The Brandeis Hoot - 3-27-09

VOL 5, NO. 23

MARCH 27, 2009

B R A N D E I S U N I V E R S I T Y ' S C O M M U N I T Y N E W S PA P E R

Senators question politics of Union presidential race

BY ARIEL WITTENBERG Editor

A series of meetings between Student Union President Jason Gray ’10 and students considering running for Student Union President, which resulted in the students deciding not to run, have raised questions among Union senators about whether Gray is attempting to sway the election in favor of Executive Director of Community Advocacy Andy Hogan ’11.

Candidates running for Union office were required to sign up outside of the Union office by Wednesday, at which point they could begin campaigning for Thursday’s elections.

Prior to the Wednesday deadline, three students, Class of 2010 Senator Amanda Hecker ’10, Sahar Massachi ’11 and Associate Justice to the Union Judiciary Matt Kriegsman ’11 all discussed the prospect of running for president against Hogan with Gray, after which they decided against running.

Gray has denied any allegations that he is playing favorites in the race.

Kriegsman, who had gone so far as to write his name on the elections sign up sheet, told The Hoot in an interview that his talk with Gray “definitely scared me out of running.”

Kriegsman said that Gray told him that he felt Kreigsman’s inexperience in the

Union made him unqualified for the office of President.

While Kriegsman said that “that part of the conversation was legitimate,” he added that he “definitely felt pushed aside and like Jason had someone else in mind for the office.”

Kreigsman said that Gray did not mention a candidate he would prefer, however, he said that “I would hate to think that I was manipulated. I don’t know if I was or not, but I’d be curious.”

After speaking with Gray, Kreigsman crossed his name off the list for those running for Union President. Kreigsman, who now plans to run for a spot on the Union Judiciary also said Thursday that he does not regret his decision to not run and that his talk with Gray “wasn’t the only thing that made my decision.”

However, Kreigsman did say, “I came to him for advice, and now I wonder if I got agenda.”

Both Massachi and Hecker said Gray did not tell them that they were not qualified for the presidency, however each said that after discussing with Gray what the presidency entails, he suggested that they run for a different Union position.

Massachi, who is now running for the Junior Representative to the Board of Trustees, said that when he told Gray he had See ELECTIONS, p. 2

THEHOOT.NET

Shut out, sophomores find housing

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

SOPHOMORE LIVING: Tyrone Calliste ‘11, Brian Gordon-Hillman ‘11, Ayal Weiner-Kaplow ‘11 and Makensley Lourdeus ‘11 play Garage Band inside Calliste’s dorm room in East. Quad. East Quad is just one of five housing options for rising sophomores.

BY ARIEL WITTENBERG Editor

A miscalculation of housing distribution needs, and not a lack of housing, is to blame for the six rising sophomores originally left without housing after their housing lottery last Thursday night, Co-director of Residence Life Jeremy Leiferman said.

According to Leiferman, every year the Department of Residence Life calculates

the number of rooms to set aside for each class year based on the number of students who checked the box to participate in the housing lottery and on the number of students who checked the box but ended up living off campus the previous year.

This year, 98 percent of rising sophomores who checked the box participated, compared with the 96 percent of rising sophomores who checked the box and parSee HOUSING, p. 3

SEA shaves for the environment Senate to consider bypassing UJ decision with by-law amendment

BY ROBIN LICHTENSTEIN

BY ALEX SCHNEIDER

Staff

Editor

A bearded David Azer ’11 sat on a lone chair on the Chum’s stage. His hands were on his knees as he prepared himself for the fate that lay ahead of him. Azer, who had left his facial hair untrimmed or shaved since the beginning of September, was about to meet his maker—an electric razor in the hands of Dan Levine ‘11 and Rachel Wolfman ’11.

After the shave, all that remained was a mustache and soul patch.

But Azer was not letting go of his facial hair of seven months for kicks, but rather, for the environment. Azer was one among seven men who offered to sacrifice their beards in return for donations at the Students for Environmental Action (SEA) coffee house on Monday.

At the coffee house, SEA collected donations for Green Opportunity Action Leadership (GOAL) Network, a not for profit started by Brandeis students to connect inner-city kids with the burgeoning green job market, whenever donations passed a certain amount of money, a

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

OFF WITH THEIR BEARDS: Amy Thompson ‘11 shaves the beard of Daniel Orkin ‘10 in order to raise money for GOAL at a SEA coffee house on Monday.

See BEARDS, p. 2

IN THIS ISSUE:

Brush up your Constitution Opinions, page 6

The Student Union Senate is considering an amendment to its bylaws that would change the way it can allocate money. The amendment, which was proposed by Senators Lev Hirschhorn ’11, Aaron Mitchell Finegold ’09, Alex Melman ’11, Nathan Robinson ’11, Amanda Hecker ’10, and Alex Norris ’11, comes less than two weeks after the Union Judiciary (UJ) overturned a Senate Money Resolution funding an event to bring Bill Ayers to campus because it was not a “union government project.”

The current wording of the relevant clause states, “All Senate Money Resolutions must be used for Student Union Government projects and/or operations.”

The proposed amendment would change the wording to “All Senate Money Resolutions must be used for projects for the betterment of the Brandeis University undergraduate student body at the discretion of the Senate.”

At the Senate meeting last Sunday, Senators voiced their opinions about the amendment.

“My basic feeling is that the precedent set by the UJ hearing last week severely lim-

Nettle brings “nu” sound to campus Diverse City, page 8

its Senate funding in general,” Hirschhorn, who helped plan the Ayers event, said.

Ayers was originally scheduled to speak on campus Mar. 30, however because the original Senate Money Resolution did not pass, he will not be able to visit. Hirschhorn said that Democracy For America hopes to reschedule the Ayers visit for sometime next month and said “we’re working on it.”

Norris agreed. “We are saying to clubs ‘if you have an idea that will benefit the entire student body, then come to us.’”

Senator Eric Alterman ’09, who brought the UJ suit originally, disagreed. “I don’t think the current wording is confining,” he said.

He later added, “The emphasis of the Senate discretionary [fund] should be for Senators to fund their projects.”

One idea that surfaced at the meeting was to institute an application process for individuals or groups with ideas to obtain funding from the Senate. This would alleviate one of the main concerns voiced that the Senate could become a second Finance Board and would be swamped with funding requests.

The Senate will reconsider the amendment at its upcoming meeting Sunday night.

AUDIO @ THEHOOT.NET Tech. Talk: Chatting and texting in style on the new iPhone 3.0 Off the Beaten Path: Eating and drinking ethically at Clear Conscience Cafe

2 The Hoot

March 27, 2009

N E W S

Union Presidential race questioned by senators ELECTIONS (from p. 1)

been considering running for an Executive Board position as well, Gray told him, “he could see me running for president but that he was more excited about me running for the Board position and my skill set was more appropriate for that.”

Massachi added that he believes that Gray would not tell him not to run for a position simply because he has a favorite in the race.

Hecker, who is running for Union Vice President said that Gray also told her that he was worried about her inexperience in running for president and that “he told me that [Hogan] would make a great president because he has [Executive] Board experience. He said that he could see me as President and Vice President and that he would have to train me if I won.”

Hecker said she ultimately decided to run for Vice President and not President because “I didn’t have my heart in the presidency.”

“People should only run if they really want to,” she said. “If they talk to Jason and then are discouraged, that shows they don’t want it and they shouldn’t run.”

Rosenthal Quad Senator Philips Loh ’11, who signed up to run for president against Hogan only a half an hour before the deadline, told The Hoot that he did not speak with Gray prior to the Wednesday deadline.

In the past two years, there have

been four Presidential candidates in the first round of elections.

To some senators, the small field and the pattern of potential candidates deciding not to run after speaking to Gray is suspicious.

One senator who wished to remain anonymous because they were worried about the effects it would have on their future in the Senate, said, “this idea that three candidates would talk to Gray and not run and the one candidate who is running against Hogan didn’t talk to Gray is definitely suspicious. It means that something isn’t right and that something is going wrong.”

“It is the absolute right of the student body to choose their own President, Vice President, Secretary Treasurer and more,” the source continued.

The senator also said that that “it is not up to the current President to decide who is qualified to run,” and pointed out that qualification is a vague term.

Gray admitted to meeting with students looking to run for President, however he said, “I am not ready to get involved in the election.”

Gray held that it was “legitimate” for him to explain what his job entailed to students considering running and for him to give the students his “honest opinion.”

However, Gray also said that “there are a multitude of reasons why I would tell someone not to run for the presidency.” “One, because they are better at something else, and two because I thought someone else would be better at

the job.”

Union Executive Director of Communications Jamie Ansorge ’09 told The Hoot that “if a student decides not to run for a position after speaking to Jason, that’s their decision and reflects more on them than it does on Jason.”

Gray’s involvement in the race is not the only aspect making senators nervous.

One student who had been thinking of running for president but then decided against it told The Hoot that Hogan had offered them a position on the Executive Board if the student would not run for president.

The student, who wished to remain anonymous because they were worried of its effect on their current election, said that the offer took place “in a serious conversation” with Hogan.

Hogan did not deny offering a student the position, but said that the offer occurred before either he or anyone else had signed up to run.

While there is currently no bylaw in the Union constitution against promising Executive Board positions in turn for support in an election, a similar bylaw will be proposed to the Union Senate on Sunday. This bylaw, if passed, would have no effect on the current election, only future elections.

This is not the first time in Union history that current Union Presidents have been suspected of picking their successor or that Executive Board positions have been used in order to gain support in

a race.

Executive Senator Andrew Brooks ’09 said that senators have questioned the politics behind the past four presidential elections.

