The Cornell Review The Conservative Voice on Campus
An Independent Publication vol. xxxi, no. viii
2 Post Office Pickle
How long before it goes bankrupt?
3 Editorial:
The State of the SA
An Activist Assembly has failed to represent you.
4 CU Conservatism in the ‘60s
Part 1 in our series on Cornell History.
6 Flu Shot Statistics Gannett sticks it to student body
9 KENDRICK!!!!!!
Slope Day; the one thing that holds us all together.
10 Sports: Baseball
Preview
Spring Training starts for the defending Ivy League Champs.
cornellinsider.com
BLOG
thecornellreview.com
SITE
Faux Dylan Mania Erupts at Cornell
“We Do Not Apologize.”
March 4th, 2013
Popular misconceptions about Dylan persist after decades. What can conservatives learn from the real Dylan? By Lucas Policastro Emeritus Editor
W
ith the announcement that Bob Dylan (+ Dawes) will play Barton on April 14th, students went bonkers with excitement. After one day, the Facebook event had over 1,000 attendees. Some would call this heartwarming—a younger generation paying respect to one of its elders. I call it an epidemic. Faux Dylan Mania is a remarkable yet common psychological phenomenon. It can be traced to a related syndrome, Dylan Projection Disorder (DPD), which first appeared in the late 1970s after Dylan’s conversion to Christianity. Feeling abandoned, Dylan’s largely
non-Christian fanbase began looking for ways to minimize, and eventually deny Dylan’s conversion. The delusion was powerful, with Dylan winning his first Grammy in 10 years for his gospel song “Gotta Serve Somebody”. (Realizing they were duped, they mocked him for the next two years with “Best Inspirational Performance” nominations.) Realizing that his poetic and evangelistic reach (and record sales, if you believe he cared) would suffer, Dylan fed confusing information to his fans, saying “I’ve never said I’m born again” and that he belongs to “the Church of the Poison Mind”. The objective observer saw that this was typical independent Dylan, who was distancing himself from
the evangelical movement, but fans fell headlong into Dylan Projection Disorder and believed that the old Dylan had returned. He never did. Dylan continues to incorporate religious themes into his lyrics, even releasing a Christmas album in 2009. DPD is classified as a projection disorder because sufferers ascribe a false persona to Dylan which suits their ideological need to be seen as intellectual children of the 60s. For Continued on page 5
Ted Cruz: Stand With Us Israeli Soldiers Tell Their Story Republican Honey Badger O Michael Loffredo Staff Writer
Mike Navarro Staff Writer
I
t is not often that a freshman senator makes many waves at the beginning of his term. It is typically a period of time reserved for learning about how things work, learning where the bathrooms are, and making some new friends. Ted Cruz is not here to make friends.
In fact, the list of people whose feathers are being ruffled by the new senator from Texas is beginning to look like a “Who’s Who on Capitol Hill” list of Democrats. Chuck Schumer. John Kerry. Chuck Hagel. Barbara Boxer. What is even more surprising are the members from his own party that Cruz is rubbing the Continued on page 2
n February 11, Cornell Hillel and StandWithUs sponsored an event called “Israel Soldiers Stories.” The innovative program brings a diverse group of young Israeli soldiers to college campuses all over the U.S. The goal is for them to share their testimonies of what actually occurs on the front lines; stories different than those we may see in the headlines. Two experienced combat soldiers, Yishai and Sharon, spoke openly about their time serving in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) on missions in Gaza, Lebanon, and the West Bank. Their stories are both eye-opening and heart-breaking, providing the listener with deeper insight into the ongoing conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors.
Putting Morality above Revenge Yishai’s story begins while he was eating in the cafeteria of Hebrew University in Jerusalem where he studied law. It started out as a typical day at the University, but things turned horrific when he witnessed a massive explosion occur in the center of the campus. This was a terrorist attack led by Hamas, leaving
many wounded and seven dead at the scene. Soon after the attack, Yishai, a soldier of the IDF, received knowledge that the mastermind behind the attack was a low-profile Hamas leader the IDF had codenamed Jeremy. The IDF had been searching for this man for close to six years, and they finally had a clue as to where he was headed next. Jeremy was off to Nablus, thirty miles north of Jerusalem. Yishai described Nablus as a seemingly nice city, with schools and parks and playgrounds, but underneath such disguise is a stink hub of terror. Yishai and his troop followed the van carrying Jeremy until they reached a house in the ancient center of the city. They entered a house adjacent to the one Jeremy was parked outside and watched as the van door opened. Along with Jeremy was his wife and between thirteen to fifteen children. Yishai’s troop set up their weapons and waited as Jeremy walked throughout his house with his wife in arm. He suddenly disappeared into a center room within the house and Yishai wanted to shoot. As mentioned before, Jeremy had been wanted by the IDF for close to six years and they finally had the terrorist at their fingertips. He Continued on page 11
2
March 4, 2013
National
The Post Office Pickle Kirk Sigmon Columnist
Right on the Law
S
o apparently the U.S. Post Office wants to stop delivering small letters (and only deliver packages) on Saturdays. This, according to the USPS, is projected to save the company $2 billion a year. And yet the Left is absolutely livid. The USPS is basically a postal corporation with a lot of congressional strings attached. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 7 of the Constitution explicitly grants Congress the power to establish the USPS—meaning that it is one of the few constitutionally mandated government agencies. While the USPS seems to have a lot of freedom to manage itself, Congress has frequently involved itself in USPS operations, from setting the price of mail to requiring the USPS to pre-fund 75 years worth of health care benefit payments for employees. Despite this micromanagement, being owned by the government has its benefits: the USPS has a monopoly over small letters and over your mailbox, meaning that no matter how poorly it is run, it is the only game in town for certain forms of mail. The USPS is obviously not doing terribly well nowadays, and there’s no reason for anyone to be surprised about that. E-mail has pretty much decimated the small letter market, and the slow trod towards paperless business has made the USPS increasingly useless in modern society.
Ted Cruz
Continued from the front page wrong way. John McCain felt inclined to yank on Cruz’s leash when he attacked the character of Senator Chuck Hagel during his nomination hearing for secretary of defense. According to Politico, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham remarked, “the one thing I will say to any new senator—you’re going to be respected if you can throw a punch but you also have to prove you can do a deal.” Judging by his actions thus far, Ted Cruz is not interested in making deals either. As of the end of January, Cruz was on the losing side of every single vote placed in front of him, a striking 0-11 record. That number includes votes against the nominations of both John Kerry and Chuck Hagel, suspending the debt ceiling for four months, and the federal aid package for victims of Hurricane Sandy. Cruz later explained this vote, saying that “[e]mergency relief for the families who are suffering from this natural disaster should not be used as a Christmas tree for billions in unrelated spending.”
CR
Private package delivery companies such as FedEx, UPS, and DHL are all eating into the USPS’s market share. And, perhaps even worse, Congress is forcing the USPS to make insanely stupid business decisions such as the aforementioned funding of health care benefits for employees not even born yet. So the USPS is doing badly, and they want to cut Saturday delivery.
that the USPS, by being forced to offer equal rates across the nation, helps connect citizens in remote parts of the country in a way that would (somehow) be harmed by the cessation of Saturday delivery. Some others in the Left have also made the argument that cutting Saturday delivery would potentially throw the USPS into a death spiral, in a deathby-a-thousand-cuts sort of way.
