www.binghamtonreview.com
Binghamton Review March 2008
The Student Journal at Binghamton University
The Student Journal at Binghamton University
Under New Management In this Issue:
*Tribute to Bill Buckley *Fear of Islam *The Future of the Review *The Return of Campus Presswatch ...and much more!
Plus BR’s Coveted SA Endorsements! Truth and two staples
Binghamton Review The Student Journal at Binghamton University Founded 1987 o Volume XXI Number 6 o March 2008
Editor-in-Chief Robert Edward Menje
Features
Managing Editor Adam Shamah
3 Editorial: Robert E. Menje begins his reign as Editor
Editor Emeritus Christopher Powell
4 Letters: A reader disagrees with the all knowing Binghamton Review
Business Manager Michael Lombardi
6 The return of Campus Presswatch
Treasurer Michael Calabrese Publicity Director Michael Alliance Marketing Director Edward Aller Staff Writers Gil Auslander, Donna Lee Cohen. Ryan Dunham, Evan Engel, Paul Liggieri, Robert E. Menje, James Novak, Christopher Powell, Adam Shamah, Thomas Shannon, Nehemia Stern Friends of the Review Dr. Aldo S. Bernardo Mr. Michael J. Hayes The Kaufman Family Mr. Robert Larnerd The Leonini Family Mr. Michael O’Connell Mr. Tony Potochniak The Powell Family Mr. Conrad Ross The Shannon Family Mr. Bob Soltis WA2CVS The Sugarman Family The Menje Family The Shamah Family Binghamton Review is printed by Our Press, in Chenango Bridge. We provide the truth; they provide the staples. Binghamton Review Binghamton University PO Box 6000 Binghamton, NY 13902-6000 binghamtonreview@gmail.com www.binghamtonreview.com
7 BR pays tribute to William F. Buckley Jr. 12 The Review presents its SA Endorsements
Articles
8 Adam Shamah on Conservatism and our founding principles. 10 Nehemia Stern tackles “Islamophobia.” 15 Dan Rabinowitz hates liberals who can’t debate. Binghamton Review is a monthly, independent journal of news, analysis, commentary, and controversy. Students at Binghamton University receive two copies of the Review free of charge (non-transferrable). Additional copies cost $1 each. Letters to the Editor are welcome; they must be accompanied by the author’s current address and phone number. All submissions become the property of the Review. The Review reserves the right to edit and print any submission. Copyright © 2008 Binghamton Review. All rights reserved. Binghamton Review is distributed on campus under the authority of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Binghamton Review is a member of the Collegiate Network and is a Student Association-chartered organization. Binghamton University is not responsible for the content of the Review; the Review is not responsible for the content of Binghamton University. Binghamton Review thanks the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.
“Before all else, be armed.” -Niccolo Machiavelli
Past Editors of Binghamton Review : John Guardiano, Yan Rusanovsky, Kathryn Doherty, Ephriam Bernstein, Michael Malloy, Paul Schnier, Adam Bromberg, Bernadette Malone, Michael Darcy, Nathan Wurtzel, Amy Gardner, John Carney, Paul Torres, Jason Kovacs, Robert Zoch, Matthew Pecorino, Michael O’Connell, Louis W. Leonini, Joseph Carlone, Christopher Powell, Nathaniel Sugarman
Binghamton Review, March 2008
Editorial
I
The Future/Bill Buckley
t is official. What is official you may ask? I, Robert Edward Menje now run this publica-
This issue will be the last issue that will have been “slapped together”.
I literally got the keys to the
tion. That’s right, I’m the head honcho. With office a few days ago and had to rush to get this issue
our last major editor graduating and his replacement together. The next issue will feature a new design, new taking the semester off after one issue, this publication
layout, and a return to our roots. So look out for it in
happened at a better time. The direction that this jour-
has fallen into my lap. I feel as if this could not have
April. Coming to a lecture hall floor near you.