Most recently, Brooks said that when he ran against Shreeyah Sinha ’09 for the 07-08 presidential term, Gray was appointed to the Executive Board after showing loyalty to Sinha, who won the race.

In Gray’s race against Kang for the 08-09 term, all but one member of the Executive Board supported Gray because he had Eboard experience. Gray was the only sophomore on the E-board.

Similarly, this year, Hogan, who was appointed to the Executive Board in January, is the only sophomore member.

While Brooks would not comment on the current presidential race, he did say in general terms that “I am not okay with people trying to circumvent the democratic process even though it has been historically done.”

He also mentioned that the qualifications of potential candidates should not be defined by any current member of the Student Union and pointed out that in the fall’s Vice Presidential election, Brooks, a three-year member of the Union, was defeated by Adam Hughes ’11, who had no Union experience.

“I don’t think that people in political power should convince others not to run in order to help another candidate,” Brooks said.

“It’s a conflict of interest.”

INFOGRAPHIC BY Alex Schneider/The Hoot

Off with their beards! No housing shortage for SEA auctions off members’ facial hair for charity BEARDS (from p. 1)

beard would go.

A total of six beards were shaved at the event, with the first three beards to go belonging to James Bartolacci ’11 , Ryan McElhany ’10 and Daniel Orkin, ’10, coming in at $25, $50 and $75, respectively.

McElhany was nonchalant about the procedure, saying, “I needed to shave at some point,” however, Bartolacci saw things a little differently.

“I’m a little ner- Amy vous,” he said preshave. “I haven’t had no facial hair since senior year of high school,” he said.

Post-beard, however, he said it “didn’t seem so bad. I feel a lot lighter in my face.”

The honor of shaving a beard was granted to either the highest bidder or a volunteer.

Amy Thompson ’11 had the honor of shaving Orkin’s beard. Thompson, who performed with her improv group Bad Grammer earlier in the night, left Orkin with half a beard.

M

Thompson’s “artistic vision” was inspired by one thought that crossed her mind as she began, when she thought to herself “maybe I’ll just stop half way through,” she said.

While the most expensive beard—that of Dan Levine the Hillel Coordinator for Israel Engagement, but perhaps better known as the Birthright guy - was priced too high to get shaved, Levine still was able to play a key role in Azer’s shaving.

Though Rachel Wolfman ’11 a member of Starving Artists, who had performed just minutes before, started the process Thompson ‘11 of shaving Azer’s epic beard, the task proved too daunting for one without any experience in beard maintenance.

Levine provided guidance, but was eventually left to tackle the beard on his own. “It was wonderful,” said Levine. “I’ve known him for a really long time, it was really a treat…I’m proud I could be part of [this].”

Matt Schmidt ’11 and Jonah Seligman ’10 also donated their beards to the cause at $100 and $150. Six beards and $215 later, SEA had more than met their GOAL.

aybe I’ll just stop [shaving] half way through.

next year Reslife says HOUSING (from p. 1)

ticipated in room selection last year.

This discrepancy left the six students momentarily without rooms, despite the fact that students are guaranteed housing through their sophomore year; however the students have since been placed in formerly “held rooms.”

“Held rooms” are rooms that are set aside every year “just in case something happens, like a falling out between roommates that means they can’t live together anymore,” Leiferman said.

Leiferman also said that all rising and juniors who attended their room-selection appointments received housing through the lottery, saying “we have a very short waitlist this year, mostly of people who didn’t check the box, or people who didn’t come to their housing appointment.”

“The past few years, I think that everyone on campus, including Res Life, has been worried about a housing shortage,” Leiferman said. “But that was when Ridgewood was unavailable to students. A miscalcula-

tion of six beds does not indicate a housing shortage. We do not have a shortage of housing for next year.”

Leiferman did say that if the university follows through with its plan to gradually increase the Brandeis undergraduate population by 400 students, in the future, Residence Life may have trouble providing housing to juniors and seniors, for whom housing is not guaranteed.

“There is a potential that we will have fewer beds for seniors, but it’s hard to say right now,” he said. “If the university holds true to its projections, the change would be gradual, so who knows what could happen between now and then.”

Currently, the university has no plans to build or renovate any residence halls.

As for this year, Leiferman said he is glad that the percentage of students wanting to live on campus has gone up.

“It’s a good problem to have so many students want to live on campus,” he said. “If so many kids don’t want to leave at the end of the day, it means we’re doing something right.”

www.thehoot.net

March 27, 2009

NEWS

The Hoot 3

University Democrats to hold Massechusetts conference

BY ROBIN LICHTENSTEIN Staff

This year, the Brandeis Democrats will play host the annual College Democrats of Massachusetts (CDM) Convention. The three day long convention will be held Apr. 3 through Apr. 5 and is open to any registered collegiate Democrat club.

Past conventions have been held at Tufts and Boston College. The Brandeis Democrats decided to apply to host the convention after a successful campaigning effort for now President Barack Obama in New Hampshire, put Brandeis in a prime position to apply.

“Brandeis is in a good location,” Brandeis Democrats President Jason Paul ’09 said, explaining why he believes the university received the honor. “It’s good for all the Western [Massachusetts] Schools and the Boston Schools.” Brandeis will host some overnight guests, however schools nearby will come and go throughout the weekend.

In an e-mail to The Hoot, Paul wrote that the club was expecting between 50 and 100 students for the event, and is hoping for a large turnout of Brandeis students. The Democrats currently have approximately 500 people on their listserv.

The convention will feature several speakers, including Lt. Governor Tim Murray, Massachusetts Democratic Party Chair John Walsh, and Newton Mayoral Candidate Setti Warren. There will be

breakout sessions throughout the weekend with some of the speakers and other professionals on topics such as life after college, being a religious Democrat, and healthcare, Paul wrote.

Perhaps the highlight of the convention is the election of the new College Democrats of Massachusetts Executive Board.

The positions of President, Vice President, Communications Director, and Membership Director are all up for grabs, Paul said.

Each delegate at the convention is allowed a vote, with each school allowed to have up to 15 votes in an electoral college-style system. The presidential nominees are Pat Johnson of Suffolk University and Krista Zalatore of Boston University. Brandeis might have a candidate for the Finance Director, but the club is awaiting confirmation.

The convention will also feature the CDM “constitutional convention,” where the group opens up their constitution to amendments and revisions.

The convention will be held the same weekend as Culture X, one of Brandeis’ biggest events, held annually to celebrate the diversity of the cultures at Brandeis.

The Democrats hope that they can invite visiting students to see other parts of Brandeis outside of the convention, like Culture X. Boston University, Suffolk University, Stone Hill College and Worcester Polytechnic Institute are among the colleges expected to attend this year’s conference.

INFOGRAPHIC BY Alex Schneider/The Hoot

A fire safety event will be held on from 10 to 3 on Wednesday Apr. 1 and Thursday Apr. 2. The event will include a 20-foot fire safety trailer parked between Sherman Dining Hall and Rosenthal Quad that will recreate a dorm room suffering varying levels of smoke. The event comes, in part, in response to a fire-safety check over winter break that revealed 20 fire safety violations in Rosenthal Quad alone.

Deis Bikes up and rolling Deis Bikes, the Brandeis bike rental program, is now up and running. Students can rent one of 12 bikes for commuting on and off campus with their student ID. The bikes can be rented from the info desk at the Shapiro Campus Center. The bikes, which have Deis Bike license plates, are numbered one to 12 based on size, with the smaller bikes having lower numbers for riders’ convenience. Students who rent the bikes can use them until midnight of the day they are rented, after which they will be charged a fine for every day the bike is not returned.

Brandeis’ International Business School has appeared on the Princeton Review’s “Student Opinion Honors for Business Schools” in two categories.

Brandeis was on the list for “finance” and “global Management,” other categories include, accounting, General Management, Marketing, and Operations. The list, which consists of 15 schools, is based on student satisfaction with and opinion of the school. The schools appear in alphabetical order and are not ranked.

Brandeis Briefs

Fire Safety Days to take place next week

IBS top rated by Princeton Review

4 The Hoot

March 27, 2009

E D I TO R I A L

Living up to our ideals Established 2005 "To acquire wisdom, one must observe."

Alison Channon Editor in Chief Ariel Wittenberg News Editor Bret Matthew Impressions Editor Chrissy Callahan Features Editor Kayla Dos Santos Backpage Editor Alex Schneider Layout Editor Jodi Elkin Layout Editor Max Shay Photography Editor Leon Markovitz Business Editor Vanessa Kerr Business Editor Danielle Gewurz Copy Editor Max Price Diverse City Editor Senior Editors Jordan Rothman, Zachary Aronow

FOUNDED BY

Leslie Pazan, Igor Pedan and Daniel Silverman

SUBMISSION POLICIES The Hoot welcomes letters to the editor on subjects that are of interest to the general community. Preference is given to current or former community members. The Hoot reserves the right to edit any submissions for libel, grammar, punctuation, spelling and clarity. The Hoot is under no obligation to print any of the pieces submitted.

Letters in print will also appear on-line at www.thehoot.net.

The deadline for submitting letters is Tuesday at 8:00 p.m. All letters must be submitted electronically at www. thehoot.net. All letters must be from a valid e-mail address and include contact information for the author.

Letters of length greater than 500 words may not be accepted.

The opinions, columns, cartoons and advertisements printed in The Hoot do not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial board.

The Hoot is a community student newspaper of Brandeis University. Produced entirely by students, The Hoot serves a readership of 6,000 with in-depth news, relevant commentary, sports and coverage of cultural events.

Our mission is to give every community member a voice.

