout, rain-soaked race days.Without fail, we as a campus throw what some call the “best college weekend” and others call much more obscene things that I cannot put in print. Why do we do this to ourselves? This is a serious question. I actually want to know why we do this to ourselves because I have no idea in hell.My freshman year little 500, I was arrested.It wasn’t just any arrest either. It was, in fact, my second arrest in the last six months, and both were for underage drinking. The first violation was innocent enough. A friend visiting from another school told me about a party her boyfriend was going to. I obliged to provide her a place to sleep for the weekend, and one cup of weak jungle juice later, the house was surrounded by excise police who, during the course of the next few hours, issued a ticket to any underage partygoer who had so much as a sip of alcohol.My parents were upset, but eventually I was able to write it off as “naïve freshman mistake” and “wrong place, wrong time.” I spent the money I had left from graduation and my summer job to pay for the ticket myself, and soon enough the incident was behind me. I was noticeably more careful, however.For the first couple of months, I rarely went out. It only took one bad night and the mounting stress of classes to get me to stop going out completely.Before I knew it, April had arrived, and I was finishing what had been a rough semester. Here was Little 500, a chance for a final hurrah, the holy grail of free booze, loud music and endless Facebook invitations. You’ve earned this, I thought to myself, Seriously, every other one of your friends is going out tonight. Are you actually going to stay in? You make me sick.And thus, I succumbed to the impossible allure of Lil Five. Go to class during the day, hit up a few parties at night and pull it together in time for class again in the morning. Most gigs were a bust, and we found ourselves doing less partying and more meandering around our suddenly wildly populated, boozy town, hoping to find something good for the night. Saturday night was when we had a plan. Saturday we were going all-out. There was a huge event off-campus, far enough that we arranged several sober drivers to bring along our entire crew.The music was good and the dancing fun, but the scene was quickly getting out of hand. It wasn’t long before police showed up. Most of my friends managed to leave swiftly and undetected, but as I was walking — probably stumbling — out the door, an officer approached me. “Have you been drinking?” he asked. Déjà vu.The rest of the night remains kind of a blur. I was Breathalyzed, but I neither remember nor was I interested in hearing the number they read to me. Somewhere between the ride home I got from a stranger and fumbling my way into my dorm room, I had lost my phone and the ticket I’d been issued. When did I have to go to court? I think it was 9 a.m. I recalled that one officer said “She’s never going to remember this.”I didn’t care. I just wanted to get out of my cold, rain-soaked party dress. I had left quite a sight for my roommate by the time she got home. All of my clothes from the party were wet and piled on the floor, with blood all around the knee of my tights because I had slipped and fallen. Oh, and my dress? In what I would later reflect on as my finest moment of drunkenness, instead of fumbling around with all of the complicated steps of removing the belt and pulling it over my head, I grabbed the scissors off of her desk and cut it off.The next morning was a panicky mess. Phoneless, clueless and more hungover than I could handle, I woke up an hour late for my scheduled court date. By the time I finally got there, the other Little 500 partiers were just leaving to do their mandatory community service. I was told to just “come back tomorrow.” Everything else went pretty smoothly. A few weeks and another $400 of graduation money later, and I was taking the same Pre-Trial Disposition class I had passed with flying colors in January. I never had to do community service. My parents eventually stopped threatening to pull me out of school for my “outrageous behavior,” or as I chose to see it, “bad luck.” Although I am still often the butt of the joke at many family gatherings, I’ve never received another ticket and certainly don’t plan on doing so again this year.So, what have we learned from this story, besides that I am probably not very fun to be around and have a penchant for being arrested? If it is Little 500, never leave your room. But if you do leave your room, don’t go to a sketchy party far off-campus. And if you do go to a sketchy party, try not to get arrested. And if you do get arrested: lose your phone, cut off your dress, oversleep your court date, and you won’t have to do community service.
