Cornell Review XXVIII #10 by The Cornell Review

“We Do Not Apologize.” Volume XXVIII, Issue 10

Limited Government. Traditional Values. America First.

An Independent Publication

www.cornellreviewonline.com / www.cornellinsider.com

April 14, 2010

photo by Lucas Policastro

Cardoso Speaks to Cornell Students on the Future of Global Capitalism Brendan patrick Devine Staff Writer

Realistic or Idealistic?

Cornell’s Strategic Plan P

Raza S. Hoda / News Editor

rovost Kent Fuchs and Edward Lawler, chair of the Strategic Planning Advisory Council and ILR professor, held a public forum on April 1 to take questions and comments on the plan the next five years. The plan, currently entitled “Cornell University at Its Sesquicentennial,” involves the uniting Cornell as one entity, renewal of faculty, enhancement of teaching, research, increase diversity, and embracement of public engagement. The overarching goals of this plan are to become a top-ten research university in the nation and the world and become a model university for combining a liberal arts education with practical knowledge of the problems of society and of the world. Cornell would be unique among the top ten universities by stressing this model university aspect, which echoes Ezra Cornell’s mission of a land-grant institution. Uniting Cornell would make taking classes in other colleges easier and making the boundaries between the colleges more seamless. It would also help Cornell use its current resources more

effectively. Provost Fuchs used our New York City-based programs as an example. Those particular Cornell units act independently, and the University and College administration are sometimes unaware of how they are functioning. A university communications staff member expressed his concern during the forum. While trying to present a view of what Cornellians do in our New York City campuses for Ezra Magazine, he was unable to successful contact many of the programs, due to their lack of organization. Almost half the faculty are over 55 and over thirty percent are over 60, according to Prof. Lawler. Cornell’s top priority is to stress faculty excellence. The administration would like to pre-fill faculty positions as our current professors begin to retire over the next five years. Other aspects of faculty excellence include increasing diversity among the professors and developing policies to retain high-profile faculty. Teaching will be emphasized heavily over the next five years.

hen The World is Flat first appeared on bookshelves in 2005, some criticized author Tom Friedman for being ten years too late in his observations while others said that his book was little more than a cheerleader for globalization. Brazil’s former president, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, demonstrated a similarly antiquarian understanding of global economics last Wednesday at Call Auditorium. Cardoso’s lecture examined the cause of today’s “global economic crisis,” which he believes was caused by a lack of regulation over precarious practices. Financial risks are latent in capitalism, Cardoso believes, and globalization, which he calls “modern capitalism,” extends those risks to more sectors. Speculation, which is intrinsic to capitalism, creates bubbles which must inevitably burst as demand collapses, posited Cardoso. Competition only encourages the competitive, high risk investments that create these bubbles. To avoid a similar crisis in the future, Cardoso asserts we must take one of the following three paths: First, we — whoever Cardoso believes we are — can limit the lending leverage of banks ...see CARDOSO, page 4

...see PLAN, page 7

Inside This Issue . . .

Catch up on campus events you missed:

Page 2 After making history, Coach Donahue heads off to Beantown.

Page 5 Pro-life supporters... in Ithaca?? 40 Days For Life hits the Commons.

Page 8 One lump or two? Another ‘Beverage Party’ takes shape.

Page 11 Basketball, suicide fences, healthcare, and more in a round-up.

Page Seven Skorton gave a response to Resolution 44. But what would he say about the Freedom Clause?

Students Speak Out

Cornellians give their true thoughts on the new ‘suicide fences:’ listen to responses from over 40 students

Campus

April 14, 2010

Basketball Ending Bittersweet as Donahue Takes Team to Sweet Sixteen Then Trades in Hill for Heights

Zachary Waller Staff Writer

hat is that thing doing?” I asked. “I’m not sure,” my friend answered, “I think it’s trying to fly.” This was my introduction to Cornell basketball: trying to figure out just what the Saint Joseph’s mascot was doing. Thankfully, things picked up from there and the Cornell Men’s Basketball Team left all of us here with a season not to be forgotten. Beginning with a victory over the Crimson Tide of Alabama, the Red set the tone for what the rest of their season would be like. The next week was a road win at Massachusetts, followed by pair of losses at the hands of Seton Hall and Syracuse. Fortunately, the team was able to shake off the losses and, starting against the University of Toledo, went on a ten game win-streak that ended with a nail-biting loss to the top-ranked Kansas Jayhawks. After the loss to Kansas, the Red finished the regular season strong, winning fifteen of their last sixteen games —at one point reaching a national ranking of 22— the only loss coming in Philadelphia to a determined Penn team. On March 14, a week after the Red finished the season with a dominating 79-59 victory over Yale, it was announced that Cornell would be taking on the Temple Owls in the first round of the NCAA Tournament. The fifth ranked Owls were considered to be a highly under-ranked team and few people gave the Red a chance of winning. However, come tipoff the Red showed why it was in the Tournament, defeating the Owls 78-65. Two days later came the next test, when the Red took on fourth ranked Wisconsin. Again, Cornell surprised, handily defeating the Badgers 87-69. With this victory, the Red punched their ticket to the Sweet Sixteen, the first ever appearance in school history and the first appearance by an Ivy League school since 1979. Next on the list for the Red was the top ranked Wildcats from the University of Kentucky, who also (after Kansas’ loss to Northern Iowa) happened to be the favorite to win the Tournament. Even though the game was at Syracuse’s Carrier Dome, only an hour from the Ithaca campus, Cornell was not able to carry over the momentum it needed and Kentucky beat the Big

Red, 62-45, thus ending the greatest basketball season in Cornell history. This year’s basketball team was truly something special. From that first win in Tuscaloosa, to the thrilling blowout of Harvard at the Newman Arena, to the final loss at the Carrier Dome to the Wildcats, the 2009-10 Cornell Men’s Basketball team never failed to deliver and on any given game day a fan could walk into Newman Arena and expect to see a Big Red team that came ready to play. As sad as it may be, the team’s impact on campus morale must also be noted. On March 11 and 12 of this year, two Cornell students took their own lives in the Fall Creek Gorge, sending shock waves through a campus that had experienced another suicide less than a month before. While these events sent administrators scrambling to reach out to students in distress, the Men’s Basketball Team was preparing for its first Tournament game, a game that would be played exactly one week later against Temple. As the university was erecting fences to deter more students from jumping, the Men’s Basketball Team advanced to the Sweet Sixteen, greatly lifting the spirits of all members of the Cornell Community. As put by junior Alison Pyszczynski, “In a rather dark time for Cornell, it was great to see the whole campus united behind a team that was going through the Tournament.”