In less than a week, the student body will vote for its new group of Union leaders. Over the coming days, eager and ambitious young people will knock on our doors, post flyers in our bathrooms, and e-mail our club leaders for endorsements in an effort to win our votes.

The student body at large sees the waste of paper and the grandiose speeches and e-mails.

We do not see the back door dealings.

And of course, at a university that holds truth and social justice as its highest ideals, we might assume that no such dealings exist. But wherever there is politics, there are politicians, and Brandeis is no

different.

As at it stands, only two candidates will vie for the Union presidency, Union Executive Board member Andy Hogan ’11, who some view as the favorite, and Union Senator Philips Loh ’11.

However, three other students showed interest, yet backed out after a meeting with current Union President Jason Gray ’10. While it is certain that some of these students may have reconsidered their ambitions after hearing the hard work that goes into the presidency, it remains highly suspect that the only candidate opposing Hogan did not speak to Gray before signing up to run.

Whether Gray acted improperly remains to be determined; however, it is clear that winning Union office is not solely contingent upon dedication and creativity.

Over the past few years, as one president has paved the way for a hand-picked successor, we have seen that winning is about connections over ideas, support from insiders over broad appeal. From Deis Bikes to study abroad merit aid portability, the Union has achieved enough to demonstrate that it are more than a high school student council. It is time for its politics to catch up.

Sunday, the Student Union will return to a proposed amendment considered at last week’s meeting. The amendment, proposed in the wake of the most recent Union Judiciary decision overturning a Senate Money Resolution that would help fund a visit by Bill Ayers, intends to change a constitutional by-law limiting the way in which the Senate may spend its budget.

The current by-law requires that the Senate’s budget may only be spent on “a Union government project.” The new by-law would only specify that the

money be spent on “projects for the betterment of the Brandeis University undergraduate student body.”

At first glance, it might appear that such an amendment is necessary. Many students would support an amendment that would allow the Senate to spend its money on projects outside of the Union government. And indeed, the Union should be here to support the student body.

But such an amendment would not benefit the student body in the long run. Instead, the amendment might

muddy funding allocation process.

The Student Union Senate is not the Finance Board and it should not take upon itself similar tasks.

More than infringing on the territory of the Finance Board, this amendment would afford Union senators the precise privilege they were most recently denied by the Union Judiciary – doling out financial favors to friends and clubs.

This amendment is not a call for change. It’s a call for a do-over by sore losers.

Making peace with a ruling

Letters to the Editor

Condoms not the answer to HIV in Africa Dear Editor, As a visiting parent to Brandeis I picked up a copy of The Brandeis Hoot (issue March 20, 2009) and felt strongly that Brandeis students need to hear more information than was printed in the Impressions [article entitled] ‘The Pope and Stopping HIV’. I sense the author’s urgent desire to help stop the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and I applaud her compassion.

Unfortunately, the article reflected a common train of thought that condoms actually protect people from AIDS/HIV. Scientific research shows that the HIV virus actually passes through condom material and does NOT protect people from AIDS/HIV. All people should be made aware of this because a choice, to have sex or not to have sex, is only truly a choice when it is an informed choice.

Pope Benedict XVI is a highly educated person who understands the science behind this issue. He also understands the connection between sex outside of marriage and the millions of helpless babies that have been murdered by abortion. He is trying to protect future children from abortion and he is trying to protect all women from the harm that abortion does them, such as a greater risk of breast cancer, difficulty in conceiving in the future, mental depression, etc.

Catholic social teaching promotes justice for ALL people, for those in college, for children, for the elderly, the disabled, the poor, the middleclass, the wealthy, the UNBORN, in America, in Africa, in the whole world. It teaches that no population, for example the unborn, should be targeted for elimination by others. It teaches that we should protect and help others.

Pope Benedict is looking at the big picture of humanity. He knows how an indi-

vidual’s choices can help or hurt others and he is teaching us a way that will protect all people, abstinence till marriage, then being faithful to one’s spouse in marriage.

The other part of this issue is the money one. Abortionists, Planned Parenthood, know that when they sell contraceptives such as condoms or birth control pills, that many people won’t use them effectively and when a pregnancy occurs, that many pregnant women will go to them for abortions.

So by telling people that it’s OK to have ‘safe sex’, abortionists know that they will get more business, more babies to murder, more money in their pocket. They don’t tell people that the HIV virus can pass through the condom material. And the condom issue does not take into consideration that HIV is also passed through sodomy. This is a discussion that needs to be shared.

Planned Parenthood and other abortionists have murdered over 48 million babies in America since Roe v. Wade. The ‘Freedom of Choice Act,’ if passed, will murder even more.

Please understand that billions of dollars have been made aborting babies. It is a huge business, where the most vulnerable in society, the unborn, are targeted. Who will be their voice? Who will protect them from an industry that pays off politicians so that the industry will get more business, more babies to murder?

Please understand that four out of five abortion clinics are in poor areas in America. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger clearly stated her eugenics beliefs, that abortion should be used to rid society of ‘undesirables’. Why isn’t this spoken of more?

Why are policies that target elimination of poor babies allowed in America? We See HIV PREVENTION, p. 5

Stars and Bars symbolizes racism not history

Dear Editor, In last week’s column “Symbol hijacking: Give us back our symbols!” (March 20, 2009) Jordan Rothman wrote “I would like to have a small Confederate flag on my desk, so that I may display my interest in southern history.” Actually, having a Confederate flag on his desk would display Jordan’s ignorance of Southern history. What we recognize today as the Confederate flag was not the official flag of the states that declared themselves “the Confederacy,” but simply one of several battle flags that disappeared completely after the Civil War. It was not used again until the mid 1950s when it was resurrected during the Civil Rights Movement as a clear symbol of white supremacy.

White supremacy is all that flag means today. Even if Jordan wishes to erase this part of this part of Southern history, he would be displaying the symbol of those who, unprovoked, made war against the United States of America, unilaterally breaking the Social Contract they had agreed to under the Constitution, for no reason other than their discontent with the outcome of a free and fair (by the standards of its time) election and their desire to expand the institution of slavery. Either Jordan’s flag is the symbol of White Supremacists or of traitors and anarchists. If he wishes to display his interest in Southern history, I suggest an old map, old newspaper, or a Civil War battlefield poster instead.

Rivka Maizlish ’10

Merits of embryonic stem cell research uncertain Mr. Matthew, I find your statement [in “Finally some science: Funding stem cell research” (March 13, 2009)] regarding embryonic life form quite disturbing. When you say that, “This is simply a chance for them to serve a purpose before they go, and it would be a terrible waste not to study them. Would it also be right to begin harvesting the old, sick, and infirm who are a drain on public resources so that they can serve a purpose before they go? Whether or not you agree on whether or not an embryonic stem cell is a human life is irrelevant. Suggesting that it is okay to destroy life simply because it is going to die anyway and has no purpose is simply wrong.

Furthermore, what your article fails to mention is that up unto this point there has been no success in using embryonic stem cells to effectively treat the illness and disease that you mention in your article. I would challenge you to provide evidence that proves so. In contrast, there has been tremendous progress in adult stem cell research which has already cured disease previously thought incurable. If your intent was to truly advance scientific progress you might have suggested research be put forth in this sector, or having listened solely to the liberal media perhaps you were unaware?

Stephen Hill ’08

March 27, 2009

The Hoot 5

IMPRESSIONS

End scare tactics: Force government to keep a balanced budget

BY CHRIS BORDELON Columnist

Politics sometimes makes me think of birds. When I was little, I liked to make birds fly. When I would see a flock of birds sitting on a lawn or on the sidewalk, I would make noises at them and move toward them just enough to make them all take off. The bigger the flock, the better.

Any kind of bird would do except one--pigeons. Pigeons in the city wouldn't budge unless somebody actually touched them. I wouldn't have done that. Kicking pigeons would've gotten me into trouble.

I was forcing a false choice on the birds: fly or be stomped, eaten, or otherwise dispatched. I wouldn't have done any of those things. All I wanted was to make the birds fly. The birds, being bird-brained, didn't know that-- except for those pigeons. What did they know that the others didn't?

Maybe they realized that they were so dirty that nobody would touch them. Or maybe they thought that, as pigeons, they were members of the lowest caste in an elaborate hierarchy of bird social relations that ornithologists have yet to discover, and thus had nothing to lose if kicked.

But I think the pigeons had learned that pedestrians like me weren't really a threat.

The pigeons didn't understand that custom and law protected them from all those feet. But they knew they had nothing to fear.

Today, I have more sympathy for the birds, because I know what it's like to be treated like one. Americans can't fly, but they can spend and borrow and regulate.

Their leaders regularly make noises and threaten them in ways that force them to make false choices between their money and their lives or livelihoods. And unfortunately, the rules Americans would need to respond to politicians' scare tactics with the pluck of pigeons-- rather than the cluck of chickens-- often don't exist.

I don't know when politicians began what I'll call the birdization of the public, but it's not difficult to find instances of it. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush maintained high defense spending for as long as they could during the late 1980s and early 1990s, even after it was clear that the Soviet Union was in economic decline and that Soviet leaders wouldn't risk war. Even while they negotiated with Mikhail Gorbachev, whose lack of bellicosity made Reagan admit that the Soviet Union was no longer an “evil empire,” Reagan and Bush still claimed that “communist expansion” threatened America.

The false choice for Americans was clear: either fly or die, either keep paying the administration's friends in the defense industry to create what would soon be an obsolete army, or succumb to the red menace. Heavy government borrowing made it possible to continue social spending, allowing Reagan and Bush to scare money out of the public without cramping its style.

