The Daily Collegian Ed-Op Blog

The Exultation of the Victorious

2009-05-10T21:58:00.000-07:00

I call it תיקווה ושינוי, or "Hope and Change". What does it represent as a work of art? Why, only the triumph of moderation and intelligence for the good of all!

At the very least this shows balls on an unprecedented level. I have never in my life seen an American President so expertly demonstrate the use of diplomacy: to back up the things we say nicely with brutal force. Obama has the internal political support and the world clout to make this at least look like a serious effort towards peace in the Middle-East. Will it work? Not necessarily, but it's definitely a step back onto the right road: a two-state solution with a secure, Israeli Jerusalem; the repatriation of the settlers into Israel; a prosperous, contiguous Palestine; and an end to terrorism.

May God show him the right way.

Swooning Over Swine Flu

2009-04-30T15:52:00.000-07:00

Dammit Nick, you beat me to the punch.

Folks are certainly freaking out over the prospect of the widespread outbreak of the swine flu, but as usual most everybody is overreacting. The regular and non-media-frenzy-worthy flu kills nearly half a million people each year, yet fails to dominate cable news coverage as the swine flu has.

Forgive me for seeming unconcerned, but I’m just recovering from the serious bout I had with the bird flu last year and SARS the year before that.

Oh wait, I’m not. Because those diseases never consumed humanity to the degree Wolf Blitzer had told us all.

Okay, I’m being overly sarcastic for the point of ha-ha’s and lol’s. I do understand that the little game we play each time a disease threatens outbreak is necessary to raise public awareness, test the competency of the government’s response, and engage in preventative measures to limit the propagation of the disease in question. So far we have received strong marks in each of those categories; so I guess I’ll just sit back, shut up, and avoid that sickly looking specimen at the library computer next to me.

P.S. Today, I saw two kids walking around campus with surgical masks on. Really? I mean…Really?

P.P.S. I always like writing a post-postscript because my initials are P.P.

P.P.P.S. I did not proofread this entry.

P.P.P.P.S. Excessive postscripts are surely a sign of unprofessional journalism.

Paul Payer is a Collegian Column...oh wait I don't have to do that for blog posts.

EvERyBoDy PaNiC!!!

2009-04-29T10:24:00.000-07:00

It's official: At least one person in the United States has died of swine flu.

If you're like me and didn't really hear about this thing until it showed up on your yahoo! homepage, this really came out of nowhere.

This wasn't like the avian flu, which crept up on us for months and ultimately fell flat. We just fell right into the midst of this thing. And that's probably good because we're skipping all the mask-wearing paranoia and it's actually an issue.

It's gotten so bad that Texas has stopped playing sports. And they freaking love sports down there.

Will this be the pandemic that we hear about every year? It seems like the most legitimate threat since... last year.

-Nick O'Malley

The "brainwashed" pro-war left

2009-04-18T20:48:00.001-07:00

Anyone interested can check out this article by the libertarian Justin Raimondo, related to my previous column about how the left support Obama even in his Bush-like endeavors.

Long Live the Resistance!