Given how badly the USPS is doing, this is totally understandable. The USPS is hemorrhaging money, so no-one should deny them the ability to cut some costs, right? But, like I said, the Left is pissed off. Why? The answer isn’t as simple as I’d like to be, because the Left is inventing pretty much every reason possible to justify forcing the USPS to deliver on Saturdays. For example, the Left seems to believe that seniors will be harmed by a lack of delivery on Saturdays, as that might prevent those seniors from receiving medication by mail by an extra day. The Left has also made the argument
Of course, most of these arguments are hypothetical and hyperbolic. The real reason the Left hates this plan so much is that it takes away something they think they “had.” The Left—massive proponents of things being done by the government using tax money—likes the idea of the USPS, even if it is an outdated and antiquated mess. By conceding that the USPS is doing badly, the Left would be forced to admit that the robust free market— that is, UPS, FedEx, DHL, etc.—can do what the government can do, but better. For a party advocating singlepayer healthcare and bigger entitlement programs, that’s a death blow.
Senator Cruz’s brashness has also made him a prime target for the media. Chris Matthews compared Cruz to noted communist-chaser Joseph McCarthy for his attacks on Hagel. Joe Scarborough compared
Democrat-controlled senate to be a perfect 11-0 record in defense of conservative values, and in a sense he may be right. But what happens when he needs to make deals to push forward his bill to repeal Obamacare? At some point, he is going to need the cooperation of a handful of Democrats in order to make progress on anything he puts forward. Being on the wrong side of prominent Democrats such as Chuck Schumer may make that difficult. However, if there is one thing that we have learned over the years, it is this: if the mass media so actively hates a conservative, then clearly he must be doing something right. Maybe Cruz is exactly what the GOP needs to wake up from its current stupor. Maybe his fervor will remind old-school Republicans that they are in ofice to fight on behalf of their constituents and the sanctity of the Constitution, not to roll over and play dead for the arrogant, wouldbe-king that the President is more and more revealing himself to be.
Ted Cruz is not here to make friends....[He] is not interested in making deals either. him to a “carnival barker at a local Republican event.” Cruz has been ripped apart by The New York Times, Politico, Forbes, and numerous other outlets. The question at hand is this: by using this aggressive approach, is Senator Ted Cruz helping or harming the GOP? Senator Cruz has stated that he considers going 0-11 in a
A single day without junk mail is not going to hurt anyone. Sure, there might be some hypothetical grandmothers in the middle of nowhere who desperately want their life-saving medication on Saturday. But the USPS still plans to deliver packages on Saturday, meaning that those hypothetical grandmothers will be just fine. Canada has been doing fine with 5 day delivery for years and, to my knowledge, no Canadian grandmothers have died as a result of it yet. In fact, the only thing those hypothetical grandmothers will lose out of this entire gambit is simple: a whole lot of junk mail. In a postSaturday delivery world, Grandma might actually have to wait two days before getting her exploitative credit card offers. If we are to learn anything from this entire ridiculous debate, it is that the Right must learn to approach the Left not on its own terms, but by understanding its incentives. Instead of sitting around arguing with random talking heads on the Left about inane things like medication delivery for hypothetical grandmothers that don’t exist, the Right should address the underlying issue with the USPS: that it is a dying service that might be worth letting free so it can manage its own demise. Five day delivery is not the magic bullet that will save the USPS, but it is the first step in cuts that might keep it alive for as long as we might need it. Kirk Sigmon is a graduate student in the Law School. He can be reached at kas468@cornell.edu.
Maybe we don’t need a Senate filled with Republicans that act exactly like Ted Cruz, but we need Ted Cruz to remind Republicans to start acting more like Republicans. Mike Navarro is a junior in the College of Agriculture and Life Science. He can be reached at mln62@ cornell.edu
The Cornell Review
Founded 1984 r Incorporated 1986 Jim Keller Jerome D. Pinn Anthony Santelli, Jr. Ann Coulter Founders
Noah Kantro Alfonse Muglia Editors-in-Chief
Karim Lakhani President
Lucia Rafanelli Executive Editor Vice President
Christopher Slijk Managing Editor
Katie Johnson Treasurer
Laurel Conrad
Campus News Editor
Kushagra Aniket
National News Editor
Contributors Caitlin Deming Michael Loffredo Caroline Emberton Roberto Matos Andre Gardiner Mike Navarro Alex Gimenez Kirk Sigmon Raj Kannappan Bill Snyder
Editorial
Board of Directors
Christopher DeCenzo Joseph E. Gehring Jr. Anthony Santelli Jr.
Noah Kantro Editor-in-Chief
T
he Cornell Review is pleased to announce that we will be hosting this year’s Student Assembly presidential debate in partnership with the Class Councils. Candidates Stephen Breedon and Ulysses Smith (but unfortunately not Jay Lee) will be answering—and hopefully arguing over—questions from the Cornell Review editorial board. We are also pleased to announce that Slope Media will be filming the debate, so even if you cannot attend, or if this column finds you after the elections are over, the recording will be viewable on our website. For most of the student body, it seems that this year’s
efforts last semester were put into again creating a mixed gender housing option, in which the Daily Sun recently reported only 87 students have expressed interest. We intend to ask the questions that really matter to the Cornell student body. We want the candidates to define the role of the SA and the president’s proper place in it. We want students to know where the candidates stand on specific issues. We want students to know not what the SA will impose upon the student body, but what it will do for the student body. The Student Assembly is constantly wringing its hands over the lack of student concern for its resolutions and machinations.
The powers that be—especially the SA—spend inordinate amounts of time focusing on minutiae rather than issues that matter to students.
Faculty Advisor William A. Jacobson 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. The Cornell Review prides itself on letting its writers speak for themselves, and on open discourse. We publish a spectrum of beliefs, 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 wellreasoned conservative opinion piece, we hope you will send it to cornellreview@ cornell.edu for consideration. The Cornell Review meets regularly on Mondays at 5:00 pm in GS 156. E-mail messages should be sent to
cornellreview@cornell.edu
Copyright © 2013 The Ithaca Review Inc. All Rights Reserved.