Halfway through writing this, I heard the news
nal has been going in over the last semester and a half that William F. Buckley, Jr. had died. I feel his con-
is appalling. You, our loyal readers, put in the effort tribution to the movement is noteworthy and that he
to bend over monthly to pick this up off the ground deserves to have at least half of this editorial dedicated because you expect to read about controversial top-
to his achievements. Buckley founded the National
you to burn effigies of the staff because you disagree.
as an American political philosophy was in shambles,
ics that you will either agree with or which will drive
Over the past few issues, I have noticed that there has been a significant increase of articles about nothingness. In a Menje run magazine, you will not read reviews about the latest video games to come
out. I will leave that to other publications on campus.
Also, Adam
Shamah is the new Managing Editor. He certainly smells better than previ-
ous editors so at least the office will be a more work friendly environment.
Our new Business Manager
is Michael Lombardi. In true Jewish
Review over 50 years ago. At the time, Conservatism
and New Deal policies were in full stride. At National
In a Menje run magazine, you will not read
reviews about
the latest video games to come out.
Review, Buckley brought together the
best and brightest conservative minds in this country, and laid the groundwork for what would become the
dominant political philosophy of the modern era. Because of this history
the Review was the first magazine that I purchased for home delivery
when I was 14. I remember checking my mailbox bi-monthly for the next issue. I became interested in writing
political commentary mainly because
fashion, he will manage our money better than my of Buckley and Rich Lowry (the current Editor of the Catholic ass ever could (we aren’t exactly known for
our accounting skills). Our articles will go back to
National Review). There are only a few people who I
can actually say have impacted my life in a meaning-
the roots in which this magazine was founded. They ful way. Bill Buckley is one such person. He will will be political and conservative/libertarian by nature. We’re going to return to covering campus issues that matter to students. There will never be another article
always be remembered and his great legacy will live on through all those whom he has touched.
about body hair printed in the Binghamton Review. Binghamton Review, March 2008
-Robert Edward Menje, Editor-in-Chief
Hate Mail
Letter to the Editor
Not everyone seems to get that we are always right. I don’t know if you guys re- possible to argue that this in itself is Pipes’ agenda (its not like he’s not ally take letters to your publication too stifling. C.A.H. (in which, to my un- used to protests), I saw it as a creative seriously (see article about Women’s derstanding, also consisted of many way to allow those who were not alRights coupled with ad for Gentlemen multicultural organizations, E.M.O. lowed to speak during Pipes’ lecture to Club) but I thought I’d give express themselves. In both For some, the distraction continued, a shot at trying to promote situations, different types the free speech and discourse of speech and ways to stimMike Lombardi champions. as the C.A.H. spent the remainder of ulate discourse were occurBinghamton Review is right ring. Thus it is both irrelein valuing discourse over all vant and childish to attempt else. However, I find it odd the event making loud noises outside. to defame E.M.O. in order to promote your own agenthat Lombardi is quick to pida against them, especially geonhole the Experimental under the guise that they are Media Organization (E.M.O.) as a group whose objective is to “sti- members were actually a minority) hurting this university, when it seems fle and silence those with a different saw this structure as insufficient and clear that the opposite is occurring. I completely agree that debate and opinion.” It is my understanding that discourse is necessary in situations Daniel Pipes still said his piece after like this. But to regulate the meththe walkout and his voice was not stiods with which to accomplish this fled, this being a credit to his tenacity so that they fit to your standards is, in what he believes in. To me though, there seems to be some sort of double to me, an act of repression, somestandard happening here. Why is it that thing I’m sure Lombardi does not approve of. I like that you guys care a planned walkout and protest cannot enough about things to write about be an act and proponent of free speech them, even though I think some of and discourse? There are obviously your views are misguided. I hope you many who agree with Pipes’ theories don’t take this as an attack on your (to wit: an entire magazine), so how publication: I don’t mean it that way. could introducing alternative thoughts do anything but encourage discourse? Love, I guess I should have some sort of de Brian Ma fense of the protest here or something. Sophomore The Coalition Against Hate (C.A.H.), to my understanding, was trying to orMike Lombardi Responds: ganize the dissenters towards Pipes’ rhetoric and spread awareness on camMr. Ma makes the argument that pus of the debate around this issue, I have “pigeonholed” E.M.O. and just as you guys attempted to do the that discourse was not at all presame. However, the main difference vented during Dr. Pipes’ speech. to me was the methods with which While I have to agree that a comboth groups attempted this. BR tried ponent of free speech is the ability to create a lecture setting, in which one person speaks and everyone else decided to create their own space to protest, the actions that day went listens and digests the information to outside and at the same time speak above and beyond what is acceptable. the best of their ability. Of course, this their mind about Pipes’ views. Rather First, by occupying seats in the lecis pretty standard although I guess it’s than seeing this as disruptive towards ture hall, and preventing those who
...I do feel that even figures as controversial as Pipes have an unalienable right to speech.