The Big Red will have several noticeable vacancies when they return to Newman Arena in the fall. Seniors Louis Dale, Andre Wilkins, Geoff Reeves, Jon Jaques, Alex Tyler, Pete Reynolds and Mark Coury will not be on the court, along with Ivy League Defensive Player of the Year Jeff Foote and Ivy League Player of the Year Ryan Wittman. However, quite possibly the biggest absence will be that of Cornell head coach Steve Donahue, who accepted the head coaching position at Boston College on April 6, just one week after being named Clair Bee Coach of the Year for the work he did with the Cornell team. When the news that Coach Donahue would be leaving for Boston College came out, I, as a sophomore transfer student from Boston College, began gathering reactions to the move from students at both universities. The reaction from students at Boston College was, quite frankly, fairly hostile towards Cornell. “F*** the Big Red, we don’t need ‘em and neither does Donahue,” said a Boston College sophomore who wished to remain anonymous. However, most Boston College students offered more subdued responses that still jabbed at the legitimacy of Cornell and Ivy League Basketball as a whole. Said B.C. sophomore Patrick Keating, “Anyone who can get Cornell to the Sweet Sixteen should be able to do pretty well anywhere. The real question is: can what Coach Donahue did

in the Ivy League work in the ACC, which is typically one of the top three conferences in the NCAA?” The mood at Cornell, on the other hand, seems to be much more nostalgic. According to Cornell junior Lauren Neuendorf, “It’s really great to see what he’s accomplished in his ten years here and I certainly wish him all the best for a job that he absolutely deserves, but it is sad to see him go.” From the first moment I stepped into the bleachers at Newman Arena on that cold December Sunday, the Cornell Men’s Basketball team never ceased to put on a show. Having never been much of a basketball fan before this year, they converted me. After that first game I was hooked, attending almost every game that did not conflict with Big Red hockey. I, for one, am extremely grateful for having been at Cornell this year, in order to witness this incredible run to the Sweet Sixteen that this basketball team offered us. However, I believe that Neuendorf and Pyszczynski best summed up the impact this team had on Cornell when they said, “Over the past three years, we have really enjoyed seeing them play and are very proud of their accomplishments, the best one being the game we got to see them play in the Carrier Dome last month.” Zachary Waller is a sophomore in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be contacted at zjw5@cornell.edu.

The Review welcomes and encourages letters to the editor. Please send questions, comments,

and concerns to thecornell.review@gmail.com.

Editor’s Note

April 14, 2010

TheCornellReview Founded 1984, Incorporated 1986 Volume XXVIII Number 10 Ann Coulter Jim Keller Jerome D. Pinn Anthony Santelli, Jr. Founders

William Lane Editor-in-Chief

Kent Haeger

Executive Editor

John Farragut President

Oliver Renick Managing Editor

Raza Hoda

Treasurer, News Editor

Joseph Bonica

National News Editor

Dennis Shiraev Campus Editor

Original Artwork by Anthony Longo

Contributors

Joe Bonica, Anthony Longo, Lucia Rafanelli, Oliver Renick, William Lane, Kent Haeger, Raza Hoda, Dennis Shiraev, Willam Wagner, John Farragut, Brendan Devine, Lucas Policastro, Roman Lesko, Justin DiGennaro, Peter Bouris, Zachary Waller, Kevin Tang, Roman Lesko, Peter Bouris, Hannah MacLean Faculty Advisor Michael E. Hint meh26@cornell.edu Board of Directors

Christopher DeCenzo, Joseph E. Gehring Jr., Ying Ma, Anthony Santelli Jr. The Cornell Review is an independent biweekly journal published by students of Cornell University for the benefit of students, faculty, administrators, and alumni of the Cornell community. The Cornell Review is a thoughtful review of campus and national politics from a broad conservative perspective. The Cornell Review, an independent student organization located at Cornell University, produced and is responsible for the content of this publication. This publication was not reviewed or approved by, nor does it necessarily express or reflect the policies or opinions of, Cornell University or its designated representatives. The Cornell Review is published by The Ithaca Review, Inc., a non-profit corporation. The opinions stated in The Cornell Review are those of the individual author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors or the staff of The Cornell Review. Editorial opinions are those of the responsible editor. The opinions herein are not necessarily those of the board of directors, officers, or staff of The Ithaca Review, Inc. The Cornell Review is distributed free, limited to one issue per person, on campus as well as to local businesses in Ithaca. Additional copies beyond the first free issue are available for $1.00 each. The Cornell Review is a member of the Collegiate Network. TheCornellReviewpridesitselfonletting its writers speak for themselves, and on open discourse. We do not all agree on every issue, and readers should be aware that pieces represent the views of their authors, and not necessarily those of the entire staff. If you have a well-reasoned conservative opinion piece, please send it to thecornell.review@ gmail.com for consideration.

The Cornell Review P.O. Box 4654 Ithaca, NY 14850

An End to American Exceptionalism? William P. Lane Editor-in-Chief

n March 30, Andrew Bacevich addressed a tightly packed Hollis E. Cornell Auditorium to deliver the 2010 LeFeber-Silbey Lecture in History. Bacevich, a professor of History and International Relations at Boston University, has authored several books, including The Long War and The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced By War. The title, and much of the material, for this lecture were drawn from his 2008 book, The Limits of Power: An End to American Exceptionalism. Bacevich opened his talk by associating himself with what he called the Wisconsin School of thought on international relations, which openly rejects the orthodox view and conventional narrative of American foreign policy. The commonly told story was, as Bacevich described it, that the history of the U.S. role in international relations could be broken down into two distinct phases. The first phase, which runs from 1776-1941, is typically depicted as one where the United States actively tried to avoid entanglements with foreign powers and eschewed great power politics. After the events of 1941 and World War II, the United States had been irrevocably cast as the world’s greatest power, and embraced its destiny as a global leader. Such a narrative plays into ideas of American Exceptionalism, a nationalistic perception that America is a chosen land and therefore has a mission to spread its ideals and institutions around the world. The alternative narrative the Wisconsin School provides, according to Bacevich, is that the abiding principle of American foreign policy has always been expansionism, in influence as well as in physical size, and that attention to economic interest has largely dictated American action. Such charges are typically laid as a critique of America; Bacevich, however, tended to acknowledge the value of such a focus, to an extent. In Bacevich’s view, American expansionism was not always a liability. In the early years of the Republic, expansion through treaty, like the Louisiana Purchase, or by conquest, like manifest destiny, provided the country with resources and territory that permitted it to pursue its higher ideals of freedom and equality. Bacevich, in his retelling, acknowledged that in its