2009-04-01T05:48:00.000-07:00

Unfortunately, I’ve found that within a mere two weeks our campus will once again erupt in interracial violence between Humans and Zombies. The pedestrian paths will run gray with brains and Nerf darts will once again fly through the air, murdering innocent civilians. Few of the high-level Human or Zombie militants will actually die, and once again another war will erupt with no resolution or movement towards peace.
We all need to understand that the Human-Zombie Conflict has got to end, and the only way for that to happen is for the Humans to make some serious concessions, real ones. The Human leaders have continued to insist that they support a “two-school” solution in which humans and zombies each have their own university in which to live, study, and follow their own cultures, but the continued occupation of the only currently-existing UMass Amherst by Humans shows that they have no intention of ever really coming through on these promises.
Consider these facts. The Human soldiers carry and use orange-dart Nerf guns against Zombies, prohibited by University Residence Life Law. In every past Human-Zombie war they have mounted organized military “missions” aimed at starving the Zombies into extermination, and in two out of the three wars they used intervening divinities and biological weapons to commit genocide against the undead.
The Zombie population demands only justice: the end of the Human occupation, the remaking of UMass as a Zombie school, and the brains of all Humans at UMass. I cannot deny them these, as a matter of conscience. After all, Humans have oppressed Zombies for so long, throwing socks at them and teasing Zombies from cars.
Still, each semester the Humans declare yet another war against Zombies after only a tiny minority of Zombies bite Humans as a manifestation of their rights to resist occupation and to reproduce. Every semester the media display its bias by condemning the ensuing Zombie resistance against Human oppression. As an example of this pervasive slant, take the very phrase “human rights”. It contains a blithe, incredibly prejudiced bias: it implies that only Humans have rights. In a balanced, fair society we would call these “basic rights” to show that they apply to Human and Zombie alike. Enlightened people can see the phrasing for what it really is: racism. However, it appears that Humans maintain near-exclusive control over world affairs, with the boards of every major media company, financial institution, and RSO composed entirely of Humans, indicating a conspiracy on their part.
I interviewed Bob de Sable of the Bacterialized Resistance Against the Independence of Non-Zombies (“B.R.A.I.N.Z.”), and he explained that, “All we want to do is eat your brains.” When I explained how Humans require our brains to live, he emphasized the fact that, “No-one’s gonna eat your eyes.”
Bob demonstrated that, since zombies reproduce by biting a Human to infect them with a virus that reanimates their corpse as a Zombie, their population has always grown exponentially. Given these hard facts, to do anything other than turn UMass entirely over to Zombies constitutes an apartheid regime. No group has the right to independence when another local population reproduces much faster than them.
BRAINZ also demands that UMass divest from all manufacturers of anti-Zombie armaments such as the Hasbro (manufacturer of Nerf), Hanes clothing, and all producers of marshmallows. The Third-World Anti-war Team (“T.W.A.T.”) has concurred by stating that UMass must completely wash its hands of all involvement with all means of the Human offense. Who are we to question what the weak must do to survive the onslaught of the strong -- including but not limited to opening hostilities against Human soldiers, laying siege to buildings, and attacking in overwhelming numbers?
Bob then attempted bash my head open in order to “put this thing to bed”, but I managed to stun him with a sock. Afterwards, I realized that by not standing against Human terrorism, I had unwittingly joined in it. I hereby call upon all righteous UMass students and Amherst citizens to stand for the freedom of the Zombie people by gathering in a large open area to demonstrate for a real, just, sustainable peace at UMass -- preferably while too burdened with signs and pamphlets to run very quickly.
Jesse “You Don’t Mess with the Jesse” Punch of the Defenders of UMass from Frankensteinian Freaks (“D.U.F.F.”) could not be reached for comment.

Eli Gottlieb is a Morning Wood columnist. He can be reached at egottlie@student.umass.edu. Exercise caution when approaching in-person.

Two seperate drug policies

2009-03-31T18:19:00.001-07:00

Hey.

I can say controversial things here, right?

I tend to avoid writing columns touching on controversial issues, not because of some fear over political incorrectness, but to avoid contributing to the obnoxious partisanship which has consumed this campus.

That said, I want to talk for a moment about marijuana.

Yes a topic which unites even the most partisan among us, from the hallows of the Republic Club to the smoky dungeon of the Cannabis Reform Coalition.

Not.

The issue is of course a preeminent example of partisan politics fought from the fringes of the left and right with a very confused and somewhat misinformed mainstream public between those fringes.

Decriminalization. Legalization. Rehabilitation.

I'm not sure what -ation holds the proper solution to this problem, but won’t be discovered by legislators from eight different states which proposed the idea of administering random drug tests to individuals receiving welfare, food stamps, or other forms of public assistance.

If a recipient of public assistance is found to have smoked marijuana or some other controlled substance, their benefits would be revoked.

What a great idea.

Perhaps we should extend it beyond eligibility for just food stamps.

Let’s make college enrollment contingent upon a clean drug record, after all, state universities are publically funded by taxpayer dollars.

What about all those Wall Street firms receiving public assistance in the form of TARP funds and bailout money? Set up some random drug screenings outside of the AIG building in New York and marvel at the results.

Of course no legislator would ever imagine enforcement on this side of America, the educated and wealthy. Proposals such as this illustrate the divide in this country not only on drug policy, but on a whole host of issues which effectively create a set of standards and laws for one group and a separate set for another.

One would not have to look hard to find examples of low-income students barred from educational opportunities or thrown in jail for marijuana possession while Johnny Q smokes a joint with his prep school buddies while driving around the suburbs in his father’s Mercedes Benz M-Class.