Binghamton Review, March 2008
4
actually wanted to listen to Pipes from taking those seats, members of C.A.H. were indeed preventing discourse. This is undeniable. Second, the “walkout” was clearly not an act of peaceful protest. It was deliberately disruptive; the goal of its organizers was to distract students from Pipes’ speech. They were successful, as many of us were not able to concentrate on Dr. Pipes’ words until after the “protesters” left the lecture hall. For some, the distraction continued, as the C.A.H. spent the remainder of the event making loud noises outside, in what appeared to most members of the audience as an attempt to break their concentration. Mr. Ma is also mistaken when he states that this entire magazine absolutely agrees with all of Pipes’ views. I can speak for myself when I say there are many things Pipes believes in that I just cannot buy into. However I do feel that even figures as controversial as Pipes have an unalienable right to speech. I have never been the type to let people make decisions for me, and I feel the best way to form an opinion is to hear every possible side of an issue. I guess that is one of the ways I am different from members of E.M.O. I am not a proponent of, as Mr. Ma suggests, regulating methods of discourse. I am only stating that the members of this “protest” did indeed tried to prevent speech from occurring. I hope this serves as a clarification and response to this letter that I received and proves to you that we at the Review do in fact take our readers’ letters seriously.
Send in your nominees for our annual “Best and Worst Professors” awards. All submissions should be sent to:
binghamtonreview@gmail.com Include a brief explanation of why he or she deserves to win. Binghamton Review, March 2008
Keeping an Eye Out
6
Campus Presswatch: Policing the left wing campus media by the Editors
It has been almost a year since BR last published an edition of Campus Presswatch. In the past, this section was used to police the left-wing campus media. We’re happy to announce that it is back and here to stay. The Olympics is about some evil corporate agenda? That’s news to us. We always thought the Olympics was about bring “...the benefit of Clinton’s race is that ing together the nations and cultures of she holds both the promise of progress the world for two-weeks to showcase the and the advantage of knowing what brotherhood of man. It’s a time when citizens of warring nations can live together she stands for...” in the Olympic Village and put aside their Really? The advantage of conflicts, even if it’s just for a short while. knowing what she stands for? We at the Review would like to be clued in. For example, we’d like to know her position on Iraq. Our understanding is that she wants to end the war immediately, but at the same time maintain high troop levels there for the next few years. At a recent debate, Hillary told us that she, “stands for ending the war in Iraq, bringing our troops home.” In that very same debate, she also said, “We’re going to have troops there, guarding our embassy, we may have a continuing training mission, and we may have a mission against al-Qaida in Iraq.” Based on this, even Hillary does not know what she stands for, let alone the Pipe Dream. The only thing we can be sure of is that she wants to take our money and steal our liberty. Pipe Dream February 22. 2008
EMO Zine February 2008 “Psychologically, the 2010 Winter Olympic Games only intends to further the brainwashing corporate agenda of the Entertainment Industrial Complex.”
We always thought the Olympics was about bringing together the nations and cultures of the world for two-weeks to showcase the brotherhood of man.