3
Holding Student Government Accountable
Emeritus Members Anthony Longo Lucas Policastro
March 4, 2013
campaign has so far been less than informative. At the candidate forum last Saturday, sparsely attended and hosted mainly by various racial minority organizations, it seemed as if every candidate’s pitch centered on their concern for diversity, their past efforts to promote it, and how their own ethnic and economic backgrounds position them to promote it in the future. While these concerns might be expected at an event hosted by such groups, it seems more and more that catering to special interests has become the main focus of the SA as a whole. Recently the SA spent time debating and voting to financially divest from fossil fuels, a resolution quickly vetoed by President Skorton. Gargantuan
Perhaps the representatives would not have this problem if their activities better reflected the concerns of the average student. Take for example a recent comment on the Daily Sun website by commenter Uzenzo. In response to news that fundraising will begin for a bronze statue of Touchdown the Bear, he said, “$250,000 for a bear statue? Does anyone even try to solicit donations for important things like student housing, financial aid, and department funding?” The powers that be on campus—especially the SA— spend inordinate amounts of time focusing on minutiae rather than issues that matter to students. Our representatives focus on diversity when countless diversity
initiatives, offices, and clubs already exist. They focus on mixed-gender housing instead of doing whatever is in their power to reduce the ever-rising costs of on-campus housing. They look into university-wide requirements on “social justice” when students already have too few opportunities to choose classes outside of their majors. The SA does not represent the average Cornellian; it represents activists. It caters to the demands of specific student organizations and interest groups who claim to speak for the entire student body, or for the environment, or for some subsect of so-called social justice. Going to events and listening to activists who come forward with their naïve dreams are great ways for representatives to pad their resumes and gain traction in campus politics, but in order to be an effective government the SA must reach the type of people, often the vast majority of students, who do not frequent events or join activist clubs. Visiting a residence hall on a weekday afternoon and asking students questions about their problems would produce solutions to more real issues than attending multicultural dinners— something that candidate Ulysses Smith spoke about at the last forum—ever will. As young conservatives, we realize that our influence on a national scale is non-existent, but on campus that is not the case. By engaging in Cornell's issues as students with genuine interest in what the SA does and who they represent, the Cornell Review will hold student government accountable. Noah Kantro is a junior in the College of Engineering. He can be reached at nk366@cornell.edu.
The Review welcomes and encourages letters to the editor. Long, gaseous letters that seem to go on forever are best suited for publication in the Cornell Daily Sun. The Review requests that all letters to the editor be limited to 350 words. Please send all questions, comments, and concerns to cornellreview@cornell.edu.
The Cornell Review
est.1984
Correction: Last issue we credited the Cornell Federalist Society for hosting Cornell Review alumnus Alan Gura in a gun control debate. The Cornell Law 2nd Amendment Club also co-sponsored the debate.
CR
4
Campus
March 4, 2013
A History Of Cornell Conservatism Part I: Our Beginnings Kushagra Aniket National News Editor
M
change and faith in the core principles of limited and sensible government run through the pages of the journal best known for its strong reaction to the Willard Straight Takeover of 1969. The foundations were
This series of articles shall be an attempt to rediscover our traditions and look back at our past. covery that might lead us to revise our perception of the long-standing leftist bias on campus, these editions leave no doubt as to what it has meant to defend liberty at Cornell. An aversion to institutional conformism, belief in constitutional freedom, skepticism towards radical
Courtesy Cornell Kroch Library
uch to the surprise of some of us, Cornell has had a long tradition of conservatism. Both Ezra Cornell and A.D. White were Republican Senators in New York and the University has been associated with some prominent names in conservative thought and politics. But this history has been hitherto undocumented and this series of articles shall be an attempt to rediscover our traditions and look back at our past It all began last month when I retrieved some editions of the Conservative humor journal “The Pink Elephant” dating back to 1969 from Carl A. Kroch Library’s Division of
Rare and Manuscript Collections. A group called “Young Republicans of the Big Red” published the journal. These editions show that even in those days, people were shielding free speech, academic freedom and intellectual diversity on campus with characteristic wit and creativity. It was the culmination of these efforts that was reflected in the foundation of the Cornell Review in 1984. While we may not agree with everything that was said then or even with the manner in which opinions were articulated, some of our roots can be traced back to that publication. The humor is unmistakable. Liberals are shown burning the effigies of Reagan long before he ran for
President, claiming to speak on the behalf of half of mankind, and demanding disproportionately severe punishments. Some of these trends continue to this date. But at the same time, in a dis-
strong but the magazine did not last long. Its staff graduated and it was discontinued after a year. Besides campus activism, a more dynamic intellectual circle had come up at the Telluride House, a branch of the Telluride Association founded in 1911. Paul Wolfowitz and Francis Fukuyama were undergraduate residents of the House then. Both of these men studied under the philosopher Allan Bloom who served as a faculty mentor of the Telluride House. The tradition continues to this date even though the House has lost its conservative touch. But it seems that between 1969 and 1984, conservatives on campus did not have a well-defined medium to address their views to the entire campus community. There were occasional political columns in the Sun and some of them took a rightwing stance on national and campus events, but the space for the expression of independent opinions was created with the foundation of The Cornell Review. Kushagra Aniket is a sophomore in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at ka337@cornell.edu.
Th e P in k Ele p ha nt Editor’s Note: This article first appeared in the Cornell Young Republican’s newsletter The Pink Elephant in 1969, a most tumultuous year at Cornell. In today’s campus political climate (and in all situations), it is important to reflect on and learn from history. In this article, the author responds to violence by student radicals suppressing academic freedom. Today, we oppose mainstreamed radicals trying to limit academic freedom in the form of social justice and diversity requirements, working not through demonstrations and sit-ins, but through the SA and administration.
The ‘Open Campus’ The recent demonstration at Mallott Hall has once again proven the blatant hypocrisy of those that cry “liberty” but practice tyranny. These self-appointed guardians of the public morality have again seen fit to protect the morals of those people whom they feel are not capable of protecting their own. How can those who claim to be protecting people’s rights violate those very same rights in their alleged protection? This is equivalent to saying that the ends always justify the means. Is this what they really believe?
CR For many years our predecessors
have argued for the academic integrity of institutions of higher learning. Foremost among these principles is that any topic may be openly discussed without fear of suppression. All sides should have an opportunity to be expressed by their advocates. Criticism of any idea should result, but suppression of legitimate means of presentation is antithetical to the spirit of academic freedom. Opposed as we are to some of the ideas of the radical left, would we be justified (by their own standards) in suppressing them? The right of anyone to recruit or speak on this campus should not be infringed upon—be it Chase Manhattan, Dow Chemical, the United States Military, or the Communist Party. Who can
morally say that I do not have the right to hear or speak to whomever I please? Simply because someone claims the topic is immoral, does that make it so? People laugh today at laws which prohibited the teaching of evolution in schools. But does that make it any less tragic or real that, until recently, these suppressions of thought existed? They, like the suppressions we see today, were allegedly based upon the preservation of the public morality. When force is used to suppress free speech, especially on a major university campus, it is time for the public itself to denounce such Gestapo tactics utilized in its name by fanatics who oppose the very rights they claim to protect.