reliance on slavery and its brutal treatment of Native Americans, the United States have not always expanded in the most moral ways. Yet Bacevich views such lapses as ultimately immaterial in deciding whether or not expansion has been beneficial for the U.S., for America has been able to achieve a freedom and prosperity that have drawn immigrants from all over the globe. Yet Bacevich claims that since the mid-1960s, expansionism has proven more detrimental than beneficial. He cites wars like Vietnam and the Second Iraq War, which expand our influence much in the vein of American exceptionalism without material benefit, as “squandering our power, depleting our wealth, and compromising our freedom”— in essence, expending American lives and resources while hoping only to achieve ideological goals. To Bacevich, this abuse of expansionism is simply a symptom of a deeper problem in America. America faces a dilemma of profligacy—in which American concepts of freedom have been increasingly tied to consumption. He claims that Americans, on the individual and also the governmental levels, have been living beyond their means. He cites the financial crisis and the government’s response in particular, noting how the government’s response was not to check financial practices or boost production, but to get people spending money again by engaging in a devil-may-care multi-billion-dollar expenditure. This leads to a growing debt which is as much a threat to national security as military overextension. Overemphasis on military power as a source of prestige also contributes to the weakening American position, according to Bacevich. This crisis, which he claims has been accelerating since the Cold War, stems from the notion, which he believes dominates foreign policy makers, that America can change other nations through military strength. This belief that American exceptionalism can be realized through intimidation by force has come to a head in the past decade, he claims. The tactics of “shock and awe” and similar intimidating measures exemplify this belief, but this policy, as Bacevich claims, is largely failed, begetting such excesses as the killings of civilians and the Abu Ghraib

torture incidents. Additionally, the willingness of American forces to abandon traditional military victory and resort to counter-insurgency by default sets the stage for perpetual struggle, as Bacevich believes to have occurred in Iraq and now possibly in Afghanistan as well. To Bacevich, the major lesson the U.S. can learn from the past decade is that power, both diplomatic and military, is more limited than we are accustomed to imagine. Yet Bacevich does not believe that much will change. In theory, he outlines several major areas for improvement. Chief among them is that the idea of American exceptionalism, which has largely driven all American expansionism, must be forgotten. In addition, he encourages a mass examination of the what it means to be free— not only what privileges we derive from it, but what duties it requires of us for its preservation. Part of this, of course, includes a realization that Americans must learn to live within their means. Furthermore, Bacevich advocates a return to principled politics, in which the current reliance on the presidency to fix the nation’s ills is exchanged for Congress in a leading role making the right decisions, rather than the popular ones. However, he remains pessimistic that any of these can be enacted. The idea of American exceptionalism is too dear to too many Americans; many Americans, particularly Baby Boomers, are too beholden to government entitlements to permit cuts to them; representatives, by their nature, are going to make the decisions that most help their re-election. The one solution he offered which he anticipated could work in practice as well was that Americans, civilians and policymakers alike, might return to a realistic understanding of war as a last resort in the face of hostility. He thought in particular it might be key if the idea of the citizensoldier were revived, closing the growing distance between war and its perception at home. In the end, nonetheless, he was not especially optimistic. In his speech, he had done the important work of identifying America’s problems but, ultimately, it will have to be the audience who solves them.

William P. Lane is a senior in the College of Arts & Sciences. He may be reached at wpl5@cornell.edu.

Campus

April 14, 2010

CARDOSO ...continued from front page

and demand more transparent accounting practices, including the presence of derivatives and other ambiguous trading entities on quarterly balance sheets. Second, we can trust the absolute self-correcting power of the free market. Cardoso, unlike other commentators, does not doubt the ability of the market to self-correct, but fears that the friction created in re-adjustment may do more harm than good: “Those who risk and lose pay the cost,” according to Cardoso, who likened the possibility of letting financial institutions collapse in the correction to a “casino game.” The last possible path for governments to take in order to avert financial catastrophe is for the State to intervene and bailout out the private sector ex post. “All toxic assets must be withdrawn from the system” so it can begin to correct. Cardoso quickly dismissed this course of action because of its high longer-term cost to economies and concentrated most of the first half of his lecture contrasting the first and second possibilities. The choice between the first path, which regulates an economy, and the second path, which allows total financial freedom, is the choice between ensured growth and high risk, Cardoso believes. Regulation curtails growth, but this is preferable to no regulation: the “cost is high to those who fail.” Countries with more stringent standards and limits on banking loans—like China and Brazil—were less hurt than more Liberal countries when America’s banking system melted down in 2008; Brazil for instance only permits banks to loan out twelve times their current capital while in the United States, banks can loan out up to fifty times their capital. Poor fiscal policies, believes Cardoso, have not been compensated for with wiser monetary policies. In

Europe, where the European Union controls the currency, individual nations are able to have fiscal spending and regulation policies, but not monetary policies, since that power rests only with the central bank in Brussels. The United States Federal Reserve, which Cardoso called the “central bank of all central banks,” has foregone good policy in order to thrust loans on companies that do not want them. The Dollar fell in value, but surprisingly so did the Euro, weakening all Western currencies and aiding China, and to a lesser extent, India and Brazil, which undervalues its currency and over-exports. This practice creates currency reserves which guards China and those other countries against the low value of their own currencies. “Protectionism should worry us,” Cardoso warned the audience. Fears can elicit imprudence in policy makers who may attempt to impose tariffs in order to protect domestic manufacturers and the national currency. All governments are in electoral danger: Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party has lost power; France’s Sarkozy has seen declining popularity. “Poor Obama… got elected in the middle of the crisis.” “The system has not been repaired, and much less reformed,” noted Cardoso. Governments, in their fears, are employing solutions that concentrate on symptoms rather than causes. Unfortunately, “Ordinary people are paying the price… but cannot voice their discontent” with government policies. These people will not find any more satisfaction now than they have in the past few years. As the system morphs from a national one to a more global one, we will be “passing through tremores.” Here Cardoso begins to mimic Tom Friedman’s naiveté. Global communication has empowered

AGENCIA BRASIL

more individuals and will birth a more democratic understanding of global financial practices. This change will be organic; “change as rupture” is obsolete, and even dangerous, to Cardoso. There will be “no more Winter Palace seizures,” a reference to the Russian Revolution; a more reasonable comparison for Cardoso is Gorbachev’s Liberalization and democratization of Russia in the 1980s, which contributed to the demise of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. The march to Elysium continues: “Wealth created by today’s flow of ideas” will create “a new Renaissance.” We must, like Karl Marx, consider “Humanity as a historical actor” rather than a collection of classes, traditions, and countries. Economic and “nuclear threat[s] no longer allow us to think in terms of class,” only in terms of “Humanity.” Here Cardoso warned against envisioning the wrong utopia, the one of Kant or St. Thomas More,

or any vision in which the world is run by a universal code of laws. In an increasingly multicultural world, we must respect each others’ rights. He reminded the audience that rights are a human invention and little else. Since the greatest threat to Cardoso’s Elysium is “religious fundamentalism,” the task at hand is to balance rights with competing groups: “How far can we have tolerance of intolerance?” The “arena of debate” created by communication and globalization will contribute more tour future code of conduct than any government or institution. “Problems will continue to be global,” but globalism and humanism are more salutary and worthwhile than the values and utopias of the past. Brendan Patrick Devine is a sophomore in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be contacted at bpd8@cornell.edu.