Binghamton Review, March 2008
Prospect February 2008 “Yet a tiny percentage of biologists still believe in creationism, but they lack the credibility, and are often more associated with Christian groups than with the scinetific community.” Intelligent Design, as a scientific theory, has been absent from the scientific community not because there aren’t scientists who reject Darwinism in favor of Intelligent Design, but because these scientists are being censored by the politically correct academic establishment. Ben Stein, though not a scientist, is a very intelligent man. We think all of our readers, and even those nuts over at Prospect, would agree. This Spring he plans to release his new film, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, about the effort by left wing academics to silence those who question Darwinism. We, the Editors of the Review, were given the privilege of seeing an early screening of the film, and recommend that our viewers go see it as soon as it hits theaters. The evidence provided in the film is overwhelming, and reveals to us that there are indeed scientists who don’t toe the line of Darwinian Evolution.
In Memoriam
WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, JR. 1925 - 2008
William F. “Bill” Buckley, Jr. was an American political commentator and author. Buckley’s primary intellectual achievement was to fuse traditional American political conservatism with libertarianism, laying the groundwork for the modern American conservatism of U.S. Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater and U.S. President Ronald Reagan. In 1955, He founded the National Review, the publication from which the Binghamton Review gets its namesake. Buckley has been the most prominent voice in the conservative movement for over five decades. His death is a great loss to the conservative movement but his ideas will live on forever. His publication is in good hands and the movement, which he helped propel, is stronger than ever.
“Conservatives in this country...are non-licensed nonconformists; and this is a dangerous business in a Liberal world.” -WFB Binghamton Review, March 2008
Conservatism 101
Don’t Listen to Those Liberal Liars Conservatism is Alive and Well
A
common talking point that has been tossed around this election season is that “Conservatism is dead” or that it must “modernize.” This is something that has been proclaimed by the usual liberal hacks on television, Hillary Clinton, Barack Hussein Obama, and even some members of the Republican establishment. The truth is that Conservatism is still the ideal political philosophy and its ideas can never become outdated. That is because conservative principles are derived from the very nature of God’s universe and mankind. In Conscience of a Conservative, Barry Goldwater eloquently states that “[t]he laws of God, and of nature, have no dateline. The principles on which the Conservative political position is based have been established by a process that has nothing to do with the social, economic and political landscape that changes from decade to decade and from century to century. These principles are derived from the nature of man, and from the truths that God has revealed about his creation. Circumstances do change. So do the problems that are shaped by circumstances. But the principles that govern the solution of the problems do not.” Those who disagree do not understand what Conservatism is. Conservatism, simply put, is the political philosophy that founded this great nation; the belief that when government expands, liberty is lost. It is more than just an economic and social theory; it is a philosophy of life itself. Government programs are
by Adam Shamah
at odds with Conservatism not because they are inefficient and ineffective, though they are, but because they turn free people into wards of the state. Conservatives’ support for a low income tax is derived not from the economic benefits of such a tax policy, but from the belief that government should not be in the business of stealing property from the people. We support the peoples’ right to bear arms not just because there are rapists and murderers out there looking for victims, but because the people should not be dependent solely on their government for protection. So can someone tell me
When candidates run as conservatives, they win, and they do so overwhelmingly.
swer, of course, is no. When candidates run as conservatives, they win, and they do so overwhelmingly. Reagan proved this to be true three decades ago, Gingrich reinforced it in 1994, and Bobby Jindal reminded us, when he was elected last fall as Governor of Louisiana, that it still hold true today. Jindal ran a genuinely conservative campaign that attracted people from both parties. That is how he was able to get elected in a state that has consistently voted for Democrats for the better part of the past 100 years. Politicians can take conservative positions on issues, but when candidates speak about Conservatism as a way of life, they appeal to far more people. When they argue their positions from a philosophical standpoint, rather than only from an economic one, they win. This country may be split in half when we are speaking in terms of Democrats and Republicans, but the split is not 50-50 when we are talking about liberals and conservatives. This is still a conservative country, and I believe it will remain that way far into the future.