(04/16/12 12:30am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Early Friday, North Korea celebrated the 100th birthday of deceased former leader Kim Il-Sung (the country’s founder), and new leader Kim Jong-un started things off with a real bang. Specifically, a rocket was launched.It carried a satellite called “Kwangmyongsong,” or “Bright Shining Star,” and within two minutes of flight, it spectacularly exploded, falling into the ocean below it. The rocket’s launch, combined with its construction, cost the country about $450 million and was supposedly meant to only carry the “Shining Star” into orbit in honor of Il-Sung. However, many are calling it a flimsy cover for a more sinister purpose: testing out technology almost identical to that of long-range missiles. In February, North Korea agreed to freeze developments in its nuclear and long-range missile programs in exchange for food aid from the United States. Although State Department officials insisted in March that food assistance did not depend on the deal, it seems they’ve now changed their minds. An Obama administration official confirmed late Friday that as punishment for North Korea’s breach of contract, the U.S. would indeed be withdrawing the food assistance they’d formerly promised. The deal was originally suspended when the rocket launch was announced last month, but it seems North Korea’s continued disregard of the agreement put the final nail in the short-lived plan’s coffin. North Korea’s actions or “propaganda displays,” according to White House Spokesman Jay Carney, are certainly foolhardy. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on missile technology is thoughtless and economically unwise for the struggling country that cannot even feed its own people. It’s unfortunate that the people of North Korea continue to be the victims of their totalitarian leaders’ actions. Withdrawing food from a starving country doesn’t punish Jong-un and those making the major military decisions from their cushy positions of power. It’s the North Korean people that need our humanitarian aid, and unfortunately, due to the maneuvers of international politics, they’re not going to get it. We agree that North Korea must face consequences for its breach of contract and that the “satellite” is definitely an attempt at testing intercontinental ballistic missile technology, which is an alarming prospect. Although we writers of the Editorial Board cannot think of a better or more viable solution, we cannot help but lament the fact that more than 24 million people are held helpless in the crosshairs of high-level negotiations.Frighteningly enough, many military analysts believe this enormous failure will only motivate North Korean leaders to work even harder on testing their nuclear capability, if only to avoid international embarrassment. The country just finished work on a $400-million launch site near its northwestern border with China, and only hours after the rocket explosion, Jong-un was formally sworn in as the head of the National Defense Commission, which is considered North Korea’s highest state agency. North Korea is run by crazy dictators with an unshakable urge to launch some nukes, and we need to keep a leash on them. We get it. These are the leaders that continued their festivities without a hitch after a failed rocket launch and threats from multiple world powers. They’re a little disconnected from reality. We understand that North Korea has demonstrated that they “cannot be trusted to keep their commitments” or “make sure the assistance gets to those who need it,” as U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes said. However, we urge the U.S. and the United Nations to put their heads together and come up with a real solution. We have the best military, economic and political strategists in the world. Surely we can do better than letting 24 million lives slowly waste away. Starve the tyrants, not the people. Kim Jong-un could stand to lose a few pounds, anyway.
(04/11/12 10:21pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Last week, the Canadian government announced that it will be phasing out the use and production of its penny throughout 2012.Well, that’s great for Canada, you might say, but why should we care? To put it bluntly, the penny makes no cents. And if that isn’t your kind of humor, this article might not be for you.But really, Canada is taking a huge step the United States should follow. The American penny is an absolute leech on our economy.How can something so small be such a drainage? Well, it’s a worthless metal disk that costs about 1.6 cents to make. Somehow, that doesn’t add up.And when you add that up, combined with transportation costs and the time and effort it takes to count them, the American penny costs us about $900,000,000 annually. That’s a lot of zeros.But maybe you’re the nostalgic type. Maybe you don’t mind paying close to a billion dollars a year to have a constant reminder of your childhood, when pennies used to be worth something.The problem with this logic is that they aren’t worth anything now. Seriously, go try to find a vending machine or toll-booth that would let you pay for something with pennies. Or try to pay a cashier for something exclusively using pennies. If the cashier won’t choke you to death for wasting time, the people behind you probably will.But the opposite of this is equally annoying. We’ve all paid $4.96 for something with a five dollar bill, forcing the cashier to give us four pennies back.What do you always do with those pennies? Invest them? Buy something? Or toss them in your cup-holder, never to think of them again?And don’t try to make this about Abraham Lincoln. The guy freed the slaves and literally lifted a man by the throat and shook him into submission when he was confronted with a fight. I doubt his sense of self-worth would come from whether he’s on the penny.So with all this evidence against it, you’d think that the penny would have been cut from U.S. circulation the second its production costs became more than a penny — some alternative reality where the world makes sense, rather than cents. But we live in this world, and the penny remains. Why?Because it’s a boring subject and no one cares.The penny isn’t like gay marriage or gun control. It’s not something that Republicans or Democrats can use to get their voters angry and in the voting booths.It’s a logical problem with a logical solution. And if there’s anything in this world that politicians hate, it’s logic.It’s kind of a boring subject, but it’s one that could save the U.S. close to a billion dollars annually. With the economy the way it is, we need all the help we can get. And with the elimination of the penny, we’d have $0.99 problems, but a penny wouldn’t be one.