Campus
March 4, 2013
5
Gun Control: How Far Do We Go? Bill Snyder Staff Writer
T
he Cornell Republicans and Democrats engaged in a spirited debate on February 13th regarding the appropriate level of gun control. This debate, like many others before it, was based on the recent Connecticut shootings and was meant to inform Cornell students of the national parties’ respective positions. The young Republicans started the debate by framing their position. “You have the right to the Second Amendment to bear arms. This Amendment gives you the right to defend yourself and your family… [but] there are sensible measures of regulation and a proactive approach to stem gun violence,” said sophomore Julius Kairey, representing the College Republicans. The Democrats did not necessarily disagree with this position, but rather qualified their opening statement by arguing that gun control laws must be considered on a caseby-case basis. By doing so, the Democrats argued that the government could minimize the amount of gun violence without violating the Second Amendment. While the debate was relatively heated, ultimately the two sides did not disagree on much. Both argued that a basic level of gun protection was necessary in upholding the Second Amendment, and that this right
Faux Dylan Mania Continued from the front page
this group, Dylan is the perfect hipster chieftan. Dylan was indeed a part of the civil rights movement, but his lyrics were sufficiently vague that a broad progressive message was stretched over them. Dylan was a projected character from his earliest days: he had much to say, but it was not leftist; rather, it was conservative. Don’t believe me? This should suffice: “I had a primitive way of looking at things and I liked country fair politics. My favorite politician was Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater, who reminded me of Tom Mix, and there wasn’t any way to explain that to anybody. I wasn’t that comfortable with all the psycho polemic babble. It wasn’t my particular feast of food. Even the current news made me nervous. I liked old news better.” (Dylan’s autobiography Chronicles 2004) One more: “I really wasn’t so much a part of what they call ‘the Sixties.’” Even though you’re so identified with it? “Evidently I was, and maybe even still am. I was there during that time, but I really couldn’t identify with what was happening.” (Rolling Stone 2012)
extended to individuals being able to defend themselves and their families. As a result, the gun debate fluctuated between trying to holistically define the line of gun control while taking a step-by step approach to the problem. As a result, the debaters often focused on the minutia, such as whether or not a Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifle should be restricted or even banned. However, a few topics within the realm of gun control became very controversial between the two parties, such as the culture behind gun violence. “American culture is partly frontier [oriented], but steps can be taken to reduce the influence and desire in feeling that gun protection is necessary, ” said Democrat Tony Montgomery. For the Democrats, this included actions such as placing more restrictions on dangerous weapons, increasing the effectiveness of mental health programs, increasing restrictions on gun commerce, and even changing the U.S. position on high crime activities like the War on Drugs. The Republican opponents did not agree with this logic. “Restrictions on guns hurts the gun culture," stated Kairey. "Under Obama’s presidency, gun purchases have skyrocketed because people are afraid the government is going to take their guns away.” The true genius of Dylan is that his identity is hidden in plain sight. Bob Dylan is the most universally praised conservative on Earth. Reading contemporary accounts of Dylan in this light is extremely gratifying. For example, President Obama suffers from DPD too: “There is not a bigger giant in the history of American music… I remember, in college, listening to Bob Dylan, and my world opened up.” Actually, Barry, you were just looking for validation, and you projected onto Dylan. He was singing for wisdom and respect, not progressive politics. Obama recounts Dylan performing “The Times They Are A-Changin’” at the White House in 2010: “Finishes the song, steps off the stage—I’m sitting right in the front row—comes up, shakes my hand, sort of tips his head, gives me just a little grin, and then leaves. And that was it—then he left. That was our only interaction with him.” Despite Dylan’s snub, Obama displays classic DPD: “I thought: That’s how you want Bob Dylan, right? You don’t want him to be all cheesin’ and grinnin’ with you. You want him to be a little skeptical about the whole enterprise. So that was a real treat.” Obama awarded Dylan the Presidential Medal of Freedom two years later. Dylan on Obama: “Look, I only met him a few times. I mean, what do you want me to say? He loves music. He’s personable. He dresses
Mayor Bloomberg demonstrating the true dangers of ketchup and mustard guns. By increasing restrictions on guns, the government is functionally increasing the number of guns people purchase instead of reducing the number of weapons in the country. Instead, the government should focus on tighter restrictions on the people who can own and purchase weapons, argued the Republicans. This includes preventing mentally ill individuals from attaining deadly arsenals. Although the debate shifted from specific details on gun regulations to drastic, even radical arguments on gun control and gun liberty, the debate did highlight an important
reality. The factors behind America's gun culture are shrouded by complicated and opaque factors that cannot be addressed by blunt, conventional means. Both sides must look for the root causes of the problems and face the reality of the situation. The constitutional right to bear arms is a part of the backbone of our country. This must be taken into account when attempting to curb gun violence.
good. What the fuck do you want me to say?” I hope you’re starting to realize that Dylan has grown to coyly appreciate being misinterpreted. He knows that his very existence is a seed of contradiction embedded within the liberal consciousness. Though times have a-changed, the pathology of Dylan Projection has remanifested in a new generation. Faux Dylan Mania (FDM) incorporates all the symptoms of DPD, but appears in a wider population of casual music consumers. “His music has been inspirational for over 50 years and we’ll all be able to take something away from his visit”, proclaims one afflicted student. What inspired this student? Perhaps it was Dylan’s anti-Vietnam activism, as the Cornell Daily Sun notes: “much of Dylan’s music has become emblematic of the Civil Rights Movement and of protests against the Vietnam War”. Ah, the deep delusions of FDM. From 1968:
Dylan: That’s like what I’m talking about; it’s for or against the war. That really doesn’t exist. It’s not for or against the war. I’m speaking of a certain painter, and he’s all for the war. He’s just about ready to go over there himself. And I can comprehend him. Why can’t you argue with him? Dylan: I can see what goes into his painting, and why should I? … My feeling is that with a person who is for the war and ready to go over there, I don’t think it would be possible for you and him to share the same values. Dylan: I’ve known him a long time, he’s a gentleman and I admire him, he’s a friend of mine. People just have their views. Anyway, how do you know that I’m not, as you say, for the war?
Probably the most pressing thing going on in a political sense is the war. Now I’m not saying any artist or group of artists can change the course of the war, but they still feel it their responsibility to say something. Dylan: I know some very good artists who are for the war. Well, I’m just talking about the ones who are against it.
Bill Snyder is a freshman in the school of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at wjs254@cornell.edu.
If you’ve read this far without having an existential crisis, you are cured. Love him or hate him, you are now equipped to understand Bob Dylan. I’d like to thank the Cornell Concert Commission for allowing Dylan to invite himself to Cornell. Dylan’s choice of a college tour is notable—I leave it to the reader to see why. Lucas Policastro is a senior in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at ljp74@cornell.edu. Originally published on the Cornell Insider.
CR
6
March 4, 2013
National
Misguided Regulation in Housing and Banking By Andre Gardiner Washington Correspondent
W
hile the budget deficit has received a majority of the attention from freemarket economists, financial regulation and the 2008 subprime-mortgage crisis have not gone unanalyzed since the start of the year. In recent months scholars at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) have published a series of articles criticizing government involvement in both finance and housing.