I fail to envision how marijuana could be legalized in the U.S. and not result in further detriment to a society addicted to tobacco, booze, and fast food, but the maintenance of the status quo in regards to America’s drug policy is simply unacceptable.

Adam Miller Is Awesome

2009-03-24T11:36:00.000-07:00

That was the most reasonable, considered piece on the Israeli-Arab conflict I've ever seen. Kudos. If everyone thought like the esteemed Mr. Miller, we'd have cracked this nut by now.

BURN IN HELL, ASSHOLES!!!

2009-03-19T15:19:00.000-07:00

There was absolutely no justification for this, ever, at all. I address this writing to the soldiers who perpetrated these evils beyond my capacity to express in words. You are traitors to your people, to your country, to your cause, and to your army. If you have any honor you will walk across the border into Gaza and kill yourselves.

Obama, race and a little dialogue

2009-03-18T15:33:00.000-07:00

As race relations takes a giant step forward, here is what might have been a, shall we say, meeting of unlike minds.

Stephen Colbert: Tonight on my show, we have not one, but two, special guests. Here to explain why race is no longer a factor now that we have a black President, Strom Thurmond. Mr Thurmond will be presenting the “enlightened” view! On counterpoint, we have the Reverend Jesse Jackson on our show. I can’t wait to tell him that he’ll finally get to meet his long lost brother!

Jackson: Mr. Colbert.

Thurmond: Stephen.

Colbert: Gentlemen, welcome to the show. Now Thurmond, many thanks to you for coming on the show tonight. Let me ask you this, now that you have found your long lost relative, do you expect to walk arm and arm with him into this, so called, struggle for racial harmony?

Thurmond: I know it turned out that my relatives may have owned Mr. Jackson’s family but I’m not sure that an outside agitator such as Mr. Jackson would be any help at all. You know we would have integrated after Brown v Board but, I just had to lobby for segregation because we weren’t ready. And fortunately it seems that the struggle is now over. My efforts later on to bring about racial harmony are realized. Why are they still arguing?

Jackson: Let me interrupt you right there. I know, Mr. Thurmond...

Colbert: Umm, Mr. Jackson, why are you standing?

Jackson: Oh, sorry, force of habit. As I was saying.. I know, Mr. Thurmond, you believe that your state is well ahead in terms of race relations but Lord, let me get this straight: Are you actually, as God as your witness, arguing that race relations and racism are over? In your home state of South Carolina, in your own home state Mr. Thurmond, blacks make up over a quarter of the entire population and yet they own only 9.8 percent of the businesses. If racism is over, then we have
surely lost.

Thurmond: You have to understand that, as a proud Southerner, the good people of South Carolina try to educate you blacks so that you can do well and give something back to the communities from which you take so much. Surely there is the occasional racist but it isn’t really a problem anymore now is it? You’ve got a black President, what more do you people want... our flag?

Colbert: Now as you know, I don’t see race, so I can only assume that Mr. Obama is black because he says he’s black. He’s in the White House... well, he will be once they have the place fumigated, so racism is, for all intents and purposes, over. I’ve got to agree with the man from the south, like myself, a southern gentleman, Mr. Thurmond.

Jackson: Oh Lord, it is certainly not over! God says to ask my brothers and sisters why it is that so many people in states like Indiana, Kentucky and, yes God, South Carolina still spell negro with two r’s... when they can spell at all.

Thurmond: Don’t speak poorly of your betters boy. Regardless Mr. Jackson, weren’t you crying election night because, now that racism is over, you’re essentially unemployed? There ain’t no more work, nor need, for the pompous, uppity, civil rights activist.

Jackson: What?? Good God, are you crazy, man? I was crying because this country, God’s country, had made progress! Not because I’m out of a job! Are you senile?

Colbert: But isn’t the fact that you two are sitting here together undeniable evidence that racism is no more? Done? Kaput? Much like the future prospects of my beloved republican party?

Jackson: No sir. God knows we have crime problems. We have teen-age pregnancy problems. We have disparities between white and blacks all over this country. I have been astounded, yes absolutely astounded...

Colbert: Mr. Jackson, please sit down.

Jackson: Oh, um, sorry... where was I... yes astounded by the various white folk on television talking about how racism is over! That’s just what my black brothers and sisters need; another opportunity for the white man to talk about the black man’s future.

Thurmond: Is it time for you to apologize for those violent riots now?