(04/09/12 10:23pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Between Justin Bieber’s “Boyfriend” video and the past two Cosmopolitan covers (Selena Gomez and Dakota Fanning, respectively), it seems the teens of Hollywood have been getting a little risqué lately. One could argue teenagers have always been like this. As soon as puberty hits, it seems every 14-year-old is eager to get their sexy on. Part of the appeal is purely hormonal, and part of it comes from the fact that sexuality has always been relatively taboo for minors. Perhaps we’re being too sensitive. After all, when we were young, Britney Spears was doing hip thrusts in a red latex bodysuit, and the media eagerly dissected the (figurative) sex lives of Ms. Spears and her then-beau, Justin Timberlake. Destiny’s Child did lots of sexual crawls on the ground in a few of its videos, if we remember correctly. Sexy teen stars aren’t new. However, the recent sexualization of America’s teen stars seems more blatant than it’s ever been before. Fanning, who wasn’t even 18 at the time of her Cosmo debut, was featured on a cover that touted “His best sex ever!” and “Too naughty to say here (but you have to try this sex trick).” Just to reiterate, Fanning wasn’t even legal when the cover was published.Gomez’s cleavage-heavy cover was accompanied by “50 sex tips” in bold, as well as “Your Orgasm Guaranteed.” Although Gomez is 18, her career has been built on her squeaky-clean Disney image. She became famous by being the star of a show that caters to the 10 to 14 (or “tween”) age group. These tweens are still the ones who follow her. Perhaps those who were 15 at the onset of Gomez’s fame have aged enough now to be comfortable seeing their idol portrayed in such a sexual manner. However, the majority of Gomez’s fans are still very young. If you walk into any Target or Wal-Mart, you can see her face plastered on children’s clothing and toys. Yet, this is the same young woman being used to sell “Your Orgasm Guaranteed.”The teaser for Beiber’s new video shows him seductively talking to the camera while countless female hands caress him from the darkness. Although it isn’t as overtly sexual as a magazine cover, it still sends the same message. He’s 18 now, so he’s allowed to be naughty.Perhaps Beiber, Gomez and Fanning are allowed to be a little naughty. After all, they’re all 18, so they can technically be as sexual as their little hearts desire. So should we just let them grow up? By the time many of us were 18, we were having sex and often doing illegal things. Is it unrealistic of us to expect young Hollywood stars to be celibate angels?We think not.Especially in the cases of Gomez and Bieber, purity and innocence (even as it veils the sexual curiosity of the tweens) have been the pillars of their careers. Parents and children alike are OK with these artists because, sexy as their dancing and singing and acting might seem, they never overtly address it.If you gain almost the entirety of your fame by being compelling but essentially nonthreatening, you can’t expect to immediately become a Hollywood sexpot or dreamboat once you hit legal age. If your fame is built upon the fascination of small children and tweens, it’s irresponsible and unrealistic to blatantly sexualize yourself. Gomez and Bieber might soon discover this if they continue on their paths of public sexual discovery. Parents aren’t going to support it, and it’s mostly their money that’s pouring into the pop stars’ pockets. When it comes down to it, sexuality isn’t a bad thing. It’s natural, and our western culture has an admittedly strange love-hate relationship with it. Combine this with our obsession with youth, and some pretty questionable stuff arises. However, when you’re a celebrity, you’ve given up your right to privacy and, frankly, to your own life. You are essentially public property. When the likes and dislikes of your fans dictate who you are, sometimes it’s difficult to let your true urges come out, so to speak. You can’t say you’re a role model and then not act like one. We hope Gomez and Bieber realize this before they get caught in a sex scandal. At this point, it seems bound to happen sooner or later.