Ivy League Releases Admissions Statistics Acceptance rates drop yet again

Hannah MacLean Staff Writer

ll of us remember it. Most of us cling to several fond memories revolving around college acceptance: opening the letter only to ignore its entire body until after the first word, "Congratulations!" had been adequately celebrated, visiting the campus during Cornell days and admiring the beautiful campus with the knowledge that it would be our future home, excitedly trying to pick a major and classes, the hugs and congrats from proud friends and family

members, and of course—the starry eyed hope about the future. Of course, there was another notso-pleasant side to the entire process: the essays, the running around for recommendations, the 4-hour standardized tests that we believed would dictate the rest of our lives, and worst of all—the wait for that decision letter (especially for those of us who received one or more rejection letters prior to Cornell's acceptance). We have all tried to put these things out of our mind, but really, it is worth reflecting on the

craziness of the process. Let's look at the statistics. Cornell's acceptance rate dropped to 18.4% for the class of 2014, a record low. Also announcing record lows were Harvard (<7%), Princeton (8.18%), UPenn (14%), Brown (9.3%), Dartmouth (11.5%), MIT (10%), Stanford (7%) and Duke (15%). All of these schools also received a record number of applications; this year, 36,337 students applied to Cornell. Yale was the only Ivy to receive fewer applications this year than last (134 fewer, to be exact), not that it made

it significantly easier to get in (they kept their 7.5% acceptance rate). Based on this year's numbers, about 29,650 students were either rejected or wait-listed from good old Cornell—ouch, that's a lot of sad students. It's important to remember that many, in fact probably most, of these students were well-qualified and could have succeeded here; we all know how subjective the admissions process seems. While ...see ADMISSIONS, page 9

Campus

April 14, 2010

“Before you were born, I knew you” 40 Days for Life in Ithaca Sam Pell Staff Writer

or five Saturdays in a row, about 20 pro-life students and Ithaca locals gathered outside a Planned Parenthood clinic to protest abortion. For about two hours they sang hymns, read scripture, and prayed for a greater respect for life in the United States. Some of them stood across the street from the facility demonstrating; others counseled passersby on the numerous options available for women facing unplanned pregnancies. These protesters were part of a national campaign, 40 Days for Life, which is a communitybased, largely Christian campaign that seeks to end abortion through prayer, fasting, and community outreach. It runs two campaigns per year. A key component of the 40 Days for Life movement is holding prayer vigils outside abortion facilities. Abby Johnson, a recent convert to the prolife cause, quit her job as a Planned Parenthood director last fall because of a 40 Days for Life campaign conducted in her hometown. In Kalispell, Montana, an abortion center shut down during the same fall campaign. The campaign this spring, which for the first time included an Ithaca chapter, began on Ash Wednesday and ended on Palm Sunday. It organized pro-life advocates in 167 cities across the nation and was able to prevent 534 abortions from occurring, according to the campaign’s national website. The campaign came to Ithaca by the persistent effort of many individuals. Ithaca local Mary Camobreco, a proud grandmother and staunch Catholic, has been devoted to protecting the preborn her whole life. She founded the Ithaca chapter of Birthright, a nonprofit organization that helps women facing unplanned pregnancies. She develops genuine bonds with the women she counsels; once she drove over miles of country road to deliver milk to one of her former clients who was struggling through illness after delivering a baby. Nicknamed the “grandmother” of the 40 Days for Life campaign, Mrs. Camobreco provided much support for the campaign organizers. She also lent the demonstrators a picture of the Virgin Mary she had hanging in her house. The Tissot family, from Cortland, has also been involved in the Ithaca pro-life movement for quite some time. Mary Anne Tissot’s

involvement began when the Supreme Court passed Roe v. Wade. Tissot was in high school at the time, and she tried to get her classmates to sign a petition opposing it. Last fall she participated in her first 40 Days for Life vigil in Syracuse. She says that this campaign gave her

an abortion clinic,” he said. Every time he tried to go and pray outside the local Planned Parenthood, he ran into difficulties. Once, a Planned Parenthood employee falsely accused him of intimidating women and threatened to call the police. He decided that, before he went back to Planned Parenthood,

LIFE: Advocates of anti-abortion policy gather on the streets of Ithaca.

www.40daysforlife.com/ithaca a new perspective on the prolife movement. “I can see that . . . educational and political involvement are not enough. 40 Days for Life woke me up to get out of my comfort zone and go where the real action is. If I am here to help a woman I must be ready to show her where to go for support, if she accepts my help.” Tissot is now a mother, and her daughters have joined the cause as well. Rachael Tissot, currently in college, joined the pro-life movement after doing careful research on the subject. She found that abortion and many forms of birth control cause women to suffer both mentally and physically, and that men make lots of money off of women through abortion. “Can you call it equality when the woman has allowed herself to be a walking dollar sign, her system to be polluted with dangerous chemicals, her understanding of her womanhood to be viewed as a negative thing?” she said. Cornell freshman Shea Hasenauer wanted to start a 40 Days for Life chapter in Ithaca after noting a lack of pro-life activism on campus. “There is a pro-life club, but none of them have ever been to pray outside

he would educate himself on his legal rights and bring a larger group of people with him. That’s when he met Camobreco and Tissot and invited many pro-life students at Cornell to help organize the next 40 Days for Life campaign. After several months of planning, legal consultation, and publicity, the campaign finally launched on February 20. The protesters stood in parking spaces that they had reserved across the street from the Planned Parenthood, so as not to block traffic. Passersby both raised their thumbs and their middle fingers at the demonstrators. Planned Parenthood noticed the gathering and sent their own employees out to escort women into the facility. All five weeks, Hasenauer and a few others stood on the sidewalk next to the Planned Parenthood to try to educate passersby on abortion as well as to counsel women to choose life. These “sidewalk counselors” had meaningful conversations during every vigil. On one occasion, a burly man approached Hasenauer and asked him what he was doing. Hasenauer explained that he was there to help women having difficulty with their pregnancies, and asked the man if he knew any women who needed