Jackson: Apologize? As God as my witness, it is surely time that you apologized for years of oppression. For not protecting our children and letting racists kill those who protested against you.

Thurmond: Hold on now boy. During Vietnam I spoke up north at the University of Massachusetts and I thought, sincerely thought, that they were going to kill me. How can you defend that kind of violence? How is any different?

Jackson: (Quietly) I’m going to cut your f*&%ing nuts off.

Thurmond: I can’t hear so good boy, what did you say?

Jackson: You, sir, are talking down to me and my brothers and sisters. I’ve been sitting here listening to Mr. his-dad-owned-my-dad say I need to shut up. Racism is alive and well, not only in the South, but across this great country of ours! You sir, taught people to think that we shouldn’t drink from the same water fountain not so long ago. The fight is not over. We will still have to fight to gain education reform and career opportunity despite what you and those like you have to say. Yes, I’ll say it; People who say that racism is over are blind... but, unfortunately, they are not color blind.

Thurmond: Would you sit down. I’m getting a crick in my neck. Usually you’re a pain much lower.

Jackson: Mr. Thurmond, we are all God’s children. On the inside we are all the same color. And the color of your daughter is the same color as I Mr. Thurmond!

Thurmond: Oh God, I wish I were dead.

Thurmond’s triple digit age began to show as his face went even whiter. As he slumped further down into his chair, the audience could hear him mutter, “she made me feel powerful.” A small, cocky grin spread over Mr. Jackson’s face. The grin seemed to say, “We may not have reached the promise land yet, but we’ve finally gotten to the point where men like you realize what an embarrassment you are. That makes me proud to be an American. We’ll continue to work on the rest.”

Ebad, Hamas Made No Acceptable Offer

2009-03-13T11:22:00.000-07:00

Ebad Rahman, I have to unfortunately take issue with one of the statements in today's column:

Hamas has even proposed a peace plan – which would establish a PalestinianState within 1967 borders, with Jerusalem – and right of return for refugees.

Hamas has proposed something like such a plan. It was not a peace plan, but a plan for a long-term "hudna", an Islamist term meaning a long-term truce in which both parties to a war resume normal life long enough to prepare themselves for the next phase of battle.

The additional problem with this proposal is the so-called "right of return for refugees". Israelis, Jews and our supporters have heard this proposal before. We've derisively nicknamed it the "1.5 state solution", and I'll explain to you why. Any peace deal that creates a Palestinian state and gives Palestinian refugees a right of return into Israel does not actually result in a Jewish Israel coexisting alongside an Arab Palestine. It results in an Arab Palestine, possibly with a tiny minority of Jewish settlers, and an Israel whose population contains more Arabs than Jews. That would force Israel to make a sadistic choice between its democratic character and its Jewish character -- the very apartheid that Israel's enemies allege already exists. Thus, if Israel chose to remain Jewish it would become a true apartheid state, and if Israel chose to remain democratic it would become - by popular vote! - an Arab state with an official Jewish minority. Thus, this solution results in either apartheid in Israel alongside a Palestine or two Arab states, one of which happens to carry the name "Dawlat Israil".

None of us sensible people want this. I believe that you don't want such a situation either. The question is: why does Hamas?

Hamas wants such a "solution" because it favors them while defeating the Jewish state. It results in either Arab reign in "kul Falistina" without any Jewish state at all, or it results in a truly apartheid Jewish state that Hamas can easily turn the world against, thus transforming bad-case of an apartheid Israel into the worse-case of no Jewish state at all.

And if you truly believe that the Palestinian capability for violence is "insignificant", I don't think you've payed close enough attention to the situation. Israel has become very effective at preventing Palestinian terrorism by employing the very unpleasant tactics that Palestinian Arabs' supporters decry. Without the security fence, the blockade on Gaza, or the occupation of the West Bank, Israel would find itself facing near-total war with the Palestinian Arabs. Please do not confuse Israel's extreme competence at protecting themselves with a Hamas or Palestinian inability or lack of desire for violence.

What the area needs is a real two-state solution, not a trap to force an Arabic victory.

Obama's executive reach

2009-03-12T21:10:00.000-07:00

Any Obama voter hoping he would denounce Bush's use and abuse of signing statements to dictate which pieces of which legislation he intended to abide, better start regretting their ballots. This article details Obama's continuation of Bush policy to disregard anything he wants to in federal legislation.