(04/08/12 10:52pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>You might think something as simple as a bike bell is not the kind of thing to land you naked in front of a police officer. But you would be wrong.That is exactly what can and did happen in New Jersey to a man who was arrested, strip-searched and detained for riding his bicycle without an audible bell.In 2003, nun was forced to bare her bones for peaceably trespassing at an anti-war demonstration in San Francisco.Others have violated similar laws, such as using a turn signal, and have been similarly violated. The Supreme Court, in a contentious 5-4 decision last week, has upheld this kind of behavior.In his opinion for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that it was not the job of any court to question the decisions of corrections officials.Well then, what is Justice Kennedy’s opinion of the job of the court system? Are courts not in the business of second-guessing everyone, law enforcement included? This ruling seems to establish a massive double standard. It seems to create a country in which the only entity immune from the law is that which enforces it.In fact, some police actions in the case placed before the court seem nothing if not questionable.Albert Florence was pulled over by New Jersey state troopers while on his way to dinner. Florence was arrested because the trooper claimed he had not paid a fine, even though he was carrying a letter that stated he had. Florence was detained for at least six days and strip-searched not once, but twice before the mistake was rectified and he was released. The argument is that police need the indiscriminate power to strip-search any incoming detainee to prevent the introduction of contraband into prisons. In other words, people who ride bikes without bells are actually gang members trying to get arrested so they can smuggle drugs and Twinkies into jails.What Kennedy skips over is an idea he presented in a decision he wrote a year ago. At the time, Kennedy argued that “prisoners retain the essence of human dignity inherent in all persons.” Few things seem more undignified than being asked to spread your cheeks, bend over and cough — Florence was asked to do all of these things. It is the main responsibility of the court system of any country to ensure citizens are receiving their rights.In this ruling, the Supreme Court has passed that main responsibility on to law enforcement officials by telling them it is not any court’s responsibility to hold them accountable for their actions.But recently, those actions have brought to light a wide range of ethical issues. Chemical weapons abuse, ticket-fixing — these little foul-ups force us to ask whether this institution deserves the kind of power it has just been given.So next time you think about jaywalking or driving with a headlight out, consider giving yourself a good wash down there first.
(04/04/12 8:12pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>We hope everyone is familiar with the shooting of Trayvon Martin by now. The 17-year-old black student was shot and killed by George Zimmerman, a Hispanic man who claims he was acting in self-defense. The merits of Zimmerman’s claim are hardly worth debating, seeing as he is a grown man who was wielding a semiautomatic weapon while Martin was a high-school student carrying candy. The murder has sparked nationwide outrage at both Zimmerman and the police department that has refused to prosecute him. It was a tragedy, and the aftermath has only made it worse, as some have complicated the matter in an effort to exonerate Zimmerman through slandering Martin.It recently came to light that Martin had been suspended from his school 10 days before his murder. He was suspended after school officials found a baggie containing traces of marijuana in his book bag. This has been tied to the narrative put forward by some bloggers and conservative media that Martin was a bad apple and a criminal in the making.Of course, those denigrating Martin’s character ignore the fact that black students are three and a half times as likely to be suspended than white students, a prejudice in modern school systems, according to a New York Times article.But even if we set aside the issue of racism in school discipline, Martin’s suspension record is still irrelevant to his murder.Let’s be honest for a moment. How many IU students have weed in their book bags at this very moment? You couldn’t throw a brick on this campus without hitting a stoner, but no one would ever suggest that we begin executing IU students for being thugs and criminals.The crucial difference between most IU students and Martin is, of course, race. Internet and media commentators are gleefully tearing through Martin’s past, including pictures and tweets illegally obtained by a white supremacist hacker. They point to his suspensions, images in which Martin wears a grill and tweets with foul language, and they exclaim that he was a thug. The implication is that anyone who meets the slippery definition of thug deserves whatever fate a man with a gun decides for him. The very fact that the Martin family feels moved to publicize private photos of Trayvon with small children or riding a horse is a defense that should not be required of a family in grief. This is a classic example of victim-blaming. Just as when a woman is sexually assaulted, those who would defend privilege are crawling out of the woodwork to tear down the reputation of the victim, rather than that of the true criminal.Trayvon Martin was murdered in cold blood. Nothing else matters.