A New Path to Regulatory Reform Once every quarter, AEI scholar Peter Wallison hosts the Shadow Financial
far too complex and opened regulators up to problems. During the last financial crisis, regulators had to explain why banks were approaching insolvency despite high capital ratios. The graph below indicates the wide disparity between government-required ratios (Tier 1) and common market measures of liquidity (TCE) during the financial crisis. The committee instead supported the adoption of pure cash liquidity standard as a means of setting a capital ratio. The new cash standard would increase investor confidence and remove many of the perverse incentives created by treating certain assets differently from a capital perspective.
crisis was avoidable, and was caused by financial regulatory failures, breakdowns in corporate governance, and risky activity on the part of banks and mortgage originators. For years now, Wallison has argued that the crisis was caused by government involvement in the housing sector. Through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and HUD, the government lowered lending standards in an effort to increase home ownership. These bad practices spread to the private sector primarily through implicit and explicit government guarantees of mortgage-backed securities.
Foreclosing on the FHA
Regulatory Committee, a group of scholars who discuss and propose regulatory reform. Last month the committee discussed new banking capital requirements. Banking capital ratios are standardized internationally as part of the Basel accords. In the new accord, Basel III, bank capitalization is set using a liquidity coverage ratio. That ratio is established using a variety of stress tests and assets are given haircuts depending on the level of liquidity and agency ratings. The Shadow Financial Committee suggested that the standard was
CR
Changing the Narrative on the Financial Crisis In January Peter Wallison released his new book, Bad History, Worse Policy: How a False Narrative about the Financial Crisis led to the Dodd-Frank Act. The book is part of a greater effort by Wallison to dispel what he views as common misconceptions about the root cause of the financial crisis. Wallison was on the 2009 Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which was charged by Congress with establishing the causes of the crisis. The commission ruled that the
For about a year now AEI scholar Edward Pinto has been publishing data on the lending patterns of the Federal Housing Administration. Pinto was a VP and Credit Officer at Fannie Mae during the 1980s and then was a consultant in the housing sector. Pinto is critical of government involvement in the housing sector and has focused most of his recent attention on the FHA. He argues that the FHA has replaced Fannie and Freddie as the government instrument for “affordable housing.� Pinto has tried to dispel the commonly held belief that the FHA has an average foreclosure rate on loans given the type of risky lending they make. Proponents of the FHA point to the statistic that during 2009 and 2010, the overall foreclosure rate was only 10%. They argue that 10% is an acceptable price to pay when compared to the value of home ownership. Based on new zip code level loan data, Pinto has found that the 10% simple average hides a more troubling trend. While the FHA makes a lot of low-income loans, they also give loans to individuals capable of finding a private mortgage. As a result, the FHA loan portfolio is a mixture of high and low quality loans. Therefore, when you look at the agencies foreclosure rates, there are zip codes with an almost 0% foreclosure rate, which lowers the overall rate. For example, in Chicago, projected loan failure rates for the 5 worst zip codes were between 35% and 73%. On the other hand, the 5 best neighborhoods were between 0% and 4%. This coupled with data indicating that the FHA as a capital shortfall of $46 - $65 billion and a net worth of negative $26 billion, presents a genuine problem. Pinto argues that the only solution is the eventual privatization of the FHA. In the meantime he argues that the FHA should implement stricter lending standards, especially in relation to down payment amounts. Andre Gardiner is a junior PAM major in the College of Human Ecology spending the semester at Cornell in Washington. He can be reached at apg58@cornell.edu.
Campus
By Laurel Conrad Campus News Editor
G
etting a flu shot is now out of the question: according to Gannett's
website, due to recent high-demand, it no longer has any flu vaccines available. According to Gannett, Cornell's Health Service, "the seasonal flu of 2013 has hit early and is unusually intense". It recom-
March 4, 2013
7
mended getting a flu vaccine as the best way to prevent illness from the flu. Students evidently followed this advice. When contacted, a representative from Gannett cited that 11260 total people, 5620 of whom are students, received the flu vaccine during this year's flu season. This is up by nearly 2000 recipients as compared to last flu season, when 9376 total people received the flu vaccine. More students went to Gannett with flu-like illness this year, too. So far, 454 students have been received by Gannett with flu-like illness, up from 232 students by this time last year. A representative from Gannett explained why the number of sick students might be significantly larger this year: "another slightly complicating factor related to comparing each season’s numbers in terms of flu like illness cases is that NY State expanded the definition of “flu like illness� this season to include a greater number of combinations of symptoms. So, the numbers are not exactly compa-
rable even when looking at the limited dates due to the newly expanded definition of illness in 2012/13 (our numbers are likely to be slightly higher this year due to this expanded definition than they might have been otherwise)". To prevent the flu, students are encouraged to wash their hands regularly and keep a good balance of sleep, exercise, and healthy eating. Laurel Conrad is a junior in the College of Arts & Sciences. She can be reached at lrc54@cornell.edu.
CR
8
National
March 4, 2013
Ignorance on Immigration Democrats continue to politicize immigration reform, halt progress Raj Kannappan Staff Writer
T
hree words currently reign supreme in Washington: comprehensive immigration reform. At stake are millions of potential votes. Since the end of 2012, a bipartisan group of eight senators has worked to develop an immigration reform package. Earlier this month, an immigration reform bill drafted by President Obama and his advisors was leaked. Apparently, it will serve as a backup in case Congress fails to deliver “comprehensive” reform. It seems that on immigration
Obama and Congress continue to view immigration in purely electoral terms. reform, Democrats and Republicans agree on the oft-repeated declaration, “The time is now.” Politics, for all the criticism it draws, is often eventually able to help elected officials hone in on the crucial details of important issues. The current immigration reform debate, however, is a case in which this has not held true. Historically, when discussing immigration reform, presidents and Congress have quite intently focused their efforts on the issue of providing a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants. President Obama and the 113th Congress are no exception. The White House and Congress have, to date, argued over such details as the length of the border
between the United States and Mexico; timelines for deportation of illegal immigrants; crime thresholds for refusing a pathway to citizenship; and the scope of back taxes. Yet, they have almost entirely ignored legal immigration. Except to mention in timid fashion—as if there should be any doubt in the first place—that they will require illegal immigrants to go to the back of the line. Much of the impetus for this ignorance is political calculation. However, if the White House and Congress have any genuine concern for the growth and vitality of the United States, they will heed the need to reform the legal immigration process. The U.S. legal immigration system is outdated, illogical, and backlogged. Currently, there are approximately 26 million legal immigrants in the United States. According to the immigration process as it stands today, it will take at least 5 years for them to receive their green card. They will then have to wait at least another 5 years to take the citizenship exam in order to become naturalized citizens. Many legal immigrants are perfectly willing to go through this slow and bureaucratic process. Yet, why must they wait when apparently those who are here illegally can escape this process altogether? Obama and Congress would do well to focus first on accelerating the granting of work visas, green cards, and citizenship to legal immigrants. Similarly inefficient is the process for allowing foreign university students to gain permanent legal
residency. Tens of thousands of international students, even those who have earned Masters and doctoral degrees and have been hired by an American employer, return to their native country each year following graduation because only employers have the ability to apply for a green card petition for these students. This petition, however, does not guarantee that the student in question will eventually receive his green card.