Is this what we want? I know liberals scoffed at Bush's signing statements and called them excessive uses of executive power consistent with Bush's desire to run things the way he wanted to run things, no questions asked, no checks and balances accepted. But will they, too, denounce Obama's executive abuses?

Doubt it.

The left's anti-speech

2009-03-12T20:55:00.000-07:00

Today's Collegian chronicled the Feder hate crime speech, which was smothered by people who have no respect or understanding of the right to free speech.

“There’s absolutely no room for hate speech on this campus,” said winter 2008 graduate Natalia Tylim. Her friend, senior Katie Perry, concurred, adding “I think campuses are places for open-mindedness, and this is the opposite of that.”

Anybody who doesn't recognize the inherent contradiction in these statements needs to listen closer. I'm sorry, but it is actually nonsensical in a sort of baffling, if not irritating, way. At one end it is said that open-mindedness is what college campuses should embrace, and at the other its saying there is "absolutely no room" for this type of speech on this campus. What is meant by this quote is that "only those who agree with me can be considered open-minded and can exercise their right to free speech, but all those who disagree with me are close minded and do not have that right."

This is insanity and the people who squelched the speech the other night should be ashamed of themselves. Listen people, we never get through to people by shutting them up. Bellicosity and loud protestations meant to smother those we disagree with may silence our opponents, but will rarely persuade anyone. Persuasion is an art, not a shouting match. And if any commie liberal or kooky right-winger wants to ever be heard and have any affect on people, they'll scrap this intolerance and begin to listen and speak peacefully. Otherwise, no one will ever get anywhere.

SGA, Our Dorms Ain't OK

2009-03-09T06:34:00.000-07:00

You know you go to UMass when your department receives millions in funding for wireless sensor networks that track wild swamp turtles (YALLAH TURTLENET!) but you can't get a nice, hot shower in your dormitories. And somehow this has never been an issue in the SGA elections.

One half of the toilets in my dorm have some kind of leak in their pipes, often spraying (clean, thank God!) water from the handle when flushed. One third of the shower stalls have heating and water-pressure problems that force students to dunk ourselves under a meager stream of lukewarm water to get clean. One fifth of the faucets have a leak or a water-pressure problem. One fifth of the clotheswashers are out of order at any given time. One third of the clothesdryers don't work but remain labeled in-order to encourage hapless students to waste $1.25. Last year my entire floor suffered a massive mildew infestation in our ceiling with every snowstorm just because we happened to live on top of the building; we had to cover our noses and mouths for days but could still feel our eyes burn.

And the SGA does nothing! They don't even care! In all the hubbub over SGA elections, I've yet to see a single candidate make a nice campaign promise like "I'll stop spending money to have 3-hour SGA meetings on weekday evenings that keep everyone from their lives and don't end in an up-or-down vote so that we can have dry clothes and warm showers". Hell, the SGA appears completely unaware that we even have these problems. Apparently they're too busy fighting for lower student fees and the expansion of wireless internet access to the dorms (incredibly insecure, never send your personal information over such a connection) to realize that our basic infrastructure needs work.

I remember another place where a government with almost no popular support claimed to stand for the little guy while its constituents' basic infrastructure crumbled: Soviet Russia. The SGA aren't Communists, are they?

Sure, Mr Brooks

2009-03-03T13:37:00.000-08:00

Just got done reading the mildly interesting bit by David Brooks posted to our Collegian Columnists Facebook group. He doesn't seem to say much of real implication except for...

Yet they set off my Burkean alarm bells. I fear that in trying to do everything at once, they will do nothing well. I fear that we have a group of people who haven’t even learned to use their new phone system trying to redesign half the U.S. economy. I fear they are going to try to undertake the biggest administrative challenge in American history while refusing to hire the people who can help the most: agency veterans who are registered lobbyists.

Here the true colors show! Brooks isn't really some moderate worried about overconfident government. He's just another neoconservative (ie: a Trotskyist who saw the error in their ways and - instead of ceasing such stupid views as historicism and Manicheanism - just went to the other side) looking to get his lobbyist buddies into power and office. Way to play!

Change We Can Believe In

2009-02-26T14:55:00.001-08:00

Check out this picture from Dusseldorf's Carnival (Mardi Gras here in America) celebration. *This* is change we can definitely believe in. Especially that stimulus package. AW YEAH.