help. The man replied, “Yes, I know someone. My wife. She needs help.” Hasenauer gave him information on several local crisis pregnancy centers, and the man thanked him and called home to tell his wife. “That one moment made it all worthwhile,” Hasenauer recalls. One week, a woman approached the group praying and started yelling at them. She told them they were wasting their time, and that they should find someone who really needed help. She paced up and down the street and finally walked across the road to where Hasenauer was sidewalk counseling. She continued to shout at him, but Hasenauer held his ground. “Ma’am,” he said, “Do you want to talk about abortion?” “Yes,” she replied. “I had one. And it was a good decision.” Hasenauer later recalled, “I could tell by the tears streaming down her cheeks that she knew that wasn’t true. We need to pray for her.” During the first week a homeless man walked up to Hasenauer and asked to pray with him. He prayed fervently for a while with Hasenauer and gave him a bear-hug before he left. As he was leaving, he gave the demonstrators across the street a big thumbs-up and said, “Hallelujah! Thank you, Jesus! Thank you people! I’ll keep you all in my prayers!” He stopped to pray with the sidewalk counselors every week. “That was just beautiful,” Hasenauer remembers. Even though the spring campaign is over, the participants have decided to continue praying outside the Planned Parenthood for the remainder of the academic year. After participating in the campaign, many demonstrators believe that prayer vigils outside abortion clinics are among the best ways to protest against abortion. As prayer vigil participant and Cornell graduate student Tiju Thomas said, “Proximity to the abortion center helps us to witness first hand the situation in our town, and by extension the condition in our nation.” The organizers of the event have compiled a website with information for those interested in participating: www.40daysforlife.com/ithaca. The organizers of the campaign also hope to hold another large

...see ABORTION, page 8

Campus

April 14, 2010

Student Response To Fences: Unhappy and Unabridged

Cornell Review reporters spent a night at Cornell’s bridges last week obtaining student responses about the recently erected fences. While the responses were overwhelmingly (and unsurprisingly) negative, a fair amount of students looked on the bright side. These are the unedited and natural responses of some of your fellow students and classmates. Where do you stand?

“

photo by DAN DANCE

I feel caged.

They’re really ugly.

I think the colors make them a little less gloomy. It’s like I’m walking the Trail of Tears to class.

I feel like I’m in a zoo. I’m sure it does help some students but I don’t think it helps everyone. It makes me want to kill myself more...not really, but they’re bad. It’s a protective move. I think it will work. It draws attention to our problems and distracts from our beauty. Prison. Take it down. It’s not good for the scenery but it’s a good idea.

Unnecessary.

It feels like a zoo. Are we the ones caged or are we looking at those inside the cage? Auschwitz.

Probably need a better looking fence.

I don’t really like them in general.

Depressing but we have to live with it.

A little depressing. It makes our campus seem like the hood. I understand the need for them. They’re ugly and depressing but I understand. I like the decorations. I don’t like the fences. They give a bad image for prospective students visiting the school. I don’t think there’s an easy solution.

Freaks me out man.

The colors are good. Is there anybody who likes the fences? Take them down!

They’re ugly. If I really want to kill myself, fences won’t help.

I like the colors. I dislike the fences. I want them gone.

I really hate them.

”

Campus

April 14, 2010

An Answer to Resolution 44: The Freedom Clause Currently tabled clause would make sure all voices are heard, always Joseph Bonica National News Editor

ith the uproar from Resolution 44 more or less silenced by President Skorton’s recent refusal to sign the resolution into rule, many have wondered whether any more attempts at altering Cornell’s free-speech codes would be made in the near future. This question was quickly answered with the proposal of the “Freedom Clause” on March 11, 2010. Proposed by Mike Wacker’10, Jon Rau ’12, Alex Latella’10, and Ray Mensah ’11, the Freedom Clause would extend the free speech right guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution to the campus of Cornell University, leading to greater freedom in the University speech code. The main inspiration of the Freedom Clause, according to the text of the official proposal, was the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court to support free speech rights in the case of Healy vs. James in 1972. The official decision stated that “…the precedents of this Court leave no room for the view that, because of the acknowledged need for order, First Amendment protections should apply with less force on college campuses than in the community at large,” a view that was followed by the State of California with its passage of the

Leonard extending rights

Law in 1992, free speech to private universities. Cornell,

speech laws throughout. However the bill of course does not prevent the university from establishing rules against hate crimes and methods of punishment for such acts, so long as the university’s definition of “hate crimes” are consistent with federal definitions, and thus of free speech right. The Freedom Clause is something the university needs to live by its code of open

and expression of information without fear of physical injury or some other kind of discrimination. However, more often than not, speech avoids taking such dark turns, and thus the guarantee of free speech can only help in the university environment. Our university’s current free speech and anti-discrimination codes, while generally fair, do limit some speech and action that is not limited by the Constitution, which has led Freedom for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) to generally look down upon the code. By expanding the protections of the First Amendment to Cornell University students, there will be a much more open educational environment that would be just as free from discrimination against a particular group, if not more free, than the current speech codes foster.

however, offers no such protections for its independent student groups, which this bill hopes to correct. What the bill specifically does is to prevent the university brass to punish an organization for an action that would be listed under the exercise of free speech in the Constitution. Currently, as a private university, Cornell is not technically obligated to do this; however, the institution of this bill would remove the double standard applied to the students outside the university and within, subjecting them to the same free

mindedness and free inquiry. A true educational experience can only occur if free speech is enforced to allow diversity of opinions, popular or otherwise, to be expressed in a manner that does not threaten other students. To this end, the anti-hate crime provision Joseph Bonica is a sophomore is an important part of the bill; free in the College of Arts & Sciences. speech is no longer free if one’s He may be reached at jmb582@ words or actions prevent the flow cornell.edu.

such a time of economic turmoil. The administration, thus, plans to identify some of the critically important departments and move those units into the top spots. These seems more realistic than trying to place the entire university into the top ten in the next five years, especially with retiring faculty. However, how can we ensure that some of the important liberal arts programs that foster a well-rounded education will not begin to slide as more resources are allocated to more cutting-edge applied science departments? It may prove difficult to maintain some departments while enhancing others. The fact that this plan is a “living document” was one aspect both

Provost Fuchs and Prof. Lawler stressed. A buzzword they seemed to enjoy using was “metrics.” These metrics would serve as indicators of whether or not the strategic plan is progressing. They held about twenty of these public forums to hear some compliments and concerns from faculty, staff, students, and the public. Many questions at the April 1st forum involved the public engagement by the students, a seemingly vague goal. This public engagement, as Provost Fuchs described it, would include planning programs for students at the local, national, and international levels, which would ultimately strengthen the public’s view of Cornell as an “academically distinguished private

PLAN ...continued from front page

years. To increase our teaching prowess, Cornell will try to install a culture that supports classroom learning. The plan currently calls for “competitive faculty compensation,” which sounds like rewards and recognition. Constrained resources was one challenge that Prof. Lawler recognized against maintaining and strengthening our academic prestige. The document emphasizes our endowment in comparison to other Ivy league institution as a challenge. Alumni would be a key element in our endowment, as the administration wishes to maintain a sustainable tuition. It may be difficult to rise in the rankings as whole university in

university with a public mission.” These programs are currently in the works, but one could speculate that they include more outreach programs here in Ithaca and student projects that would take them abroad. Cornell’s overarching goal of becoming a top-ten university may seem a little superficial and out of reach. However, the current goals for the next five years that the committee has set would no doubt improve Cornell in terms of learning experience and use of resources.