-Adam Shamah is a freshmen at BU. He is also the new Managing Editor of the Review. He thought he would get out of having a blurb, but he’s not that lucky. He can usually be found listening to Britney Spears songs on loop all day and night in the BR office. Stop by how something as basic and fun- and serenade him some “...Baby damental as freedom can become One More Time.” outdated? Do people just wake up one day and decide they do not want to be free anymore? The anBinghamton Review, March 2008
BU COLLEGE REPUBLICANS present:
DINESH D’SOUZA Politically Incorrect Details Coming Soon... Wednesday, April 16th at 8:00 pm in the UU-Mandela Room Sponsored by Harpur College Dean’s Office and the Young America’s Foundation SA Chartered Binghamton Review, March 2008
Islam: A Dynamite Religion
A Second Look at Islamophobia
10
The Liberal Hijacking of the English Language by Nehemia Stern
F
or as long as I can remember, I have suffered from an exaggerated, inexplicable, and irrational fear of heights. I do not like them, I can not stand them, and I try to stay as low to the ground as humanly possible. Now call me a sissy, but that’s not the only thing that I am afraid of. I am also plagued by an illogical fear of government and religion. I am heartened though in the knowledge that I ‘suffer’ with some of the greatest individuals of the modern era. Men the likes of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison all feared government and religion (they might have been Acrophobic as well). They feared these concepts to such an extent that for the better part of a decade they risked death in their attempts to separate and limit the two. It is with this thought in mind that I am perplexed by the actions of a misguided liberal cohort, who for the sake of a political agenda, place the name of a religion (in this case Islam) as a prefix to the word ‘phobia’. I am doubly perplexed when I fail to see any substantive dissent to the use of this linguistic anomaly. The term Islamophobia conjures up connotations of bigotry and hatred. It brings to mind fearful images of a manic majority persecuting a frightened and horror-stricken minority. Moreover, in recent years, this term has acquired a political currency. It is used to libelously
besmirch the reputations of individuals who just happen to possess conservative viewpoints. Because the term ‘Islamaphobia’ is used so often, and to such effect, it would be beneficial to spend a few moments deconstructing and analyzing the term. The Runnymede Trust, a British anti-discrimination think tank defined Islamophobia as a “dread or hatred of Islam and
Simply put, since when is it wrong to fear religion?
therefore, to the fear and dislike of all Muslims.” Perhaps owing to my Talmudic background in hermeneutic and dialectical thinking, I cannot help but take apart the above sentence. Firstly, following in the well-trodden tracks of Merriam-Webster, Islamophobia should simply reference the inexplicable and illogical fear of Islam. Fear of a particular religion should not imply hatred of that religion. Binghamton Review, March 2008
Secondly, it does not necessarily follow that ones personal fears vis-à-vis Islam should translate into hatred towards the practitioners of Islam (in all their quotidian forms). Simply put, since when is it wrong to fear religion? Allow me to be absolutely clear. I believe bigotry and hatred directed towards individuals (as well as groups) who happen to practice a particular religion (in this case Islam) is absolutely and categorically abhorrent. At the same time, I am arguing that an inexplicable and reactionary response towards any religion is not only legitimate and justified, but also praiseworthy. The world has earned the right to fear religion, just as the world has earned the right to fear big government. To be sure, belief along with the practice of that belief has the potential to perform a great deal of good in the world. It offers comfort along with a certain sense of ‘transcendental order’. Yet at the same time, left unchecked these institutions have proven their true potential in their ability to cause an innumerable amount of harm. A healthy reactionary fear of Islam is just as legitimate as a fear of the Catholic Church, or indeed of any rabbinic legislative body. Left to their own devices these institutions posses the inordinate ability to hurt people. The founding fathers of this country acknowledged religion’s potential for harm, and codified this healthy fear into the
11
first amendment to the Constitution. Moreover, they associated their limitations of religion to the inalienable civic freedoms of speech, the press, and assembly. A healthy fear of religion is not only legitimate and praiseworthy, but it is also codified within the founding documents of this country. On the other hand, fear of those who practice religion has (and should have) no place within a free and thriving democracy. The latter though, does not - and should not - follow the former. Thus, fear of Islam as a religion is a legitimate reaction, a fear of Muslims (individuals or groups who practice Islam in all its myriad forms) most certainly is not. The same logic applies to any religion, as (like government) they all have the potential to cause destruction and ruin. The multifarious theologies of Christianity and Judaism should all be feared and critiqued. The practitioners of these religions (providing they do not cause physical harm