In the same way, President George W. Bush launched his invasions, his expansion of the military, and his creation of a big, pushy domestic and border security apparatus. The Bush administration constantly cited the threat posed by terrorism and its alleged state sponsors in order to frighten Americans to line up behind these initiatives: terrorism would destroy Americans' way of life, and the only alternative was to throw away money and civil liberties.

Little attention was paid to the issue of

whether the ends sought by the powerhungry Bush and his military-contractor friends justified the means they employed to acheive them. The Sept. 11 attacks to which Bush referred most frequently could've been prevented easily by measures much less drastic than those Bush implemented, largely by redeploying America's already-large military and law enforcement resources.

Instead, Bush used public money to line the pockets of his friends and buy himself reelection and wartime powers. As with Reagan's spending, Bush's was funded in part by massive borrowing, hiding its cost from the public while forcing later generations to pay for the present one's unwillingness to stand up to the noisy little boy that it called its president.

America's trade policy has also been created with scare tactics. “Protectionism” has become as dirty a word as “fascism” or “communism” in the American vocabulary. It was made so by politicians' constant reminders that so-called “free trade” (framed not as a terrible “-ism,” but as an unequivocal good) means “prosperity,” while any barriers to trade mean certain poverty.

Never mind that a few Americans seem to gain most from trade, or that far more find themselves out of work or talking up their college degrees in a Wal-Mart personnel department. The first President Bush's NAFTA, and President Bill Clinton's WTO agreement, were both products of scare campaigns framing the choice facing Americans as one of prosperity or decline and poverty.

Reasonable arguments that trade in some sectors or with some countries warranted limitation, or that a trade policy that enriched holders of capital while ruining workers wasn't really so good, were framed as anti-prosperity.

It's harder to use scare tactics to induce Americans to give up programs that have proven their worth, or support legislation lowering their standards of living. The effort to implement national health care during Clinton's first term, and the second President Bush's more recent attempt to promote Social Security “reform,” were based upon claims that existing systems for provision of health care and Social Security were unsustainable, and that Americans' only choice was to accept less health care and less Social Security than they had been promised. But both efforts failed. The majority of Americans who had been promised health insurance by their employers or were entitled to it from the government in 1993, and who were legally entitled to Social Security benefits during Bush's second term, had rules and expectations that they could rely upon to overcome their fear and keep their feet on the ground.

I think that the current administration is using scare tactics in several ways. It has justified fighting President Bush's wars by posing a false choice between spending money and giving in to “the foes or forces that could do us harm.” It has printed money and paid off big banks and financial institutions, claiming that the only alternative is the continuation of what Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner calls “the most severe financial crisis in generations.” And President Barack Obama is about to make “the huge healthcare costs... that we're going to have to tackle” the subject of proposed reforms that will give a few more Americans health insurance but will give all of them less health care. This administration, like the last, apparently has no qualms about run-

ILLUSTRATION BY Ariel Wittenberg/The Hoot

ning enormous deficits to hide the true costs of its initiatives.

It would be hard to make the public less like birds. There's no way not to feel insecure about the many aspects of modern life that individuals can't control. But if we can't be less bird-like, we can be more pigeon-like. As the failures of Clinton's health care and Bush's Social Security “reform” efforts suggest, what is needed are rules and expectations that Americans can point to when politicians come at them like silly little boys.

Guarantees of health care and Social Security at levels that no less than insured Americans have come to expect are necessary to human dignity. Guaranteeing both would help Americans to resist in pigeon-like fashion any politicians who come-a-scaring.

But it's also necessary to ensure that politicians don't scare all the money out of our pockets before it can be used in broadly beneficial ways. The public needs rules in place to motivate it to pay attention and to prevent politicians from creating choices between a falsely limited range of options.

Achieving this will require rules to limit both the potential impact of scare tactics and the public's susceptibility to them. What is especially necessary is a constitutional rule-- perhaps waivable in narrowly-defined, extraordinary

circumstances, such as declared war-requiring that the government operate with a balanced budget. The fact that Bush, Obama, and the Congresses alongside them have kept straight faces while asking the public to incur enormous debt shows that only firm rules can prevent abusive spending, which allows current leaders to pass on the bill for maintaining their popularity.

A balanced-budget rule would ensure that the “tough choices” Obama wants us to make aren't the false, fly-or-die kind that I used to force on birds. Wars and earmarks (and, incidentally, tax cuts for rich people) would suddenly become harder to justify if it meant having to give up socially useful spending.

Typically untouchable aspects of the US budget, such as defense spending that is more than nine times larger than the next largest defense budget, might be reconsidered. The public would have to pay closer attention to the budget, and politicians wanting to keep their jobs would have to listen closely to how people wanted their money spent. To use the buzzword du jour, a balancedbudget rule might even make government “sustainable.”

Under such a rule, scare tactics would become less useful, because less money would be at stake. Until we have such a rule, scare tactics will remain in the ascendant, and that's for the birds.

Letter to the Editor HIV PREVENTION (from p. 4)

need to protect all people, including the poor.

Who knows what kind of footprint one of these ‘unwanted’ babies might leave on Earth? Who knows what they might be able to contribute to society?

We will only know if they are allowed to live. We will only know if they are NOT aborted.

So what is the answer to the HIV/ AIDS epidemic? Is it using taxpayer dollars for condom distribution, which misleads people into thinking that they are safe while allowing the HIV virus to pass through the condom material? Or

is it something that can be accomplished by all people without paying a cent; abstinence until marriage and faithfulness to your spouse in marriage?

The Catholic Church has been the voice for the unborn and for women for almost 2,000 years, trying to protect them. I would encourage any who are interested in learning the real teachings of the Catholic Church on social issues to Google ‘United States Catholic Bishops’ for more details than I can write.

Claudia Morse-Karzen Wilmette, Illinois

Like what you read? Hate what you read?

Submit a letter to the editor at thehoot.net.

6 The Hoot

IMPRESSIONS

March 27, 2009

One Tall Voice

Book of Matthew

Constitutional ignorance all around Senior advice from

One Tall Senior was being pressured by our community to become a member of more and more clubs. And beAs I begin winding down my cause of it, I wasn’t incredibly Brandeis career, I am similarly good at anything I did. I was horthinking about winding down rible at Track and only mediocre my writing in the Hoot. I know at debate. I wrote my Hoot artithat I want to convey some “Se- cles half an hour before deadline nior advice” before I step away and was horrific at quizbowl. I from “One Tall Voice” perma- would encourage people to get nently and I think I have valu- involved with a few clubs and do able suggestions for individuals those well. Don’t be a jack-ofto pursue. I want to leave my last all-trades and a master of none. columns free for whatever my Be good at the few things you heart may desire, so I’d like to do and you will feel much better use this article as a platform to about yourself. convey my pieces of advice.

Finally, I would like to suggest One thing that has always fas- that people not go against the cinated me about Brandeis is that grain and try to do things that people seem crazed about pursu- the Brandeis community may not ing multiple majors and multiple like. Take it for me, if you disapminors. It is even a point of pride prove of a popular sentiment, if to rack up additional concentra- you have different feelings about tions, as some may believe it dif- issues, do not speak up. Keep it ficult to major in a multitude of to yourself, find friends who you fields. can relate to and do not make First, I’d just like to say that waves. gaining an obMy first noxious numtwo years at y first two years Brandeis, I ber of concentrations is at Brandeis, I was was not very not any more vocal about difficult than not very vocal about my my beliefs, not doing so, beliefs, and I reaped all and I reaped as you are just all the benefocusing your the benefits of this life- fits of this lifestudies. You style. style. People can doubleloved me, I major and got elected to double-minor various Union by taking 29 classes (trust me, I offices, won a number of awards, did it and am getting my Master’s and it was all made possible due too!) to my non-abrasive attitude.

But back to why this is stupid.

Since then, I have tried to If one truly believes all the Lib- contribute to the community by eral Arts talk, then doing this is adding my diverse beliefs and harmful to your academic and sentiments to the marketplace of intellectual growth. Although (as ideas. This has resulted in nothillustrated in a previous article) I ing but pain and discriminafind adherence to some tenets of tion, as I have been metaphorithe Liberal Arts tradition annoy- cally ‘crapped on’ by the Brandeis ing, I can certainly see the ben- community. efit of academic exploration. By Despite what people may say, accumulating an ungodly num- the Brandeis community is not ber of concentrations, you are open to all ideas. The people at not extending your intellectual this university are close-minded boundaries and are not explor- and deeply prejudiced. I would ing all that the academy has to advise those who may have conoffer. trary opinions to keep them to By racking up majors and mi- themselves so that they may reap nors, you are impressing no one, all the benefits of quiet adherand are simply ensuring that you ence. have multiple “mini-commenceI don’t claim wisdom, but here ments” to go to at graduation. is just some of the wisdom I have Take it from a double-major, acquired after my four years at double-minor, 4-year B.A/Mas- this university. To recap, no one ter’s candidate: don’t do it. Ex- is impressed that you are doubleplore and enroll in classes you majoring and double-minoring. genuinely enjoy.

Anyone can do it, and it is, in Another thing that is interest- fact, quite easy. ing about Brandeis is that people In addition, don’t spread yourhave a tendency to get ridicu- self to thin and over-saturate lously involved in their com- yourself with clubs and activimunity via extra-curricular par- ties. Devote time to a select few ticipation. I’m one to talk. I was and expend all you energy on once a member of 19 clubs, was those organizations. Also, don’t an officer in 10, and participated go against the grain and do not in two seasons of Varsity athlet- voice an opinion that may be ics. I am currently a Community contrary to the beliefs of a majorAdvisor and am also a campus ity of Brandeisians. tour guide.

All right, I can rest assured that At some level I enjoyed meet- some of this wisdom has been coning people and getting involved, veyed and stay tuned for my last but on another level, I felt that I articles, they should be a doozey.