Raza S. Hoda is a junior in the College of Arts & Sciences. He may be reached at rsh94@cornell.edu.

Nation

April 14, 2010

From One Beverage to the Next Coffee Party advocates political unity Lucia Rafanelli Staff Writer

s recent debates regarding the financial crisis and the drastic restructuring of the American healthcare system captivated the nation, a new political movement took shape, and quickly gained publicity and recognition. This, the Tea Party movement, is based upon values of limited government and popular involvement in the political process, among other things. According to TeaParty.org, the movement was founded by ex-Marine and Naval officer Dale Robertson, who drove overnight from Texas to Washington, DC to protest a 2009 financial stimulus package. The movement soon grew from Robertson’s lonely protest to include chapters across the country. According to the website, the Tea Party is built upon a set of “nonnegotiable core beliefs,” which are listed online exactly as follows:

• Illegal Aliens Are illegal. • Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable. • Stronger Military Is Essential. • Special Interests Eliminated. • Gun Ownership Is Sacred. • Government Must Be Downsized. • National Budget Must Be Balanced. • Deficit Spending Will End. • Bail-out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal. • Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must. • Reduce Business Income Taxes Is Mandatory. • Political Offices Available To Average Citizens. • Intrusive Government Stopped. • English Only Is Required. • Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged. •

The party also claims to be dedicated to what it terms Judeo-Christian, conservative, constitutional values. The Tea Party, however, is not the only organization of its kind on the US political scene. Formed in response to the Tea Party, The

Go to the

Coffee Party USA began as a Facebook page, and it, too, grew to contain several branches across the nation. According to its website, CoffeePartyUSA.com, its central goals include civility in political discourse and the realization “that the federal government is not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges that we face as Americans.” The Coffee Party site touts political unity and lack of partisan divisions, and its

divisions created by identifying with this country’s two main political parties. Further, they both advocate a reduced role of special interests in politics in favor of an increased role of the average citizen. Both parties claim to be an avenue for the average American to get involved in a political process that is normally relatively restricted, favoring a type of elite ruling class. Grassroots mobilization due to organizations such as the Tea and Coffee parties- as well as less organized mobilization that took

role of the government in the national economy. This debate has captivated the US since its founding, from the Constitutional Convention to the raging debates about whether or not a national bank should be allowed to exist. The healthcare bill, too, seemed to touch a nerve in the American psyche. The role of the government in providing social goods such as healthcare and funding for it is also something that has been hotly debated in this country for decades. The provision of social goods is an area in which the US has traditionally differed from European countries, and, in fact, several other industrialized democracies. Thus, the possibility of the US adopting a system dramatically more similar to those of other countries sparked intense controversy. It seems that the saliency and publicity of these issues, which are and likely always will be extremely important to the American populous is what sparked such a sudden increase in grassroots mobilization, including tea party movements and response movements like the Coffee Party. Moreover, this is a truly intriguing observation that demonstrates the political dynamics that result from challenges posed to some of the nation’s core values.

promotional video asserts that people simply “don’t want to be divided anymore.” Despite its origins and its perhaps seemingly contradictory focus, the Coffee Party is actually quite similar in several ways to the Tea Party. In fact, the two rivals espouse some strikingly similar goals and values. Although the Tea Party has a more decidedly conservative platform, and a more specific set of political goals (as reflected in its list of “non-negotiable core beliefs”), many of its underlying objections to the current political system mirror those of the Coffee Party. Indeed, both organizations boast diverse bases of support, and claim to transcend traditional political divisions. They both tout the importance of escaping the typical

place in town hall meetings across the nation- seemed to skyrocket following the Congressional passage of financial stimulus packages and the consideration of national healthcare reform. And although various grassroots groups may have had slightly, or even drastically, different goals, it is intriguing that so many of them simultaneously gained so much strength. Perhaps, then, this mass movement of grassroots mobilization was triggered because the major political issues of the day were largely centered around political and ideological conflicts that have galvanized the country since its founding. For instance, the various financial stimulus packages and bailout bills passed by Congress reignited the age-old debate about the proper

Lucia Rafanelli is a freshman in the College of Arts and Sciences. She can be contacted at lmr39@ cornell.edu. ABORTION ...continued from page 5

campaign next fall, when the national 40 Days for Life campaign will kick off again. In the next campaign, they hope to hold vigils more frequently during the week and to train more sidewalk counselors. “The Lord will continue to prepare the way,” Mary Anne Tissot says. “There is no stopping it now, this campaign is growing in Ithaca!” Sam Pell is a freshman in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be contacted at sep87@cornell.edu.

The Review’s website, http://cornellreviewonline.com/ for more news and a online versions of all the Issues and Articles!

Also read the Cornell Review’s Blog! www.cornellinsider.com

April 14, 2010

Nation

NY Times Blasphemes Christianity…Again Anthony Longo Staff Writer

s usual, the godless New York Times has nothing better to do than make enemies with believers. This time, the newspaper has decided to slam the Catholic Church, bringing up of a sex scandal between an American priest and numerous deaf children in Milwaukee from 1950-1974. The columnist, Laurie Goodstein, blames this on—of course—the supreme head of the Church, Pope Benedict XVI. She gives no counterpoint, and even alleges that “the church fought to keep secret” these documents, citing quotes that would solely put the Pope or any high official in a bad light. She tries unsuccessfully to hide the fact that the man convicted of the scandal, Reverend Lawrence C. Murphy, actually went through the American justice system, which was not able to punish him either; She reveals Murphy “also got a pass from the police and prosecutors who ignored reports from his victims.” This would make the scandal, if it were indeed the Church’s fault, also the fault of the American criminal justice system. But she does not hammer that system, does she? The Times’s only agenda is slamming the Pope with whatever means possible. Why does the Times bother to combat Christianity? Is it because Christians are moral, soulful, generally conservative, and logical people (certainly not found among the Times’s readership)? Is it because the Church’s values are usually analogous to the conservative agenda (strong family values, anti-abortion, personal freedom)? These reasons are likely very true, but most likely this whole attack is simply over the issue of abortion; the Church’s strong and clear stance as a Pro-Life entity is

ANTHONY LONGO

Why don’t we just worship the Times instead of Christ? God doesn’t have a Twitter, does he?