This is losing its funny...

2009-02-23T14:39:00.000-08:00

It's getting painfully redundant for me to write columns and blog posts every week insisting that, in the important ways, Obama is no different than Bush. But I feel I need to continue doing it at a steady pace since pathetically faithful Obama supporters (our main constituency here at the Collegian) straight up refuse to criticize Obama for doing the same horrible things they vehemently bashed Bush for doing.

Here's a list of assorted links which help validate my claims of Obama's Bush-like disregard for the constitution and the rule of law in general. They mainly pertain to detainees, secret prisons, torture, propaganda, and disregard for the Freedom of Information Act. Hopefully the one or two people (not even? maybe?) that actually read the Ed/Op blog posts will begin to submit to the evidence and become lastingly convinced.

1. torture, human rights, et al
2. little more and a little more and a little more
3. Obama's War on Terror
4. freedom of information, and again
5. transparency?
6. Afghanistan "surge"? (just the beginning, by the way)

Still think Obama represents change? ...Fine, I'll keep trying.

Obama's "Bush-league" legal stances.

2009-02-16T14:11:00.000-08:00

My upcoming Wednesday column will be on Obama lying (again) about government transparency and accountability and how he's now using all the Bush legal tricks to subvert the rule of law. Here is a supplementary video to wet your palates.

1100 pages for just $787B

2009-02-13T10:38:00.000-08:00

Representative John Boehner (R-Ohio) brings up a good point today, speaking in front of the House, heaving a mountain of paper onto the floor. That mountain: the stimulus bill expecting a House vote today, rewritten last night and amounting to over 1,100 pages and a total tab of $787 billion.

Mr. Boehner explained that not a single representative had read the entire bill since its reformed completion late last night, and expressed his doubt that it was even possible for a person to read so many pages in so little time. As college students expected to tackle heavy reading loads every week, I think we can all agree that 1,100 pages is a bit much for one night.

President Obama campaigned on the promise of a reformed Washington with greater transparency. Obviously, the economy needs action now. But rushing this bill through a vote before Americans even have a chance to grasp the breadth of its policies and the depth of its spending effectively sets that mountain before the eyes of Americans and blinds them to the true content of this bill. The president can publish this bill for all to see and claim transparency, but if if it passes before anyone has a chance to even peruse the 1,100 pages, then the administration has failed to deliver on its promise.

Shouldn't Americans have a chance to judge this bill, in its enormity, for what it is before it goes to Obama's desk and turns into a reality?

Hate to say I...nevermind

2009-02-11T09:59:00.001-08:00

A while back I wrote a column about Obama's call for open talks with Iran and how good a thing that would be if he kept his campaign promise of it. Read it here. Despite how vehemently I disagree with Obama on almost every issue, I was hopeful in this one respect.

Well, just to update, for those faithful readers who commented on the site under my column, voicing their objections quite harshly and condemning my point of view on diplomacy with Iran, here is some amount of vindication: Iran has responded positively, offering 'dialogue with respect.'

To Ryan...

2009-01-30T12:00:00.000-08:00

"Ryan" is the internet pseudonym of someone who commented on my latest column. He says that I am "well-known" on campus as a hater of Muslims by several leaders of student groups who've been quite offended.

OK, supposedly-existing personal enemies, can you, like, let me know you exist or something? Unless you've got some kind of attack planned (a fantasy so paranoid even an internet commenter couldn't manage it), there's no need to go around being someone's enemy and never saying anything.

Or do you not actually exist? Am I not the pariah that some jerk on the web says I am? OH HORROR ! ANONYMOUS INTERNET PEOPLE MAY BE WRONG WHEN THEY TELL ME I'M AN ASSHOLE! HOW CAN I LIVE IN SUCH A WORLD!?

Releasing Gitmo Prisoners

2009-01-29T19:23:00.000-08:00

When the right in this country cries out against releasing Guantanamo prisoners as per Obama's executive order to close it, I literally marvel at their hypocrisy. They're worried about the security threat it may cause, that it somehow means we're vulnerable to more terrorist attacks now.