BY JORDAN ROTHMAN Editor

PHOTO from Internet Source

BY BRET MATTHEW Editor

Every once in a while, we hear about how young Americans are suffering from a severe lack of civics education. I certainly won’t argue with this claim. In high school, I remember sitting in a US history class in which at least half of the students could not tell the teacher the number of Justices who sat on the Supreme Court, let alone their names or what their job was.

You can call that anecdotal evidence, but the statistics back me up. A few years ago, the National Center for Education Statistics found that only 47 percent of high school students were able to achieve the “minimum” level in US history and civics, while only 14 percent were able to reach or surpass the “proficient” level. The Intercollegiate Studies Institute did another study, showing a group of high school students the sentence, “We hold these truths to be s elf-e v ident, that all men are created equal.” Only slightly less then half of them knew that it was part of the Declaration of Independence.

This is an enormous problem for the health of our republic, which depends on input from educated, active citizens. And it’s worrisome. But to be honest, there is something that worries me even more than the blatant ignorance of teenagers. That would be blatant ignorance of our leaders.

While there is a tremendous amount of press surrounding civics in schools, I can’t say that I have ever read a report that showed how many members of government could pass a civics test. Which is troublesome, because it is fairly obvious that some

I

could not.

I’ll start with the obvious example: former President George W. Bush. They didn’t accuse him of walking all over the Constitution for nothing. His administration committed countless infractions, from shattering the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution (via warrantless wiretaps) to tossing habeas corpus out the window (via unlawful treatment of enemy combatants), and he had a habit of taking unconstitutional powers from a submissive Congress that only occasionally became indignant. Bush did more than enough to make the average constitutional scholar sick to their stomach; and yet, he managed to win a second term with the votes of Americans who apparently could not have cared less about the law of the land.

But as scary as the Bush-era was, it is now in the past.

For something more recent, look no further than the, um, “Honorable” Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN).

Like President Bush, Bachmann is not above putting her own partisan interests before the Constitution. Recently, on a talk radio interview, she argued against President Obama’s plan to reduce carbon emissions through “cap-and-trade” legislation. And when I say “argued,” I mean that she called for an armed revolution against the United States government. Bachmann told her constituents, “I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back.”

Perhaps, before she and her followers pick up their rifles, they should read Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution, which defines treason against the United States and gives Congress the power to

think it might be time to take a quick survey of prominent government officials.

punish those who commit it.

I think my favorite story, however, is that of Michael Steele, Chairman of the Republican National Committee. I say it’s my favorite because unlike the previous two clowns, I actually feel a little sorry for Steele. Not only is he in the tough position of being in charge of a minority party reeling from a massive electoral defeat, but he is also taking considerable flak from both sides over his increasing collection of on-camera gaffes.

But all that doesn’t excuse this nugget of stupidity. While guesthosting Bill Bennet’s Morning in America radio show, Steele had a discussion with a caller over the constitutionality of the 90 percent tax that was levied on the AIG bonus recipients. The caller claimed that the action by Congress was unconstitutional, because, in his words, “I believe it is the First Amendment that specifically states that a law cannot be passed to specifically target a person or a group of people.”

Now, anyone who has read the First Amendment to the Constitution knows that it prevents Congress from establishing a state religion, hindering the free press, or preventing the people from peacefully protesting the government. Nowhere does it say anything about specifically targeting people.

But Steele didn’t take the time to kindly correct the misinformed caller. Instead, he responded with an enthusiastic “That’s right!”

Short, sweet, and completely ignorant.

With all this in mind, I think it might be time to take a quick survey of prominent government officials. A civics test, if you will.

Maybe then we can take the results and see who deserves their office and who doesn’t.

Honestly, how can we expect the young Americans to understand how their republic works if their leaders—their supposed role models—don’t understand it either?

The Hoot accepts submissions to the Impressions section on any topic of consequence to any member of the campus community. Our mission is to give every community member a voice. The views expressed in the Impressions section do not necessarily reflect the views of The Hoot's editorial board.

M

IMPRESSIONS

March 27, 2009

Choosing the blue pill: Self-imposed ignorance

BY STEPHEN GRAY Special to The Hoot

“Ignorance is bliss.” We’ve all heard this phrase before, but I think it warrants a good deal of examination, considering that as students, our primary goal is to learn and combat ignorance. But what consequence does this strategy have for us as human beings?

I’m sure not many would argue with the idea that most human beings strive to ultimately obtain some sort of self-fulfillment and happiness. Scholars attempt to achieve this by obtaining knowledge. But does obtaining this knowledge always lead to the intended goal? Is knowing the truth always satisfactory for fulfillment and happiness? My answer to these questions is “no.”

Let me provide a concrete example that many of you have probably experienced. Let us say that you take a difficult exam, and are unsure of exactly how well you did by the end of the test.

When the professor announces, a few days later, that he has posted the answers to the test online (but not the grades), what would you do? I know that many students, eager to know exactly how well they performed, will immediately head to LATTE and try to calculate a rough estimate of their score. I also know that after the announcement in class, I can expect to hear a few groans. Many people would rather not worry

about the answers right away, as it will only serve as a stressor until they receive their actual grade.

The people who choose not to look at the answers are demonstrating a concept called “self-imposed ignorance.”

In the well known movie The Matrix, characters living in the world as we know it are presented with a choice related to self-imposed ignorance. They can choose between swallowing a red pill, after which they will be immersed into the true world, full of hopelessness and desolation, or swallowing a blue pill, after which they will forget everything they have learned about the true world and continue living their lives in a dream. After originally choosing the red pill, Cypher, one of the movie’s antagonists, attempts to take back his choice and return to the dream world where he can be ignorant, but happy. He serves as a foil to Neo, the movie’s protagonist, who chooses to continue living in the true world. While the movie intends for us to take the side of its protagonist, I cannot help but sympathize with Cypher.

Although his way of doing things was corrupt, his ideologies are certainly understandable. After all, everything that he does is only an attempt for him to seek the contentment with life that he once felt. This example raises the main question I’m trying to address: is it better to be ignorant but happy

or to be knowing but miserable?

Furthermore, is there a balance between the two?

I cannot answer this question definitively, but I can tell you it has been my personal experience that there is a time and place for both. I’m not suggesting that we simply accept the facts that the world feeds to us blindly. As scholars, that would defeat our very cause. At the same time, I think it is beneficial to know when not to dig too deeply. Sometimes, for the sake of one’s happiness, it is better not to know the truth. If you had the opportunity to have all of the knowledge in the world, would you really want it? Would it provide you with self-fulfillment?

I’m also not suggesting that we should only focus on seeking our own happiness, and ignore that of others. On the contrary, I think it is quite possible to experience some sort of nirvana through showing compassion towards other people and watching them achieve their goals. I’m simply trying to say that one needs to consider whether knowing is always in his best interest.

Sometimes choosing to be ignorant can provide a shallow sort of happiness, and it can be that happiness that keeps us from breaking down completely. To quote Christian Bale's and Gary Oldman’s characters in The Dark Knight, “sometimes the truth isn’t good enough.”

conceit about mischievous fairies.

It is our brains’ fault. All the little chemicals swimming around, all the glandular secretions oozing through ducts cause problems.

It all comes down to that weird little biological urge to reproduce (now you say “ew”), and the function of that urge, something called attraction. The Discovery Channel or Manswers can tell you all about monthly cycles triggering hormones and pheromones which smell good to the opposite sex. It’s funny to think that if you see a guy paying attention to a girl he has never noticed before, it is probably because she smells fertile (say “ew” again). Also, girls will show more skin when ovulating, laugh more around men and move more seductively. This is why you should always use protection. Anyway, you see this person, you feel drawn to them and you talk to them. “Hey, you’re an artist? Well, I have this Titanic fantasy…”

But honestly, it does not matter how you both can sing about the fields of Athenry, or both love pierogi, or both read Neil Gaiman.

A relationship that forms from a solid foundation is nice, but it’s all a function of those little chemicals in our brains, which reduce us to nothing more than spiraling coils of self-replicating DNA. So when you enter a new relationship, it really is not worth getting all caught up in this person, who I’m sure is lucky to have you.

It’s silly to spend all your time with them, call them for constant updates, and write poems about your feelings (I wrote a villanelle once…). This person is probably

not your soul mate. In college, that is basically a guarantee. They have a nice set of genes, similar enough to make you comfortable and conform to societal expectations, but different enough so that there is little chance of inbreed diseases (think of the flipper-ed children!).

It’s nice to have someone to talk to and maybe cuddle with on a regular basis, but seriously, NBD. Same thing for break ups. When your pheromonally-pleasing friend gets boring, or seeks another well-endowed (with genes) person, that’s evolution, not you.

All this talk about waning passion and personal growth, it’s not you it’s me, it’s just a sugarcoating on the cake of animal urges. There is nothing like love to reduce people to animals. I think there is a Nine Inch Nails song about this (you know the one).

Perspective is an important feature of rational thought that often gets lost once the flower juice has been applied to one’s eyes. As my friends all seem to be going through incredibly interesting and varied relationship dramas, I just want to provide a tiny drop of it, along with hugs, tissues, and respect for socks on doorknobs.

Love can be all-consuming, but that is because it can dance through the synapses of your brain like cocaine. There really is no reason to get too excited, enamored, or hurt in a relationship, because feelings are not concrete, important things.

With control, understanding, and moderation, you can have some wicked fun like Puck and the fairy nobles, rather than come out looking like an ass.