Many of these skilled foreign students would like to continue to live in the United States in order to take advantage of the superior professional opportunities available here. In the process, they would provide valuable contributions to exactly the sectors of the economy—medical, technology, and financial services— which need help. Obama has continued to emphasize the need for skilled workers in the STEM—science, technology, engineering, and mathematics—fields. There currently exists a population capable and willing to fill part of this
void: legal immigrants. If allowed to become permanent legal residents and citizens more quickly, they would have stronger incentives to pursue high-quality jobs here rather than return to their native countries. Obama and Congress continue to view immigration in purely electoral terms. They therefore resort to grand ideas of providing a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants. They should instead view immigration as a tool to help the United
States grow its economy. Their goal should be to attract and keep immigrants capable of contributing to this growth. Thus, any deal on immigration reform should follow this simple and logical precept: restrict illegal immigration immediately and simplify and accelerate the legal immigration process.
Raj Kannappan is a senior in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at rk398@cornell.edu
Branco @ Legal Insurrection
CR
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/02/branco-cartoon-red-tide-rising/
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/02/branco-cartoon-econo-cide/
Campus
Believe in the Kendrick Hype
March 4, 2013
9
Consistency Brought to Slope Day Festivities Alfonse Muglia Editor-in-Chief
T
hroughout the past week, Cornell students have been responding to the announcement that Kendrick Lamar will be the headline performer at this May’s Slope Day. During these discussions, however, students should be cautious not to take the nature of our annual spring concert out of context. Gone are the days when the spring concert was an inconsistent event, like it was throughout the Vietnam War. Gone are the days of the “Take Back the Slope” Campaign, when thousands of students rallied together in response to the administration’s compliance with the new national drinking age of the late 1980s. These students did not want to see the Slope Day that they loved compromised by the administration, who called to make the event entirely alcohol-free, even for 21-year-olds. These events are not too removed from our school’s collective memory. In fact, the power struggle between the students and the administration for control of Slope Day was
rather heated as recently as the mid1990s. In 1991, for example, students responded to the cancellation of the event by flocking to the Slope in the hundreds. It was then that the administration realized that they must have a role in the event, for students would gather to the Slope regardless of whether there was an official event of not. Today, roughly two decades from these events, the largest concern for the student body is whether the headliner for the annual concert is enough of a star. This move toward the “modern” version of Slope Day can be dated to 2003. In that year, student leaders joined forces with the administration to form the Slope Day Programing Board. The new, bylinefunded group brought Rusted Root to Ithaca for a day that included catered food, controlled drinking, and
non-alcoholic games. Over the next decade, the Programming Board would bring household names to Libe Slope, including Kanye West, Drake, Nelly, and the Pussycat Dolls, to name just a few. This year’s concert marks a continuation of this recent trend. Ken-
drick Lamar is an up-and-coming Hip-Hop artist, much like Kanye West was in 2004. Slope Day Programming Chair Yang Zhao commented on the students’ response to the announcement. “People are either very excited about the choice,” he remarked, “or just don’t know who Kendrick is.” Zhao’s comments echo much of the overall sentiment this past week. With the existence of Slope Day never in doubt, the largest concern for students was who the musical choice would be, and Kendrick’s Hip-Hop appeal made him the most compelling candidate. “Rap/Hip-Hop was a popular genre according to our Slope Day student body survey,” continued Zhao. “I think that if the people who don't know who Kendrick is give him a listen, they will learn to appreciate how talented he really is.” In reality, the Slope Day hype should not be limited to the musical selection. The students’ acceptance
of Kendrick’s performance may be the most memorable, but it is not what Slope Day has been about since its founding. Instead, it is a day for students to come together and celebrate the commonalities that make us Cornellians. In the weeks ahead, the Program-
ming Board will work to continue to onboard volunteers and work for the overall good of the day’s activities. “[Our] next steps are planning out our promotional campaign, logistics, and Slope Fest,” said Zhao. Slope Fest, a now stable element of the Slope Day activities, was first introduced in 1999. It came as an effort to promote non-alcohol related student merrymaking leading up to the concert. Recent activities have included carnival games, giveaways, dance, and singing competitions. This is a far cry from the broken Slope Day of 1991. This progress throughout the last decade to bring consistency to the event has given Cornell students something that they know they can look forward to after a long, cold semester. Therefore, the fact that students are now most worried about the performer should be a welcoming sign. Kendrick’s strong following among a core group of students will spread throughout the entire student body and lead to a successful event. At the same time, however, students should continue engaging in ways to improve the overall Slope Day experience, like our predecessors in the 1980s and 1990s. As the byline-funding process begins to enter the limelight, students will have exactly that opportunity. Regardless of how structured the event becomes, in order to maintain the tradition we all love, Slope Day must be kept in the hands of students, with limited administrative interference. Alfonse Muglia is a junior in the School of Industrial and Labor Relaitons. He can be reached at arm267@cornell.edu
CR
10
Sports
March 4, 2013
Alex Gimenez Sports Contributor
A
fter one of their most successful seasons in team history, the Big Red basebal team lost its strong senior leadership core this offseason due to graduation. This group contributed not just on the field, but off of it. For the team, losing center fielder Brian Billigen, shortstop Marshall Yanzick, first baseman Frank Hager, catcher Brandon Lee, and starting pitcher Rick Marks will take its toll this season. Replacing this class is not going to be an easy task. Nevertheless, with a group of playoff-hungry returning players, and incoming freshman who are ready to prove themselves at the next level, head coach Bill Walkenbach will have no shortage of talent at his disposal.
Manning the Outfield In 2012, Billigen solidified his status as one of the greatest baseball players in Big Red history with a phenomenal senior campaign. Billigen was a force in the Big Red lineup, driving in a team leading 40 RBI out of the three hole, while his .361/.443/.576 line led the team in all three categories. However his contributions did not just end with his offensive prowess. “Beans” provided a defensive spark in centerfield, where his speed and arm strength made him a perfect candidate to roam Hoy Field’s spacious outfield. "It is going to be difficult replacing the best player in the Ivy League,” remarked coach Walkenbach. Following last season, Billigen signed as an undrafted free agent with the Arizona Diamondbacks, and was called up to Single A after hitting .327 in a 30 game stint in Rookie Ball. Replacing Billigen this season appears to be sophomore outfielder JD Whetsel, who is poised to make an immediate impact for the Big Red. He will be tasked with replacing one of the best hitters in Big Red history. “It’s like Aaron Rodgers trying to fill Brett Favre’s shoes. He was one of the best hitters in the history of Cornell baseball,” said Whetsel. “It's going to be tough, but no one expects me to be him or do what he did. The key to my success will be trying to do my best on the field and staying within myself.” Whetsel saw some playing time last season when Billigen went down midway through the year with an ankle injury. In limited action, he hit .189 and drove in five runs. Heading into 2013 the once concern was his offense. Whetsel made major strides during the fall and received high praise from Coach Walkenbach. There is no question that Whetsel’s defense makes him a strong candidate to man centerfield. A converted infielder, he had never seen playing time in the
CR
outfield prior to his collegiate playing career. However, as a former high school football kick returner, his familiarity with tracking balls in the air gave him an edge in making the transition. Combine this with his terrific speed—he was 6-6 in stolen base attempts last year—make him a perfect fit to man center field at Hoy Field.