at odds with the liberal, no-worry agenda of the Times staff. Or maybe the staff is simply jealous that people spend an hour per week at Church, when instead they could be reading the omniscient, ever-present Times. Abortion, gay rights are serious issues, but copying the Obamamethodology of eradicating any and all opposing views (even those of a two-thousand-year-old church with over a billion members) is not the answer, especially for an organization that claims to have “the best journalists in the world” (see their recent commercial). Why don’t we debate on tough issues instead of making enemies over an issue or two? Why

can a college student see this clearly, when the self-proclaimed world’s leading newspaper can’t? Let’s stand by our priests and our faith, and if you’re not Catholic or not a believer, stand by Catholic priests because they are good people with good hearts who care about humanity. No religion lacks its problems, and we cannot forget the horrible things done to the victims of the scandal. Yet, the actions of a few should not diminish the lifelong devotion Catholic priests (and the Pope) have for their religion, their God, and their parishes. Just as a reminder, priests—every week— attend funerals, anoint the sick (make house and hospital calls),

administer matrimony, give mass many times, hear confessions, prepare sermons, and pray for their parish and the people of the world; they are continually available for people of any faith to access at any time for advice or prayer. And let’s not forget all of the good that the Catholic Church does for the world—through its tremendous support of charity and humanitarian acts. Perhaps only those who are free of sin should be able to attack the Pope. That would certainly rule out the New York Times staff.

parts of it can be objective, there extremely intelligent; I am certainly is a large grey area. The university not saying that those 194 students has not released all the breakdowns are less deserving of acceptance yet, but hopefully they will be out soon. It would be unfair to assume that the percentages will be exactly the same this year as last year, but they will probably be reasonably similar, so let's take a look. Last year, of the students who decided to enroll, 38% were accepted early decision, 14% were legacies, 36% were "students of color", and 7% were recruited athletes. Also, 44 students with an SAT verbal score of 400-499 and 150 students scoring between 500 and 549 were accepted. I'm sure that these accepted students are T. HAYASHIDA

than the rest of the Cornellians (just want to get that out of the way). However, it is obvious that the application process is quite variable. The truth is that there are so many qualified students applying to Cornell that the committee cannot be completely objective. It is extremely difficult to choose between two equally qualified people, let alone twenty or thirty thousand. So, now that the frustrating realities of the application process are behind us, take a few moments to relish being a Cornellian. You made it, you were chosen. Go ahead, watch the tours for prefreshmen walking around campus; watch the hesitant but clearly

content pre-freshmen. As you see them, remember that sense of joy and relief you felt when you first read your acceptance letter and when you first arrived here in the fall of that year. Just take a moment or two (or three) to appreciate, and more importantly, enjoy the beauty that is being a student at Cornell. Go ahead—despite the subjectivity of the application process, one thing is certain; you earned your right to call yourself a Cornellian.

Anthony Longo is a freshman in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be contacted at ajl272@cornell.edu.

ADMISSIONS ...continued from page 4

Hannah MacLean is a freshman in the College of Arts & Sciences. She can be contacted at hem47@ cornell.edu.

Nation

April 14, 2010

Bizarro-World: More Space For Drilling? President Obama seemingly defies his constiuency by opening up lands for drilling Roman Lesko Staff Writer

ast week, President Obama defied environmentalists, a strong and incredibly vocal part of his coalition, by proposing a plan that would greatly expand the area available for drilling off of the coast of the United States. By grabbing this issue, which has been part of Republican platform for years, Obama is clearly trying to win over moderates and independents in the months leading up to the mid-term elections this year. Political move or not, this decision will have far reaching implications from our economy to national security. For years environmentalists have claimed that it is just a matter of time before offshore drilling will cause a catastrophic environmental disaster. They argue that the

economic gains are dubious and that the price of environmental degradation is far too high to risk expanding drilling operations. Looking at the issue from a more practical perspective, however, we can see why President Obama had such an unexpected change of heart. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders recently posted an op-ed to his website that asks, “How long are the rest of us supposed to sit here passively as we watch gas prices zoom up again?” This is an interesting question to ask in an article that also claims that rhetoric for drilling more now is nothing more than an attempt to “pin the blame for the high prices of gasoline on liberals.” The obvious contradiction here is not crafting policy directed at lowering

energy costs is tantamount to sitting passively as prices skyrocket. President Obama’s sudden announcement to open up new areas for drilling is likely not a faint hearted capitulation to the right as Sen. Sanders may suggest, rather it is simply a move that is in the best interest of our nation’s security and economic well being. It is undeniable that for the American economy to remain strong, affordable energy is indispensable. Although clean energy technology is rapidly developing and being implemented, the large fixed costs of switching over preclude a rapid transformation towards “green energy.” Ultimately I am confident that a natural

progression towards clean energy technology will happen through the forces of the market, but until the transition is in full swing, the United States will need the oil and natural gas to keep our economy growing thereby protecting the jobs and incomes of Americans. As if 2006, there were 21 billion barrels of recoverable oil deposits in the United States, but restrictions from Washington that ban drilling in the arctic, Rockies and in many offshore areas have the potential to put a self-inflicted stranglehold on the American economy. With all of these natural deposits present in the United States, it is a waste of money and resources to deal with the major oil producing countries in the Middle East. Presently, the American taxpayer pays a substantial premium each year to ensure access to foreign oil reserves through military deployments while simultaneously pumping billions of dollars into the economies of nations whose policies can complicate the national security of America and its allies. If we are going to such great troubles abroad to secure energy for ourselves, why succumb to the environmentalist lobby and refuse to utilize the resources in our own backyard? Environmentalists and many liberals argue that the United States needs to transition to clean energy quickly, and avoid domestic drilling in order to decrease environmental degradation and start the transition to a cleaner economy. Realistically, this transition will take decades and in the meanwhile petroleum is indispensable to American economic livelihood. Rather than sending money abroad to nations with questionable governments and policies, we should keep this money at home and invest in cleaner and more efficient technologies. President Obama agreed to support offshore drilling because it simply does not make sense not to. Hopefully, one day cries of “Frack no” in Ithaca will be supplanted by cheers of “Drill Baby Drill!”

Roman Lesko is a senior in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be contacted at rml37@cornell. edu.

Thought

April 14, 2010

From the Cornell Insider blog:

Where We Talk About Things Going on Around Our World Dennis Shiraev Oliver Renick Joseph Bonica Bloggers at The Review’s blog, Cornell Insider, have begun a new weekly feature every Wednesday called “The Midweek Post Where We Talk About Things That Are Going On Around Our World,” or TMPWWTATTAGOAOW for... short. Sure, the title might be a little loquacious but the material is quick and concentrated. Each week, three Review writers will give their take on curent events both on and off of campus. Here is a sample, see you on the blog! ( h t t p : / / c o r n e l l i n s i d e r. c o m / ) .