Relationships: the coursing of true love

BY EMILY MASKAS Staff

Apparently, I am receiving the sacrament of Confirmation this weekend. I thought it was happening sometime in April, which would give me some more time to work out my commitment issues, but I suppose I have reflected enough about what it means to be fully embraced by the warm bosom of the Church (this is where you snicker and say “bosom”).

But actually, because I have been thinking about commitment, and devotion, and all sorts of silly things like that, I have been pondering the more mundane relationships than the one that one has with God. I watched “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” multiple times last week, mostly because it brings back fond sixth grade memories of getting to yell at the boy I had a crush on while he wore donkey ears. The play itself is a comedy, but the dialogue is more mean than funny and the fantastical plot elements do not seem out of place with the chaos of everyday love.

Shakespeare emphasizes quite well not the humor, but rather the absurdity of relationships even among otherwise intelligent and powerful people. He was incredibly ahead of his time in stating that love is nothing more than an illusion created by inappropriately applied chemicals, a strange daze produced by a sudden flow of foreign substances. It’s funny to think that people can feel so much, get so hurt, allow themselves to be so embarrassed, by an emotion that can boil down to a

The Hoot 7

Security fees and civil rights

PHOTO from Internet Source

BY DANIEL ORTNER Special to The Hoot

The excessive and exorbitant security fees that are essentially preventing students from bringing Bill Ayers and Robert H. King may be unconstitutional or violate our student rights and responsibilities rights.

The Foundation For Individual Rights in Education has recently become involved in a number of similar cases in Berkley and University of Colorado at Berkley arguing that excessive security fees are a form of prior restraint that unfairly burdens speech. This argument is amply backed up by Supreme Court precedent such as the Supreme Court's ruling in Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123 (1992), which prohibits increasing a security fee because of a potentially hostile audience: "Listeners' reaction to speech is not a content-neutral basis for regulation.... Speech cannot be financially burdened, any more than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob." Thus, the university's actions can be seen us unduly punishing the expression of speech just because a large portion of students may respond critically.

"Charging for extra security because of a potentially hostile audience grants the most disruptive or violent hecklers a veto over controversial events and creates an incentive for that kind of behavior," Greg Lukianoff, FIRE's President, said. "It's also unconstitutional at a public college or university."

While it is true that Brandeis is a private university and thus not subject to the same restrictions, it is also true that Brandeis can be held accountable for its contractual obligations such as those put into print in our student Rights and Responsibilities handbook.

Section 13 of the Rights and Responsibilities reads “ University facilities are available for activities consistent with the University’s educational, social, and cultural goals. The University does not impose prior restraints upon the subject matter or point of view expressed by any person or group using its facilities.”

Thus, we can be said to have a similar promise as to that extended by the constitutional guarantee of free speech. It is also true that section 13.2 of the Rights and Re-

sponsibilities does give ultimate deciding power to the administration: "13.2 The requirements for safety and security at the event will be based upon a timely review by the Associate Vice President of University Services. Requirements may be appealed to the Associate Vice President for Campus Operations, who will make the final decision. This review will be based upon such factors as the possibility of criminal acts, the risk of harm to persons or property, and crowd control."

Still, a reasonable claim can be said that this clause is subordinate to the prior one guaranteeing that prior restraint will not be exercised. Because our courts have clearly shown that financial burdens are equivalent to content restrictions, it can be argued that the University is at fault.

Students at Berkley pursued this train of argumentation bolstered by the support of FIRE had had the security cost for a controversial event reduced from 3,000 dollars to 460 dollars for two police officers. The university agreed to use content neutral criteria such as the expected number of attendees, the nature of and number of exits from the room for the event, whether money would be exchanged, and so on; rather than biased expectations of protests or opposition and so were able to reach a reasonable total.

At UC Bolder, students brought Ayers as well as former CU professor Ward Churchill to speak and the event was successfully carried out without disruption.

The university has attempted after the fact to bring a security fee of more than 2,000 dollars while neither Ayers nor Churchill required or needed added security. The students at Bolder are proudly refusing to pay an unjust fee and rearing up for a legal battle with the aid of FIRE. What is obvious from these two examples is that a decent case can be made that our University is acting to suppress student speech by prohibitively costing such an event. This action may violate our student rights and thus even be prosecutable in court. What’s clear is that the principle at stake here is a vital one. We cannot allow the fear of protests to stop us from bringing speakers to campus and from being exposed to unique ideas and views.

12 The Hoot

March 27, 2009

FEATURES

Fire safety: A guided tour

BY CHRISSY CALLAHAN Editor

The door to your dorm room is blocked.

The fire outside is intensifying by the second. You need to crawl through the bedroom and out the window. Time is closing in.

A few minutes ago, everything seemed fine. You entered your door and sat down in the kitchen. Your eyes took in the fire hazards--paper towels close to the stove, a combustible fireplace and covered smoke detectors--and you didn’t think twice.

And then it started.

The smoke levels started to rise. Your visibility began to deteriorate. The escape routes vanished.

At least you knew it was coming. In real life, you might not have.

In this instance, your dorm room is actually a 27-foot-long, two-room motor home. The smoke is coming from a theatrical smoke machine, and there is an escape. There’s also a firefighter guiding you through the whole experience.

It’s a scene reminiscent of a fifth grade fire awareness program or something out of a movie. But this scene will soon be at a trailer near you--an actual trailer, that is.

As part of an ongoing effort to increase fire safety awareness on campus, the Waltham Fire Department will bring a fire safety trailer to campus Apr. 1 and 2.

The trailer will be set up outside of Rosenthal in the walkway between Hassenfeld Conference Center and Rosenthal, and will be open 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. both days.

Inside the trailer, members of the Waltham Fire Department will be present to walk students through the simulated experience of being in a burning building.

“It’s kind of a guided tour of what it might be like inside of a fire situation,” Director of Student Development and Conduct Erika Lamarre said.

Lamarre said the event is part of the “renewed commitment we have this year of educating students about the dangers of tampering with fire safety equipment or being careless in the residence halls around fire safety matters.”

The event comes after a surprise inspection of residence halls three months ago found an alarming number of covered smoke detectors, one of the main concerns in preventing fires. Since then, Lamarre has worked to bring fire safety awareness to the forefront of students’ minds.

With the number of fire safety violations rising in recent years, a $150 fine was recently imposed for students found with covered smoke detectors. Over winter break, Lamarre received approximately 15 reports of fire safety violations discovered during routine room checks.

She hopes the experience will help counter the “lack of awareness we see in our student population of the dangers of a potential fire in a residence hall.”

The event is modeled off of fire safety programming Boston College and other institutions have previously hosted. After her graduate assistant, Stephanie DurantMattson, mentioned it to her, Lamarre proposed a similar idea for Brandeis.

Lamarre and her office soon partnered

PHOTO COURTESY OF Lieutentant John Craig

SPREADING THE MESSAGE : A view of the fire safety trailer Brandeis and the Waltham Fire Department will be bringing to campus April 1 and 2. Inside the trailer, firefighters can simulate a real-life fire situation with smoke. The event comes after an increase in instances of covered smoke detectors earlier in the year and is a part of Brandeis’ continued commitment to raising awareness about fire safety issues.

with Health and Safety coordinator Andy Finn who was also concerned about the lack of awareness on campus and was looking for a way to inform students. So he reached out to Lieutenant John Craig at the Waltham Fire Department and the idea developed from there.

Finn hopes that students will recognize the importance of smoke detectors and the danger that covering them pose. “It’s really kind of a first line of defense [and] we’re trying to catch an emergency before it becomes a working fire,” he said.

Smoke may seem less dangerous than actual flames, but Finn explained how smoke delays students when exiting from a building. “Just because it’s smoke doesn’t mean it’s not dangerous,” he said. “It may just be smoke, but like the saying goes, where there’s smoke there’s fire.”

Though the trailer can’t replicate all aspects of a real-life fire such as the smells or heat, Lieutenant Craig said it recreates the limited vision and claustrophobia typical in such situations.

The trailer, he explained, is typically used during fire awareness programs for younger students ranging from kindergarteners to sixth graders. As such, the Waltham Fire Department has never brought such an event to a college campus before. Though the first of its kind on a college campus, Craig said it serves an important purpose.

“We’re really looking forward to it because [college students are] definitely a group that’s underserviced as far as fire safety goes,” he said.

The event might even be a launch-

ing board for future such events with the Waltham Fire Department. Craig hopes to partner again with Brandeis in the future to create fire safety awareness programs for incoming students and their parents.

In the meantime, he hopes to get Bentley College involved and possibly invite members of their life safety team to the Brandeis event.

Many students, Craig said, think covering smoke detectors isn’t that big a deal. In other words, they figure that the sprinklers will just go off and prevent any tragedy before it occurs. Through this event, he hopes to change that mindset and “get the word out that it does happen and [that] a few precautions will make you safe.”

Making sure your smoke detectors are working is one such precaution. According to The Center for Campus Fire Safety, disabled or missing smoke detectors are one of the four common factors in off-campus fires.

The others are alcohol consumption, careless disposal of smoking materials and a lack of automatic fire sprinklers.

College students living in a community residence hall environment can’t just think about themselves, Craig said: “It’s not just you. You’ve got a whole apartment building or dormitory building full of students, so it’s not fair to cover your smoke detector and think that the sprinkler will go off and take care of it.”

He said there will also be a TV outside of the trailer that will play a video depicting a real-life fire in a residence hall with and without sprinkler systems to show just how

WWW.THEHOOT.NET

quickly fires can spread.

Despite the serious message behind the event, Lamarre said it’s not all doom and gloom; there will be fun and games as well.

“I actually think it’s going to be really fun,” she said.

Outside, there will be treats and balloons.