Back at his Natural Position While the centerfielder is the captain of the outfield, the shortstop is the commander of the infield, and the loss of shortstop Marshall Yanzick left a big hole for the Big Red. While Yanzick struggled offensively in 2012 as a result of a mid season slump, he was a top-of-the-order hitter throughout his career and led the team in batting average in 2011. Hitting second in the order last season, Yanzick batted .258 with a .330 on base percentage. Defensively, he was a steady contributor at shortstop and had the ability to make highlight reel plays as he proved in game one of the NCAA Regional versus UNC. The Big Red will fill the shortstop hole with Tom D’Alessandro, a familiar face who was the team’s starting left fielder during the second half of last season. A natural shortstop, D’Alessandro has bounced around seeing starts in the outfield, designated hitter, and second base. His flexibility allowed the coaching staff to find positions for him in order to include his bat in the lineup. “I think that growing up as a shortstop and playing on very competitive teams put me in a good position athletically and mentally with the mindset that, if I am in the lineup, I can play anywhere,” said D’Alessandro. D’Alessandro’s bat proved to be a crucial part of the team’s Ivy League Championship run in 2012 as he proved that he could hit for power. He finished tied for third on the team in home runs in just 32 games played. “I have to attribute my offensive success to working hard to contribute every game, whether it was doing the pitching charts, pick-off times to first, pinch hitting, or being a defensive replacement and then taking that opportunity that the coaches gave me and not missing it.” The Big Red will be leaning heavily on D’Alessandro’s bat in the middle of the order, and there is no question that he has the ability to provide the spark offensively that this team needs.
Replacing the Defensive Anchor Another key bat for the Big Red this year will come out of the first base position. In 2012, Frank Hager was a constant force driving the Big Red’s success on both the offensive
and defensive side. As the team’s fifth hitter, Hager hit .295 and tied for second overall in extra base hits. He also led the team’s starting infielders in fielding percentage and helped out the other infielders by digging balls out of the dirt with ease. In his absence, the Big Red will turn to another strong offensive weapon at first base in Ryan Plantier. In limited playing time (29 at bats) Plantier posted a .172 batting average with 5 RBI, one of which came on a sacrifice fly to provide the Big Red with a walk off win over Columbia at Hoy Field. The Big Red expect big things from him in 2013, as his strength and size should yield some powerful results over the course of the season. Plantier, who has learned much about hitting through his father, Phil Plantier, who is the hitting coach for the San Diego Padres, will be a nice addition to a younger Big Red lineup for the upcoming season.
The Battle for Catcher Behind the plate, Brandon Lee was a wall defensively and had the ability to control the young Big Red pitching staff. Lee was the team’s second leading hitter batting .320 throughout the season. This including a torrid run in the NCAA Regional, where he went 6-9 against UNC and ECU. The Big Red are now tasked with finding a replacement for one of their most crucial players from 2012. “The competition is really heating up as to who will be our starting catcher going into the season,” said Coach Walkenbach. That competition is between three very legitimate options. Chris Burke played the back up role for the Big Red last season, and the senior has familiarity with the team’s pitching staff. In 23 at bats Burke his .217 and was solid defensively in his seven starts at the catcher’s position. Another candidate is Matt Hall, who saw some playing time last year as a freshman. In 73 at bats, Hall flashed an ability to drive in runs with some added power. He picked an excellent time to hit his first collegiate home run last season, delivering the blast in a win-or-go-home scenario against Princeton on the final day of the regular season. Hall will be in the Big Red lineup regardless of the outcome of the catching competition, most likely as the team’s designated hitter. He is working on polishing his tools behind the plate. The final candidate is freshman Colin McGee, who has tons of
Brandon Thomas
Big Red Baseball Preview
raw talent behind the plate. He has shown a strong throwing arm and some hitting ability, hitting his first home run as a member of the Big Red in a fall league game against Team Canada. “Whoever is consistent receiving the ball, controls the running game, and puts up quality at bats will win the job,” remakred Walkenbach.
Filling the Rotation The final major competition going into the season is for the spot in the rotation vacated by Rick Marks. Marks went 4-5 with a 3.48 ERA last season and was a mentor and leader for the team’s young starting core. With a wealth of pitching options, the competition has opened up to four pitchers. Senior left hander TJ Parthemer saw ten appearances last season and went 1-1 with a 4.15 ERA. After transferring into Cornell from Bellevue Community College, Parthemer went down with Tommy John Surgery and has been on the road to recovery since. The injury caused him to miss all of the 2011 season and 2012 became a comeback year where he was just trying to get a feel for things back on the mound. Now that he’s back to full health, this season could be his break out year. “I’d actually say my arm is stronger now than it was before,” said Parthemer. “Its essentially a brand new ligament they put in there.” Other options for the Big Red include junior transfer Zach McCulley and sophomores lefty Nick Busto and righty Roberto Suppa. McCulley brings with him a strong resume from junior college as well as a 6’5” 205 pound build that makes him an intimidating opponent on the mound. Busto saw nine appearances and three starts for the Big Red in 2012 finishing the year 1-1 with a 3.47 ERA (lowest amongst the teams left handed pitchers). Suppa, in thirteen innings of work last season had no decisions with an 8.31 ERA. However, do not let the numbers do the talking, Suppa is incredibly talented and was drafted out of high school in the 26th round of the MLB Draft by the San Diego Padres. Alex Gimenez is a sophomore in the School of Industrial and Labor Relations. He can be reached at ajg322@ cornell.edu
Campus
March 4, 2013
11
CORNELLINSIDER.com Ten Theses Against The Social Justice Requirement
Posted by Kushagra Aniket
With reference to the Campus Liberty Project’s campaign against a proposed mandatory Social Justice Requirement at Cornell, here are 10 compelling arguments to sign the petition: 1. People who are interested in the concept of social justice have plenty of classes to choose from across departments ranging from philosophy to economics. There is no need for any compulsory general requirement. 2. What is Social Justice? Who gets to define it? One of the definitions I received from an advocate of the new requirement was this: ” When a society is committed to the pursuit of fairness, redress of grievances, inclusion, human rights and humanism.” But something seems wrong when to define one loaded word, one has to use five more loaded words. Besides, if freedom is seen as an integral component of justice, then it is an inherent contradiction to force students to take a course. 3. Social Justice should not be interpreted as political correctness. It should not degenerate to silence on controversial issues. The idea of justice is itself complex and dates back to Plato who defined it as the harmonious reconciliation of different parts of the whole. 4. The SJ requirement is reactionary in the sense that it rests on the presumption that prejudice is simply a product of ignorance and that people can be forced to overcome their deep seated beliefs by mandating a class. Searching for an instant solution to “hate crimes” should itself be seen as simplistic and unfair. 5. What are the actual logistics of this class? Who would teach it and in what department? Would it be big enough to accommodate the entire student population? Would colleges be allowed to design their own social justice curriculum? How would it affect inter-college relations within the University? 6. If the central purpose of education is to enable people to engage in free and critical thinking, what impact would such a requirement have on their analytical abilities? 7. Technical proficiency and academic success are often compatible with the existence of bias. How would coursework allow people to overcome the perceived social problems on Cornell Campus? 8. There is a crucial difference between other science and liberal arts requirements and a specific SJ requirement. Other general requirements still allow students to choose their courses of interest. But the SJ requirement would be a direct attack on the students’ choice in designing their own unique academic experience. 9. It would hurt those who are really interested in exploring the concept of social justice. Do you want to be in a class full of people sighing and complaining while you’re actually interested in the material? A class where the vast majority of people happen to be there because they couldn’t do otherwise would descend into boredom and drudgery. 10. It should be seen as another attempt to replace personal responsibility with bureaucratic administration. People would be absolved of their responsibility to select courses because some of those decisions would have already been made for them by those in the positions of authority. Kushagra Aniket is a sophomore in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at ka337@cornell.edu.