or negate the rights of others to practice as they see fit) should be respected and valued for their virtuous and worthy deeds. The term Islamophobia obfuscates this necessary distinction. The term coalesces and blurs the boundary between the justifiable fear of religion and the unreasonable fear of religious practitioners. Even worse, it does so for the sake of political gain. Any westerner who critiques a theology of Islam is suddenly equated to a hateful bigot. Islamophobia is used as a catch all phrase to vilify--to the point of capital punishment--a cartoonist who draws a picture of Mohammed. In the unfortunate wake of this libelous classification, necessary arguments and discussions that must occur are stifled. This is categorically wrong, for in the end, the term Islamophobia itself causes misunderstandings that are centered on discourses of hatred. I implore the individuals on this campus who seem to care
so passionately about the sensibilities and sensitivities of ethnic and religious minorities to create a new term. Such a term must abjure the fear of individuals based solely upon religious beliefs. At the same time, such a term must respect and protect the rightly earned privilege of individuals to fear and openly critique theology and religious practice. At the end of the day, we should remember that while religion can do a great deal of good, we have a deserved right to be fearful of its other potential. -Nehemia Stern is a BU Grad student. He is also afraid of open spaces, spiders, and Mel Gibson.
Words of Wisdom:
“I don’t like being called ‘new right’; I’m an old, old son-of-abitch. I’m a conservative.”
-Barry Goldwater Binghamton Review, March 2008
Campus Elections
BR’s Coveted SA Endorsements
12
by the BR Staff
SA President
Our Editor-In-Chief is running so it would be disingenuous of us to endorse any candidate. But if we were to endorse a candidate, it would probably be him.
Executive Vice-President: Boris “For Us” Tadchiev
Borat was wrong; not all people from Uzbekistan are assholes—Boris certainly is not. He is the only one of the EVP candidates with an actual plan to deal with the lack of programming space student groups will be faced with next year. His platform calls for more freedom and autonomy for student groups. And as you all know, BR prides itself on our love for freedom. Boris is clearly the most qualified of the EVP candidates as he has be involved with the SA for three years and currently chairs the Rules Committee, which is the legislative equivalent of the EVP. He also works in the office of the current EVP, Joe Danko.
Vice-President for Academic Affairs: Peter X. Spaet
Hillary Clinton isn’t the only Hillary who BR won’t be endorsing anytime soon. Peter Spaet has shown, through his work in the Student Assembly, that he is willing to fight for student interests. Other candidates talk about dealing with the programming space problem, but only Peter (and Boris Tadchiev) have taken steps to do anything about it. Both are authors of an SA resolution that would direct the FVP to withdraw money from the Student Association’s retained earnings account for use in renting off campus programming space next year. We like his ideas regarding pass/fail classes and textbook exchange,and believe he is one of the few members of the SA who will put students’ interests above his own.
Vice-President for Programming: Daniel Y. Levin
We know we will confuse our readers when we mention that Dan Levin is Editor-In-Chief of Prospect Magazine. That is because no one has ever read Prospect Magazine. Nevertheless, he has used his leadership positions on several student groups to plan several very successful programs this year. These include last week’s Rock The Vote concert and last semester’s College Democrat versus College Republican debate, which was a landslide victory for the College Republicans. We hope he can continue to provide the school with excellent programming next year, as your Vice-President for Programming.
Endorsements Continue on Page 14
Remember to Vote on Wednesday, March 5th or Thursday, March 6th Binghamton Review, March 2008
13
Binghamton Review, March 2008
SA Endorsements Continue
14
Vice-President for Multiculural Affairs: Randal Z. Meyer
We like the fact that Randy is an outsider with regards to cultural groups on this campus. An important aspect of the VPMA position is managing the affairs of cultural groups, and we feel that Randy will be the most impartial in any situations that might arise. As of right now, the VPMA’s office is wasteful and is essentially useless, and we believe that Randy is the best candidate to change that.