(04/01/12 11:29pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Wait! Stop the presses! Put down that remote!It’s not all over — Barack and the Supremes haven’t broken up just yet.True, like that scene in “Dreamgirls,” the justices all crowded around the president like vultures around a corpse, eager to air their frustrations.His manager, Solicitor General Don Verrilli, who accidently walked out of a 1950s commercial, took the brunt of the hit.“You’ve been late, you’ve been mean, getting fatter all the time,” they might as well have told him.“Your law is a lie! Your law is a lie! It’s a broccoli-eating, liberty-draining abomination.”Verrilli never stood a chance. It was the spectacle of our lifetime, the stage of their dreams, and the Supremes were going to use it to their full advantage.The air was thick with theatrics as the nine divas took their place behind the bench, ready for the primetime spotlight.In the smoky aftermath, the pundits — who a week before were predicting the ruling 8-1 in favor of Obama — were ready to call Obamacare dead as a dormouse and declare Barack and the Supremes broken up.Fear not, good reader, for the pundits were a step ahead of themselves.Yes, the law stands a good chance of being struck down, but anyone who thought this fight wouldn’t be close is an idiot. The court wanted this case — wanted it bad — just for this reason.In general, the pundits’ reading of this case has been rather flimsy. People seem to have forgotten the court knows this case as well as any they’ve ever decided, and so its public questioning was just theater with a side of ritual sadism in which the justices get to go grill and flip the lawyers.Although revealing, the real decisions will happen behind closed doors as Justice Stephen Breyer lobbies and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Elena Kagan join in. None of us will get to see that. But what we can do is consider the sort of questions the justices will ponder behind closed doors.As former justice Sandra Day O’Connor might ask, what does the public expect?According to polls, about two-thirds of United States citizens disagrees with the mandate. The nation is evenly split on the full Obamacare bill. The question is how much of this is built up from the noisy opposition to the bill and how much of this is a throwback to deep-set American individualism.How might a decision in favor of Florida and the rest of the states have real-world repercussions?Commentators have called this potentially the most impactful case of our lifetime, but other than the takedown of the law, it’s unclear what sort of immediate effects the reduction of Congress’ Commerce Clause powers would have. On the other hand, an obscure part of the argument in which the states argued the Medicaid expansion — the new conditions the feds put on receiving federal money for Medicaid — was an infringement of their liberty could end up affecting everything from the drinking age to educational curricula.How might the nation react to a 5-4 decision?Everyone seems to have taken for granted that the vote will come down to a 5-4 split of the conservative and liberal factions on the court, but no one seems to have asked what might happen after that.It seems obvious: The left would be outraged, accusing the court of being a partisan organization trying to sway the election.The decision would rip open the scars from Bush v. Gore, a true low point in the court’s history, and place the very legitimacy of the Supreme Court onstage.This is not something previous courts have ignored — with Planned Parenthood v. Casey famously citing the “principles of institutional integrity” as a reason for that decision — and something Chief Justice John Roberts must consider today in his court, if perhaps not as openly. Importantly, the court’s approval rating has dropped to 46 percent.It needs to solve the Obamacare case to preserve itself and its trust — and this, more than any reason, is why it’s not all over yet.
(03/26/12 8:55pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In case there was any confusion about IUSA last week — considering it appeared in the title of four Indiana Daily Student articles — the acronym was not referring to the International Underwater Spearfishing Association.Rather, the four letters stand for the Indiana University Student Association, a group which is meant to represent all students at IUB.We wouldn’t be surprised if students didn’t notice any election drama, given the indifference to the news of IUSA’s single-ticket ballot.A poll on idsnews.com shows that, at the time of writing, 84 percent of those polled who plan on voting do not intend to write in a candidate for the IUSA ballot, a provision which was made for this year’s election in light of the lack of opposition to the Movement ticket.Neither will the majority of those polled vote for the Movement party. An overwhelming 65 percent said they will not vote at all.So what does this tell us about IUSA? Was the system rigged in favor of the Movement party, which is recycling most of its membership?Or do most students simply not care about their student government enough to vote one way or another?Considering the results of the online poll, it seems safe to say that apathy is more to blame than conspiracy.Disinterest in the IUSA election parallels indifference seen each year in elections throughout the country. In fact, student government at IU could be said to represent our country’s government as a whole.The most obvious symptoms include poor voter turnout and limited candidate options.But the core of the problem lies in the function of our governing bodies: They don’t seem to do much.On the national scale, the two dominant (and barely different) parties are perpetually locked in a tug-of-war in which significant legislation produced by one side either gets blocked, removed after a power-shift or watered-down beyond effectiveness by the opposing party. This has resulted in a 40-year low approval rating of Congress.With regard to IUSA, its recent contribution to state law protecting appropriate response to alcohol overconsumption, its installation of sustainable exercise equipment at the gym and information screens at the library and its passing of various well-intentioned resolutions are all things that our student representatives should be proud of.However, IUSA has little sway with changes in tuition, the University budget and other policy decisions that critically influence the lives of students on campus.IU’s Board of Trustees, which boasts only one student member (who is appointed by the governor, not the students) legally owns and controls the University.While interest in student government is important, it must also be acknowledged how little of an effect IUSA has had on major issues.The “Raise Hell, Not Tuition” pamphlets released from Ballantine Hall last week are an example of direct action that might catch more student attention than IUSA policy.Does this mean our system of student government is broken? We might never know unless we snap out of this streak of apathy and reengage as active and concerned students and citizens.There are problems on campus. We need to voice them.