Stand With Us Continued from the front page
immediately called the base, as is standard procedure in the IDF code of ethics. An Israeli soldier cannot shoot unless given permission by the base and only in extraordinary circumstances. To Yishai’s dismay, the base told him not to shoot. They said it was too risky, for women and children were near the man. Protecting them was more important to the IDF at this moment of crises. Although Yishai felt offended, his troop waited three long hours before making the call to finally bust inside the now dark and quiet house. Nobody was found upon entering, and a search was led throughout every room of the house. In the center room, where Jeremy had disappeared beforehand, they found nothing but a carpet. Yishai lifted up the carpet, and underneath—a tunnel. The terrorist had escaped and the troop was horrified at this missed opportunity to finally get him. Just five years before, there was literally no information about this man at the IDF. Now, they had him in plain sight and one gunshot could have ended the terror, but they could not shoot. To this day, Yishai believes that the decision called by the IDF base was in fact the right one. He explained that as a soldier in the IDF, one must make a distinction between who is a terrorist and who is
an innocent woman or child. Even if there is a chance that all of Jeremy’s children become terrorists like their father, in the present moment they are children and as such are protected by the IDF.
Twenty Seconds to Save Her Family Sharon’s story begins in 2006 with the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Their kidnapping essentially sparked the month-long war with the Lebanese militia Hezbollah. The men were brutally beaten and died while under Hezbollah custody. Israel had negotiated a deal with Lebanon to release the dead bodies of the two soldiers in exchange for the release of one of the most vicious Lebanese terrorists, Samir Kuntar, along with four other jihadists. The terrorists were welcomed back with shouts of praise from their people whereas Israel was left mourning over the two dead soldiers. Sharon explained the fear she had when Hezbollah, under the leadership of Samir Kuntar, began aiming missiles once again at Israeli civilians. She spoke of the strategy used by Hezbollah; one that avoids the incredible strength of the Israeli army and targets the weak spot of Israel— the civilians. Her responsibility as a soldier in the IDF was to predict where the missiles would land and warn the people to run for shelter. She had roughly twenty seconds from each missle launch to take care of this
task. On the day of her account, she tells of twelve missiles fired into Haifa, a mid-sized city frequently the target of terrorist organizations. This destination particularly resonated with Sharon because it is the town in which she grew up and where her family still resides. On her GPS locating device, one of the missiles was headed right for her street, near her house, in a family-oriented neighborhood. From the time of its firing, she had twenty seconds to predict the location of impact. Turning on the sirens to warn the town took five, giving her family and the other civilians a whopping fifteen seconds to reach shelter. After the explosion she saw seven missed calls on her phone but wasn’t allowed to answer until she left the base. Once off of the base she called back the number—it was her father. He thanked her for saving their lives, telling her that the explosion hit a mere ten seconds after they took shelter under the stairs. The pride and honor she felt from saving civilians like her family pushed her to pursue a career as an officer in the IDF. The most striking aspect of the stories told by these two Israeli soldiers is the level of ethics held by the IDF. Commonly referred to as “The Spirit of the IDF,” it is basically the Ten Commandments that govern the soldiers at all times and in all situations. Both Yishai and Sharon agreed that IDF Law is much stricter than International Law when it comes to
caring for civilians and taking precautions before action. It is also as a result of this code of ethics that the IDF has one of the lowest rates of PTSD in soldiers and veterans. According to Yishai and Sharon, it is truly sad that the other side does not want to see the day when peace reigns over the region. The duo explained how the Palestinian terrorist groups are using women as human shields and rising up a new generation of terrorist children. A Palestinian woman taking a class with Sharon once spoke words that Sharon will never forget: “One day we will free Palestine and wipe out all the Israelis.” Sharon’s expression of grief is felt by many Israeli soldiers and civilians who want nothing more but to see peace come between the two sides. She talked of an instance when she heard that Palestinian “peace” protesters would be on her college campus. The protesters were anything but peaceful and used their weapons to kill a defenseless group of Israeli counter-protesters. Still, the IDF holds the highest standard of ethics among the great armies of the world. As best declared by former Israeli Prime Minster and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Yitzhak Rabin, “We’ll fight terror like there’s no peace, and make peace like there’s no terror.” Michael Loffredo is a sophomore in the College of Architecture and Art Planning. He can be reached at mjl343@cornell.edu.
CR
12
March 4, 2013
Wisemen & Fools Generic religion evades responsibility…Religion that is purely personal and private makes no difference in the world; that is why people in a pluralistic society resort to the privatization of religion, insisting that it is whatever you personally make it to be. Jacob Neusner
potential in this society. Sonia Sotomayor
The power which a multiple millionaire, who may be my neighbor and perhaps my employer, has over me is very much less than that which the smallest functionnaire possesses who wields the coercive power of the state on whose discretion it depends whether and how I am to be allowed to live or to work. F.A. Hayek
Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents. Bill Ayers
At Princeton, I began a lifelong commitment to identifying myself as a Latina, taking pride in being Hispanic, and in recognizing my obligation to help my community reach its fullest
The more I study the history of intellectuals, the more they seem like a wrecking crew, dismantling civilization bit by bit—replacing what works with what sounds good. Thomas Sowell
Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not. Thomas Jefferson I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them. George Mason
It is not the young people that degenerate. They are not spoiled until those of mature age are already sunk into corruption. Montesquieu When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing. They believe in anything. G.K. Chesterton
Read and comment online at
I don’t think there’s anybody that’s defended the Second Amendment as much as I have. Michael Bloomberg
We asked for freedom of the press, thought, and civil liberties in the past because we were in the opposition and needed these liberties to conquer. Now that we have conquered, there is no longer any need for such civil liberties. Nikolai Bukharin, Pravda editor and communist theorist
I learned to distrust my mechanistic pre-occupation with facts and to regard the world around me in the light of dialectic interpretation. It was a satisfactory and indeed blissful state; once you had assimilated the technique you were no longer disturbed by facts; they automatically took on the proper color and fell into their proper place. Both morally and logically the Party was infallible. Arthur Koestler, The God That Failed I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started…And an enormous debt to boot! Henry Morgenthau, FDR’s Treasury Secretary I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody. Barack H. Obama
thecornellreview.com
Join the Review. CR
Come to GS 156, Mondays at 5:00 pm or send us an email at cornellreview@cornell.edu