Vice-President for Finance
We have chosen to not endorse a VPF because we believe that both candidates would do a superb job. Alice Liou is more qualified in the realm of SA finance, but we feel that Jon would work better with student groups. We wish we could mold the two into one candidate, and hope that whoever loses continues his or her work on the Student Association.
Remember to Vote on Wednesday, March 5th or Thursday, March 6th in your dining hall. Off-Campus and Dickinson vote in the Old Union.
Binghamton Review:
We already control campus. Soon it will be the world. Join us before it’s too late. Weekly Meetings: Thursdays, 7:30 P.M. in our office, WB05 (basement of the New Union below the food court).
E-mail: binghamtonreview@gmail.com Website: www.binghamtonreview.com Binghamton Review, March 2008
The Jew Corner:
15
Daniel S. Rabinowitz on Debating Liberals f you have ever roomed with a person who is delusional then you and I certainly have something in common. I am not referring to rooming with your common drug abuser, but rather with a crazy liberal. I have posters of Ronald Reagan on my wall and a copy of Conscience of a Conservative by Barry Goldwater in my desk drawer. I listen to Rush Limbaugh daily, and use the New York Times as toilet paper, so you can imagine what it must be like for me to live with such a person. Liberals come in all shapes, sizes, and sexual orientations, but few of them are actually able to win an argument. For the past month, I have been arguing with my roommate over a variety of political issues. Throughout this upsetting and frustrating process, I have come to notice that liberals lack the skills needed to win a debate. Their Forrest Gump IQ can explain this phenomenon. So can the fact that they have grown reliant on playing the race card and just calling conservatives “mean.” Either way, liberals as a whole tend to not concentrate on the issues. All they need are two deceiving words that have become the base of the Democratic Party: hope, and change. If all else fails, they can always call their conservative opponent a racist.
I
may ask? We don’t know, but we do know that he is for “change.” Eventually, B. Hussein Obama will have to face John McCain in a presidential debate. If McCain calls him out on the fact that he says nothing, how will he respond? Probably by doing what he usually does; he will give a very nice speech about how America needs change, and the TV audiences will salivate. But how will Obama change this country? What policies is he going to implement that others have not attempted? The fact is, no one knows. McCain must capitalize on this opportunity to show the world that Obama is merely another liberal. He is a more eloquent, less clownish version of Al Sharpton. When it comes down to it, debating a liberal is no different than trying to talk to a crack addict. They repeat the same statement over and over again. But instead of saying “sucky sucky five dollars,” which many liberals probably do use anyway, they use words like “hope,” and “progress,” over and over again. Liberals live by the principle that states, on any issue. He is for everyone. “We know nothing, do nothWhether you are a white male ing, but somehow we will still living in Greenwich Village, a manage to steal your money.” terrorist living in Pakistan, or an EMO/SAC member planning to -Daniel S. Rabinowitz is a blow up the Binghamton Re- Freshmen Engineering maview office, Obama is for you. jor. In his spare time, he can What will he do for you, you usually be found beating up No person exemplifies this ability to bull shit his or her way through an argument more than Barack Hussein Obama. B. Hussein Obama is a candidate who refuses to pick a position
[Obama] is a more eloquent, less clownish version of Al Sharpton.
Binghamton Review, March 2008
Embrace Global Warming
Binghamton, NY
March 2030
Who needs to save up for Spring Break when you can take a $3 dollar cab to SportsBar, where you can enjoy their world famous Mai Tai (with those little umbrellas) at their new beachfront location, still at 85 State St. If you would like to make this a reality, we encourage you to drive an SUV, leave your lights on day and night, and waste as much paper as humanly possible. If we all work together, we can leave a better world for the future students of Binghamton University. Binghamton Review
Binghamton University P.O. Box 6000 Binghamton, N.Y. 13902-6000 binghamtonreview@gmail.com Binghamton Review, March 2008
Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAID Permit 61 Binghamton, NY