In the same breath, though, they ignore the enormous number of terrorists abroad that have been created (or radicalized) by Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, the occupation of Iraq, U.S. military bases in Muslim holy lands, unconditional support of Israel over the Palestinians, or a host of any other terrorist-breeding policies. There are only a couple hundred Gitmo prisoners, and we won't be releasing even a majority of them, I think. So the potential number of terrorists we release is dwarfed by the potential amount of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers we have created and antagonized through aggressive foreign policies. To quote Tyler Cowen:

"When the number goes up by one hundred, no one much notices. If the number goes up by one hundred because we release some previously identified terrorists, there is or will be a public outcry. But it's the same consequence."

The facts are you're not allowed to detain human beings indefinitely without even telling them why. It's against the law. It's immoral. It's tyranny. This move by Obama is much more likely to improve America's image in the Muslim world than to subject us to another attack.

Armchair Innaguration: The Speech

2009-01-20T09:31:00.000-08:00

If Barack Obama had a cool sports nickname, it would be something along the lines of BO44 or the O-Bomb, which wouldn't normally be relevant at a presidential innaguration; but, it's not very often that a president-elect takes the stage to the same type of chant you'd hear forDustin Pedroia.

So, as this largely wildly popular president prepared to assme the position of Commander-in-Chief in front of the largest crowd ever gathered for a presidential innaguration 9at thee time of this writing, place estimated to be around 1.4 million people in the mall alone) it remains to be seen whether or not he will be succesful in leading the United States in getting us out of this economic hellhole.

In terms of his much anticipated speech, however, President Obama (that sounds wierd) attempted to bring forth shades of JFK, FDR, LBJ and other great presidential speeches that may or may not have been made by presidents who were referred to by their initials. However, as Obama's speech developed, it quickly became apparent that this was not just another speech on "change" and "yes we can."

Obama's inagural speech incorporated many harsher tones that were avoided during his campaign. As he spoke, he shifted to a tone that is much more familiar with Bush' speeches, that "wrath of god" aura that has become commonplace in presidential speeches since 9/11. As it was noted on TV, Obama spent very little time on policies and what he will actually do in office.

There was no mention of Guantanomo or bailouts; instead, Obama focused on the values that will be incorporated in his administration and what he hopes to accomplish while he is in office. It was a type of speech that was, until now, not expected of Obama. It was made in the "yes we can" model, using the word "I" only three times (I'm saying this on the TV analysts' word, I didn't I would analyzing the speech too much myself).

Notes:

There is a tendency at speeches for politicians to not wax poetic. So, why is it that inagural speeches use poets? I do appreciate the author's contribution to the inaguration and Barack Obama; but, the poem really didn't make all that much sense. I got the idea of it, but it just seemed really vague and didn't get the point of it. "We see this," "this person works hard," "this person goes through this "hardship." It felt like I was in English class again, trying to figure out what the hell was being said in the poem.

I'm not going to have those five minutes back.

Dr. Joseph E. Lowry had the first truely lighthearted moment of the inaguration as he finished the benediction. When he first took the stage, I thought the guy was having a stroke. But once I got past the slightly slurred words, I saw what was really the most personal take on the civil right aspect of the election when Lowry said that now is the time where it's ok for:
Black to not go back.
Brown to stick around.
Yella' to be mella'.
The red man can get ahead, man.
White to do what's right.

By the way, am I the only one who tried to call the ABC narrator's bluff in mentioning that the White House website changed to acknowledge Barack Obama as the 44th president?

And isn't it just appropriate that Dick Cheney leaves the White House in wheelchair, an image indicative of the prior administration basically dragging itself along as it came to a close. Also, it's nice to see the emphasis that ABC ( I'm not quite sure what the other networks were showing) put on George W. Bush leaving town in a helicopter. It seemed that the cameras were going to remain trained on the chopper until his being no longer remained on Washingtono soil, a detail sure to be enjoyed by the former president's many opponents.

Nick O'Malley

Wikipedia: the Free Encyclopedia that 1400 People Edit

2009-01-03T21:04:00.000-08:00

The general consensus on the topic of Wikipedia is that it is edited by a bunch of random people that have nothing better to do than... you know... edit Wikipedia in their spare time.

But is this really the case?

According to Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, the site is updated largely by a small "community."

"I expected to find something like an 80-20 rule: 80% of the work being done by 20% of the users, just because that seems to come up a lot. But it's actually much, much tighter than that: it turns out over 50% of all the edits are done by just .7% of the users ... 524 people. ... And in fact the most active 2%, which is 1400 people, have done 73.4% of all the edits." The remaining 25% of edits, he said, were from "people who [are] contributing ... a minor change of a fact or a minor spelling fix ... or something like that."