And if you run into a talking Dalmatian named Patches, dressed in fire gear and riding around in a little fire truck, don’t be alarmed. He’s part of the day too. The automated dog can actually hear and talk to people and will serve as a greeter for the days’ participants.

Simultaneously tapping into students’ intellect and desire for fun is one of Lamarre‘s goals for the event.

“I think just going through the experience, there’s always something to learn.

And I know that Brandeis students are intellectually curious people who also like to have fun, and so I hope to connect with both of those aspects of the Brandeis student,” she said.

As part of his role as Student Union Director of Community Advocacy Andy Hogan ’11 has worked this semester on issues pertaining to fire safety, so it was natural for him to become involved with this event.

Hogan has helped to advertise the event and thinks the trailer is an effective way to raise awareness.

“It’s a really valuable, educational tool and experiential in that you can just go in there and really see what it’s like,” he said.

“I know I’m going to be going in to see for myself and I would encourage all students to.”

F E AT U R E S

March 27, 2009

The Hoot 13

Reviving Mumbai through theatre

BY CHRISSY CALLAHAN Editor

Where were you when you first heard about the November 2008 attacks on Mumbai, India? More importantly, where were you after?

Did you read the newspapers or watch the nightly news to get a sense of how the events transpired? Did you attend a lecture or a peace vigil in support of the lives that were lost?

Did you get caught up in the subsequent “Slumdog Millionaire” phenomenon and think that since you forked over $10.50 for a movie ticket that you knew the “real” Indian culture?

Many people might feel like watching a movie or reading an article fulfills their role as a global citizen, but a group of Brandeis students and their organization Revive: Mumbai are seeking to go beyond accepting what is floating out there and see for themselves.

In May, these Brandeis students will embark on a five-week-long summer journey that is sure to change their lives. During the trip, these members of Revive: Mumbai will see and hear the real story for themselves.

Revive: Mumbai was formed the weekend after the November 2008 attacks in Mumbai. So far, all of their efforts have centered around raising awareness and money on the Brandeis campus.

At a candle vigil hosted the Monday after the attacks, members of the Brandeis community gathered around a peace circle in solidarity to commemorate the lives lost.

Others attended a dinner with presentations on the attacks or purchased t-shirts sold by the club.

But seeing will become understanding this summer for a group of four students. In an effort to understand the various causes of conflict, including a lack of economic and social empowerment, Revive: Mumbai has partnered with the Experimental Theatre Foundation and the Parivartan school in India.

Founded in 1992, ETF is an organization that uses theatre as a means for social change. The Parivartan school is a school for underprivileged children living in the Wadala slum in Mumbai.

By combining the two outlets, Sahay said they’re “mixing the two groups together and having Brandeis students be the bridge between the two.”

These four students will start the fiveweek program by learning about the local families and children through informal meetings. Throughout the program, the students will also participate in workshops with ETF and Parivartan to discover the potential and social relevance of performing a play to deal with social conflicts. The

experience will culminate in the writing and production of a play to be performed with Parivartan children and their families.

Participants in the program will keep track of their experience and present it to members of the Brandeis community in the fall.

“We believe that a direct and a grassroots level work is required to make a difference.

One of our goals is to promote social harmony and in order to do that one needs to understand the root causes of terrorism [and] the root causes of conflict,” Revive: Mumbai member and summer program organizer Richa Sahay ‘09 said. “Going to the grassroots level and really speaking to these people and learning about their lives is the first step towards that goal.”

Though Revive: Mumbai is a small group of 10-12 students and there are only four taking part in the summer program, Sahay believes that what can be seen as shortcomings are actually assets.

“We cannot give back that much, so much that their lives can be changed, but… that same kind of feeling could keep us from [doing] anything,” she said. “We wanted to do something about it, we wanted to take the first step of even trying to make a difference if we can.”

Sahay has lived in India and the Philippines and now, like the four students participating in the program, finds herself in the United States as an outsider looking back on a distant situation. Sahay won’t be going to Mumbai herself but says this outsider status will actually help the group of four gain perspective over the five weeks.

“Somehow it takes an outsider to kind of see what’s going on back home…sometimes what you see everyday desensitizes you and you don’t feel the need to do anything about it because it’s just part of life,” she said. “[Members of Revive: Mumbai] have stepped out of that daily humdrum of poverty and want to do something about it.”

When she first heard about the summer program, Zohar Fuller ‘10 knew it was perfect for her. An independent interdisciplinary major in theatre for social change, Fuller is no stranger to the power of art to facilitate self expression and is looking forward to viewing this dynamic in Mumbai.

In an email message from Ecuador, where she’s currently studying abroad, Fuller expressed her excitement for further exploring her subject area this summer.

“I am looking forward to watching the children, and all those involved in the process of creating this production, grow over time,” she wrote. “I have experienced in the past how effective art is in terms of allowing for easier expression, and I hope to witness the same this summer.”

For program participant Wajida Syed

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

REVIVE MUMBAI: Revive Mumbai summer program particpants. Clockwise from top: Roxy Bischoff '11, Wajida Syed '12, Shibani Pandya '11

’12, an artist herself, the combination of art and social justice offered in this program seemed ideal.

“This is the only program [at Brandeis] that I know of that can effectively bring the two together,” she said.

Syed hopes combining the two will help her in possibly designing an independent interdisciplinary major when she returns to Brandeis in the fall.

Syed hopes this summer experience will help her gain perspective as an outsider looking in.

“I’m really interested to see what the students do for art, besides the theatre part. I want to see how they see their neighborhood,” she said. “When you go there you only see it comparing to where you’re coming from which may not be how things actually are.”

Roxy Bischoff ’ 11, a sociology and phi-

Studying with Bernie in the library Who’s been sitting in Bernard Madoff ’s chair? Brandeis graduate student Josh Cypress has.

Well, sort of. While working at the Farber-Mezzanine computer cluster in Brandeis’ library, Cypress recently took a look at just who had donated the chair he’d been sitting in for weeks. Turns out this chair was donated by the man himself, Bernard Madoff, and his wife Ruth.

-Chrissy Callahan PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

losophy double major with a minor in peace, conflict and coexistence studies, is excited to see the situation in India for herself versus accepting what she reads about it in the news.

The unpaid aspect of the program doesn’t faze Bischoff, and she’s most interested in what she can both take out of the program and give back to the community.

“I think it’s an amazing opportunity to not only help the people in the area that need it, but to help yourself and to gain such incredible experience. There’s nothing like working hands on within a community,” she said.

Remembering why she’s going there in the first place is something Bischoff plans to keep in the back of her mind.

“I think it’s important to realize too that we’re not going into the community to do our own thing,” Bischoff said. “And it’s important to understand that they aren’t these miserable people living in the slums. They face adversity, but they’re not depressed.”

The Revive: Mumbai program hits close to home for Shibani Pandya ’11, who’s lived in Mumbai her whole life and hopes to return there in the future to work with marginalized communities. Pandya is most excited to use art to “liberate people and help them use it to express themselves in a way that they can’t usually do in a mainstream culture.”

If the program is successful, she believes it could be an important first step towards peace-building.

Like Bischoff, Pandya doesn’t feel the need to be paid for doing what she really loves, and says she’ll get as much out of the program as the community she’s working in will.

“We're not just going to help them,” she said. “We’re going to learn from them.”

14 The Hoot

March 27, 2009

SPORTS

BY ZACHARY ARONOW Editor

The Brandeis Judges softball team returns to home action, wrapping up two double headers in two days, sweeping Lasell 3-2, 8-3 and settling for a split at Clark taking game one 3-2 but getting blanked 1-0.

A two out triple put Clark on the scoreboard in game one, but Brandeis was able to tie it up in the sixth after back to back errors brought Samantha Gajewski ’12 across the plate. It remained tied after seven innings, requiring extra inning action.

Brandeis struck first thanks to Emily Grimm ’12 who brought home the go-ahead and winning runs with a two run double to left field giving the Judges their first lead of the game, 3-1. Clark got one run across on an RBI single and had the tying run in scoring position with one out. In the end though, Brandeis pitcher Emily Vaillette ’11 was able to secure the complete game, coaxing a ground out and pop out to second to end the game.

Vaillette earned the victory, pitching all eight innings, giving up two runs on three hits; one earned and had three strikeouts. Melissa Traft took the loss, surrendering three runs on seven hits. She also had only one run charged to her. Brittany Grimm ’12 and Chelsea Korp ’10 powered the offense, each player getting two hits while Clark only had one player, Lauren Blake, who finished with a multi-hit game.

Game two of the double-header saw Clark jump out on the scoreboard first and this time, they wouldn’t relinquish it. Lauren Blake led off the bottom of the first with a single and soon ended up on third after a wild pitch and a throwing error from catcher Erin Ross ’10. Another wild pitch one batter later brought home Blake who ended up providing all the scoring there would be. The Judges threatened in the top of the second, Courtney Kelley’s ’11 single loaded the bases with one out but Clark escaped the jam, getting groundouts back to the mound Carly Schmand ’11 and Chelsea Korp ’10 to end the inning and preserve the lead. The game remained a pitcher’s duel, with neither side able to get back on the scoreboard for the rest of the game. Korp provided a last gasp, getting a one out single in the final inning but Melissa Cagar ’11 lined into an unassisted double play to end the game.

Sarah Carter shut out Brandeis, throwing a complete game scattering five hits and two walks.

Miller nearly matched her perfectly, the one run allowed in the first proving the difference. Miller went six innings, giving up the run on six hits and also collected four strikeouts while not allowing a walk. Korp was the lone bright spot on offense, having her second multi-hit performance of the day. Lauren Blake went 3-3 for the hosts, also the only player to have a multi-hit game.