Suicide Fences on Campus Bridges Dennis: They’re hideous, but I think the administration had no choice on this one. The fences accomplish three goals: 1) Reduced likelihood of further suicides. Yes, the fences are negotiable, but there’s no doubt that they significantly decrease the chances of another student taking his or her life in the gorges. 2) PR statement to the outside world that Cornell is doing all it can to ensure the safety of its students. 3) A message is sent to the students that the administration is actively doing all it can to ensure their safety. Obviously the downside of #2 is that we are also signaling to everyone outside Ithaca that Cornell is in crisis mode, but this is much better than refusing to acknowledge the significance of the suicides or not doing enough to prevent another one. Oliver: Welcome, to Jurassic Park. These new fences send a serious message that basically consists of two parts, or two interpretations: “We’re doing everything we can to prevent disaster,” and “Welcome to Cornell, where we have fences along our bridges so you don’t throw yourself over.” How will prospective students react during Cornell Days, which are just around the corner? What are tour guides instructed to say? The former of the two interpretations reflects the fact that the fences are simply a PR move. Cornell has to signal to the public that they are trying to solve the problem. What more does putting

a fence over the 25-ft collegetownengineering footbridge do than send a message? Cornell has a false stereotype as being a suicide school. These fences come dangerously close to morphing that stereotype into a description.

it was an amazing achievement for a program that operates under a budget that makes up only 9% of the same one at Kentucky. Having such immense athletic success at a school that is normally only known for its academics brings about a whole different side of Joe: These fences are pretty much the student body. A good one. a complete disaster. First of all, they may reduce the risk of suicide Joe: In addition to doing wonders by gorge-jumping, but there are for the school spirit of the student plenty of other ways for an intent body (which I find to sometimes be person to kill him or herself. Also, a bit lacking), Cornell’s impressive if we do see a reduction in suicides showing in the NCAA tournament during a short and long term, it should mean big endowments in the will be basically impossible to tell future; after all, a college’s athletic whether or not the fences were a program is its best fundraiser. As major reason if one at all. Since our athletic legitimacy increases, their worth is basically impossible which it no doubt did during the to quantify, one cannot truly justify tournament, more people will they were worth the cost and want to donate. Also, even though defacing of our beautiful campus. Cornell does not give scholarships Also, this reinforces Cornell’s to athletes, the fact that Cornell stereotype as a “suicide school,” can succeed in a major stage may which will drive away potential draw some talented athletes to future students, and thus much the school, further improving our needed revenue, from the school. sports program. The above goes for all sports, not just basketball.

Implications of Men’s Basketball Sweet 16 Run

Dennis: I live right by George Mason University in Virginia, so I’ve seen what great things an NCAA Tournament run can do for a school. Sure, we didn’t make the Final Four, but a Sweet 16 appearance by an Ivy League team that doesn’t give out athletic scholarships is still remarkable. In addition to being a national powerhouse in hockey, lacrosse, and wrestling (plus a bunch of other less-watched sports I’m neglecting), we are now officially an Ivy basketball powerhouse. I think we can definitely expect more alumni giving to athletic programs and more interest in Cornell in general from prospective students.

Obamacare Dennis: It’s difficult for anyone who’s not a political analyst to make any complete judgment on the healthcare bill- seriously, do any of you supporters or dissenters really know what’s in it?- so I will stick to offering a few observations. First, the government is planning on forcing uninsured individuals to eventually purchase health insurance, which is an unprecedented over-stretching of government power. The Democrats have conveniently placed the IRS in charge of enforcement, effectively disguising it all as a tax. We can disagree about constitutionality, but this is clearly a ruse. Krauthammer has also pointed out that the only way to pay for these new entitlements will be a value-added tax, which he predicts the Obama administration will introduce after the November elections. Let’s hope he’s wrong on this one.

legislation in American history passed with an equally drastic level of division among the country’s people and in its Congress. Obama’s success as a president will be directly dependent on the success of this passage as other domestic issues will pale in comparison. Though it is hard to assess precisely the bill’s visible effect – how can we know its inner workings, its deep darkest secrets – it is by principle directly against what I stand for. But even already, the cost of providing healthcare to employees is affecting big companies. AT&T announced $1 bil dollars in costs, and 3M manufacturing company expects $5 bil dollar costs. But as a Heritage article pointed out, the fight on both sides is just beginning. Joe: While the bill is no doubt a disaster, it is not the worst bill that could have passed. At the very least, it doesn’t have the public option which history shows serves as the death knell of the healthcare systems of all nations that have such a method. Despite that, it is still laden with large tax increases, onerous regulations such as forcing people to purchase health insurance, and has within it, buried somewhat deeply, a massive government expansion into the student loan system. While the numbers from the CBO indicate that the plan will reduce the federal budget deficit, this is based on the assumption that the program will grow no further than it is now. Any student of government programs knows that this never, ever happens. Oh, and to top it off, people and businesses are paying for the bill, in the midst of a recession, while the benefits don’t kick in for at least 4 years.

Oliver: If suicides caused the drought of school spirits, the basketball success was the monsoon that healed our ailing. Cornell was in need of an upper and the men on the basketball team had what it takes to to bring our school into a positive light. Hopefully it will Oliver: At long last, it is finally To Contact The Review in response outweigh the upsetting impression upon us – the healthcare bill that set to this article, please contact us our tragic month most likely had a vast chasm between left and right. at thecornell.review@gmail.com. on prospective students. Overall, One of the most drastic pieces of

The Review welcomes and encourages letters to the editor. Please send questions, comments, and concerns to thecornell.review@gmail.com.

The Cornell Review

April 14, 2010

Wisemen and Fools “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you’re misinformed.” Mark Twain

Scott Brown

‘’No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It’s like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something.’’ “Now that we’re on dog President Barack pee, we can have an Obama interesting conversation about that. I do not “You and I have a recommend drinking rendezvous with destiny. urine…but if you drink We will preserve for our water straight from the children this, the last river, you have a greater best hope of man on chance of getting an Earth, or we will sentence infection than you do them to take the last if you drink urine.” step into a thousand Howard Dean years of darkness.” Ronald Reagan ‘’In case anyone’s wondering out there, “Charity is injurious yes, [my daughters are] unless it helps the both available. ... Only recipient become kidding. Only kidding. independent of it.” John Arianna is definitely not. D. Rockefeller But Ayla is.’’ Senator

“I would have to... investigate more of Bill’s dancing abilities, you know, and some of this other stuff before I accurately judge whether he was in fact a brother.” President Barack Obama “The New Frontier of which I speak is not a set of promises — it is a set of challenges. It sums up not what I intend to offer the American people, but what I intend to ask of them.” John F. Kennedy “If you have intercourse you run the risk of dying and the ramifications of death are final.” Cyndi Lauper

“I think gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman.” Arnold Schwarzenegger “Those who survived the San Francisco earthquake said “Thank God, I’m still alive”. But of course, those who died, their lives will never be the same again.” Barbara Boxer “Life has become better! Life has become more fun!” Josef Stalin, c. 1935 “Take time to deliberate; but when the time for action arrives, stop thinking and go in.” Napoleon Bonaparte

In your heart, you know we’re right.

Join The Review Send us an email at wpl5@cornell.edu or come to GWS 164 on Mondays at 5:15