(03/25/12 11:33pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In an outrageous show of victim blaming last Friday, Geraldo Rivera, an attorney, talk-show host and reporter, said he believes “the hoodie (that Trayvon Martin was wearing) is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was.”Rivera went on to explain that he never lets his own son — who is “a dark-skinned kid” — go out in a hoodie or anything else that would make it seem like he was trying to “stylize himself as a gangster.”Rivera’s point is clear. If you look like a gangster — that is, if you’re dark-skinned and wearing a hoodie — people are going to feel threatened, and it might cost you your life.It seems Rivera is suggesting that if all dark-skinned people stop wearing hoodies, we can systematically eliminate crime motivated by prejudice against dark-skinned people wearing hoodies.There are innumerable problems in Rivera’s offensive diatribe, but the most glaring ones are that Rivera is using his identification as a member of a minority group — Rivera is an Hispanic-American — to justify victim blaming, and he is perpetuating a stereotype by claiming that this massive, complex problem can be solved simply by not presenting yourself as a stereotype (i.e., by not wearing a hoodie if you’re black or Latino).Race and ethnicity are not relevant when it comes to victim blaming and racial profiling. Anyone can racially profile anyone, and you can even blame a victim if you’re the same race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation as him or her.An example of this problematic practice is Corey Dade’s March 21 article for NPR, “Florida Teen’s Killing: A Parent’s Greatest Fear.”In this article, Dade, who is black, discusses the “rules” that his parents drilled into him when he was growing up: never loiter outside, never go anywhere alone, never talk back to the police, never reach into your pocket in the presence of police, and never doubt that trouble could happen anywhere.Respecting the police is good advice for any kid no matter what his or her race, but it doesn’t solve the deep systemic and cultural problem that is racial profiling. More importantly, it doesn’t prevent a tragic incident from occurring.We can’t excuse the injustice that fatally befell Trayvon Martin as self-defense against suspicious behavior. We need to condemn victim blaming and confront the reality of racism in the United States.Not hoodies.
(03/07/12 11:45pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>The University of Texas at Austin is the venue for the latest challenge to affirmative action.University policy provides race-based enrollment guidelines to help historically disadvantaged groups gain admission and the benefits of college education.A white student, Abigail Fisher, who was not admitted to the school, is suing to have the policy overturned.The University of Texas has a policy of admitting students in the top 10 percent of their high-school graduating classes. Fisher did not meet this standard.Additionally, she attended another university, so she cannot claim to have suffered major hardship by not being admitted to the University of Texas. Nevertheless, by agreeing to hear the case, the Supreme Court is signaling potential willingness to overturn the affirmative action policy. Whatever the particular merits of the University of Texas case, affirmative action still has an important role to play in higher education. Despite the passing of years since the civil rights era, there are still enormous structural inequalities facing non-dominant racial and ethnic groups. African-Americans face disproportionate social and economic barriers when attempting to complete a college education.Some of these barriers stem from poverty and low-quality primary school education, which leave African-American students at a disadvantage relative to white students.This disparity has long-term effects on career opportunities and perpetuates multi-generational academic underachievement among some African-Americans. There are legitimate criticisms of affirmative action as the system is currently administered. In certain respects, the scope and selection method of affirmative action programs should be revised. Not all people of color require the support that affirmative action provides, and not all whites are part of the privileged upper class.Politicians and school administrators should consider expanding the criteria of affirmative action to address class and race inequalities in our society.Affirmative action at least recognizes that this problem exists and seeks to alleviate racial disparity. The system is not perfect, but removing affirmative action while large racial inequalities remain would be a step in the wrong direction.Critics who allege that African-Americans are now being given special treatment should remember the legacy admissions policy of many schools. Selective institutions regularly give preference to the children of alumni, which in practice means students from wealthy white families. The truth is that all kinds of special privileges exist in American society, and for generations unequal advantages have been given almost exclusively to whites. Affirmative action has historically been, and still is today, a limited but worthwhile attempt to reverse the chronic effects of discrimination.