The split comes one day after Brandeis swept away nearby Lasell on a Mar. 24 double header.

Game one saw the Judges climb back from a 2-0 deficit, getting all three runs on a bases-clearing triple from pinch hitter Lara Hirschler ’12 in the top of the fourth and that proved the difference. Samantha Gajewski went 2-3 at the plate for Brandeis while Vaillette delivered a complete game to pick up her second win of the season.

The second game did not require any comebacks as Brandeis jumped out to a 6-0 lead after two innings providing Caroline Miller ’12 all the support she needed. Miller threw six innings, victimizing Lasell for nine strikeouts before handing the ball over to Allie Mussen ’10, who closed out the final inning. Three Judges had a multi-hit performance at the plate in game two, led by first baseman Marianne Specker ’12 who went 2-3 with 2 RBI’s.

Brandeis returns home early, hosting Bates for a Mar. 29 double header originally scheduled to be held at Bates. They return to the road, taking on WPI for an April Fool’s double header and then return home Apr. 3 to host Framingham State for two rounds.

Baseball

Softball

RESULTS Friday, March 20, 2009 at Rhode Island College L 2-1 Saturday, March 21, 2009 v. Rochester Inst. W 7-5 v. Rochester Inst. W 5-1 Monday, March 23, 2009 v. Salem St. postponed to April 17 Tuesday, March 24, 2009 v. Wheaton postponed to May 1 Wednesday, March 25, 2009 v. Wentworth L 6-3 Thursday, March 26, 2009 v. Salve Regina W 7-6 UPCOMING Saturday, March 28, 2009 v. Springfield 12:00 PM v. Springfield 2:00 PM Sunday, March 29, 2009 at Wheaton (Mass.) 1:00 PM Tuesday, March 31, 2009 Mar. 31 vs. MIT 3:30 PM Thursday, April 2, 2009 v. Fitchburg St. 3:00 PM

RESULTS Tuesday, March 24, 2009 at Lasell W 3-2 at Lasell W 8-3 Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at Clark (Mass.) W 3-2, 8 innings at Clark (Mass.) L 1-0 UPCOMING Sunday, March 29, 2009 v. Bates 11:00 AM v. Bates 1:00 PM Wednesday, April 1, 2009 at WPI 3:00 PM at WPI 5:00 PM

Overall: 8-9 Conference: 2-4

Men’s Tennis Overall: 5-7 RESULTS Sunday, March 22, 2009 at Tufts L 8-1 UPCOMING Saturday, March 28, 2009 at Trinity (Conn.) 2:00 PM Wednesday, April 1, 2009 v. Babson 3:00 PM

Overall: 8-8 Conference: 3-5

Women’s Tennis Overall: 7-3

Conference: 1-0 RESULTS Saturday, March 14, 2009 at Middlebury L 9-0 v. New York U. @ Middlebury, VT W 7-2 Saturday, March 21, 2009 v. Bates W, 8-1 UPCOMING Saturday, March 28, 2009 at Trinity (Conn.) 11:00 AM Tuesday, March 31, 2009 at Babson 3:00 PM

Fencing - Individual records vary RESULTS Thursday thru Saturday, March 19- 21, 2009 v. NCAA Championships @ State College, Pa. (Penn State) 18 out of 24

’Deis Board

Softball wraps up road swing, taking 3-4

SPORTS

March 27, 2009

The Hoot 15

Brandeis baseball eeks out a win against Salve Regina

PHOTO BY Danielle Wolfson/The Hoot

ON THE MOUND: Kyle Ritchie ‘10 throws a pitch during Thursday’s home game against Salve Regina. The Judges won 7-6.

BY ZACHARY ARONOW Editor

As Yogi Berra said, “it ain’t over until it’s over.” Brandeis certainly proved that as RBI singles from Drake Livada ’11 and Pat Nicholson ’11 in the bottom of the ninth capped an on-going comeback from a four run deficit to swipe away a 7-6 victory from SalveRegina.

After getting on the board first on a lead off home run from Mike Alfego ’09, Salve-Regina bled starter Kyle Ritchie ’10 for five runs over the next three in-

nings. Trailing 5-1 to visiting Salve-Regina entering the fourth inning, Brandeis managed to chip away at the lead, starting with a sac fly from Zach Wooley ’11 that brought home Jon Chu ’12. They got some assistance in the fifth, a bases-loaded walk to Sean O’Hare ’12 cutting the score to 5-3 followed by an RBI single from Chu to make it a one-run affair.

The eighth inning saw Zach Wooley lead off with a single but would have been stranded at second were it not for a pinchhit, RBI single from Eric Rosen-

berg ’11 that tied the game up at 5-5. Errors though nearly killed Brandeis as they fell behind again by one thanks to an error from O’Hare at short. The Judges, however, would not be denied, though it started off looking like they would after reliever Charles Kwolek got the first two batters in order. Kwolek, however, suddenly unraveled and ended up snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Kwolek’s troubles started off by giving up a two out walk to Chu who was then subbed for pinch

runner Zach Malis ’12. Everything then went to meltdown for Kwolek, throwing two wild pitches, moving the tying run to third.

Malis ended tying the game on an RBI by Livada. Another wild pitch from Kwolek advanced Livada to second and the subsequent walk to Wooley ended Kwolek’s day but the die was cast. Facing Laurence Liggett, Pat Nicholson brought home Livada with a single to left and brought home Brandeis’s eighth win of the season.

Nicholson earned the win, pitching a scoreless third of an inning, picking up a strike out.

Kwolek was charged with the loss, giving up two runs on two hits and three wild pitches. Kyle Ritchie got the no-decision, going eight innings giving up six runs on eight hits, three earned.

Ritchie also had five strikeouts.

James Collins ’09 had a scoreless 2/3 an inning before turning the ball over to Nicholson.

Providing a lot of offense was Jon Chu who went 3-4 at bat while Livada had the other multihit game going 2-5. The victory comes after falling to visiting Wentworth Institute of Technology 6-3 Wednesday.

Wentworth set the tone in the second inning as Doug Papauga and Anthony Carbone each took Brandeis starter James Collins deep to left field, putting them up 2-0. Papauga added another homer in the fourth inning, this time off reliever Justin Duncombe ’10 and finished the game going 3-5 at the plate for Wentworth. Brandeis cut the deficit in the fifth after

Sean O’Hare singled home John O’Brion ’10, making it 3-1. It was all for naught, however, as Wentworth brought across the winning run the next inning thanks in part to an error by O’Hare. Wentworth plated another run off an error from centerfielder Tony Deshler ’11 in the seventh and brought home one more in the eighth. A pinch hit RBI from Eric Rosenberg ’11 and a fielder’s choice play courtesy of Jon Chu brought the deficit down to three runs but had no answer for closer Matt Chymbor who racked up an easy 1-2-3 inning to seal the defeat for the Judges.

Earning his third win of the season was Chris Carbone, who went eight innings scattering three runs on six hits while also piling up five strikeouts. Collins got charged with the loss, going 3 and a third, giving up two runs on three hits and picked up four strikeouts.

Duncombe went an inning, surrendering one run on three hits before giving the ball over to John McGrath ’11. McGrath went 1.1 innings, allowing one unearned run. Nick Pollack ’12 faced two batters, could not get them up and turned the ball over to Pat Nicholson who covered the remaining 3.1 innings.

Sean O’Hare was the only Judge to rack up multiple hits against Carbone, going 2-3 with one RBI. James Likis ’10, Drake Livada and John O’Brion were the only other starters to make safe contact at the plate. They also suffered a relapse of defensive woes, finishing with four errors.

16

The Hoot

March 27, 2009

W E E K E N D Spotlight on Boston

Dvorak's Rusalka: Friday, Mar. 27, 7:30 p.m.

265 Tremont St.

Two Men of Florence:

Friday to Sunday, Mar. 27-29 264 Huntington Avenue Galileo and the Pope are friends, at first, but in this play issues of faith and science collide driving a wedge between them. Directed by Edward Hall.

A water nymph falls in love with a prince in this opera by Dvorak. Go to this Boston premiere and hear the famous "Song to the Moon."

The story and music in this dark fairytale are sure to enchant. www.blo.org

Photo courtesy of Jeffrey Dunn.

www.huntingtontheatre.org

Photo courtesy of event website.

What's going on at Brandeis?

Philadelphia, Here I Come: Harry Potter Feature: Friday to Sunday, Mar. 27-29 Shapiro Campus Theater

Sunday, Mar. 29, 12 p.m.

Castle Commons

BET's Spring semester play is a comedy in 3 acts about a boy on the eve of a journey to America. Bring friends! You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll mostly laugh. Tickets sold at the door or in advance in Usdan.

Photo courtesy of Jason Ralston.

Looking for a way to procrastinate on Sunday? Student Events will show Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix. There will be refreshments, trivia, and prizes.

Tobacco: Friday, Mar. 27, 9 p.m. to 11:20 p.m. Editor's Pick: Cholmondely's Groove to the electronic beats of the musician who debuted in 2008 with the album entitled "Fucked up Friends." Brandeisian Daniel Harris will also perform.

Unless otherwise noted, photos are from Google.

Comic Strips Sleazy

laughingwarlock

By Matt Kupfer

Adagio Spring Fever: Saturday, Mar. 28, 10:30 p.m.

Levin Ballroom One of Brandeis's dance companies will put on a performance which promises to heat up your Springtime. Featuring an appearance from a cappella group Voicemale, hip-hop, jazz, and modern dances, don't miss out!

Photo courtesy of Abdulaziz Almansour.

For more information contact: adagio@brandeis.edu.

Insert Comic Here

By Anthony Scibelli

By Ian Price