In case my Wikipedia-esque sourcing isn't enough. If you look deeper in the sources on the link up there, it comes from speeches and lectures that Wales has done. Speaking of which, wouldn't it be awesome to have the Wikipedia dude give a lecture? All we get is Ralph Nader.

It seems stranges, by the way, that this little fact isn't made more public to Wikipedia users. The fact that a smaller group of more experienced people changing things on the site seems a little more trustworthy than random people changing things on a whim. However, it is stated that a lot of the changes made on the site or done by those random people, albeit small changes for typos and incorrect information.

On the other hand, though, Wales did mention that there are "malicious" Wiki users that purposefully change information. The question is, though, why do they do it?

Because it's hilarious, that's why.

Back to the point, though, the majority of changes are made by a small group and nobody really knows about it. So why doesn't the site just feature those certain individuals? Is the ability for anyone to make the changes they want at anytime truly that important to the site?

Not really. People use Wikipedia because it give you the information you want on the subject you want. Right now. Boom. Plus, it almost always has the same topics you want and there really isn't a substitution for it.

There is Google, but you usually get a bunch of random stuff that you don't want. The only restriction is that people really don't trust the site because of the fact that anyone can change it.

The open dictionary factor is cool, but really just brings the site's ultimate demise. So Wikipedia should just close the site's moderation capabilities. No one cares if anyone can change it just as long as people get the information they want.

Or, they can just keep the site as it is, which is pretty much a gimmick you can use to look things up.

Christmas Extravaganza! Christmas Day Live(ish) Blog!

2008-12-25T00:19:00.000-08:00

3:19 - It's the early morning, and the man known as Santa is sure to have already infiltrated my household. I've heard many rumors about him:
-Wanted on 876 trillion counts of breaking and entering
-Allegedly making out with Michael Jackson's mother
-One count of reindeer-vehicular homicide
-Three counts of getting hurt on the job, thus providing a plot line for three Tim Allen movies

I've left cookies and a glass of milk in an attempt to appease the man, but a peaceful resolution seems unlikely. In association with NORAD, I've been tracking the man via top secret government procedures; however, by the time this reaches you, it may be too late.

However, I do not intend to go out a miserable wreck; rather, I intend to continue with my previous plan of playing video games for several hours. It has worked so far...

11:10 - The man known as Santa is attempting to win me over. Knowing that I have been constrained to my desktop computer in the past, the man offered me a laptop computer. Well, it's actually a netbook, but I can type on it while sitting on the can, which is not what is happening right now.

That's just not sanitary.

11:30 - On Demand is a wonderful thing.

My house does not have a fireplace, nor does it have a scenic river flowing in front of it. But, with Comcast's programming choices, my family chose to switch between a yule log and a rainy, snowy river in Yellowstone National Park.

Beats Sportscenter, I guess.

12:17 - James' post above me has stolen some of my thunder, but I shall carry on! It's just past noon now and I'm lying in wait for my family which will soon consume my household.

In years past, this epidemic known as relatives was directed at the household of my uncle; however, the burden has now been shifted to my house. I fear that I will not make it through the night.

6:49 - With six and a half hours coming between posts, I can pretty much go ahead and label this a complete failure. But, if you've spent time around relatives recently, you know that it's a cavernous vortex of your time. A half hour ago, I'm pretty sure it was 1:00 and my cousin had just come in door. He's looking over my shoulder as I type this - stop it Dan.

Note: he has already gone on the record as labeling himself as the "idiot cousin."

As of now, the Celtics are on (losing to the Lakers and an onslaught of "Paul Blart: Mall Cop" promos). Kevin James' career has hit a high note.

9:14 - In a broader perspective, this time of year has the most depressing stories of the year. Not only do people keep committing crimes at pretty much the same rate as the rest of the year (I have no idea if this is actually true, it just seems it is) but you also have the fact that it usually involves someone getting trampled in a shopping mall, getting their presents stolen, losing power for three weeks or, in this certain case, a man dressing up as Santa shooting six people to death.

Our culture has a tendency to treat this time of year as somewhat of an anomaly of usual human nature. There's an unspoken expectation that, because of the holidays (Christmas!), people are suddenly going to become decent and take the well-being of others into consideration, which would be an amazing accomplishment.

But, after spending five minutes driving or shopping during the past two days, it's plain to see that people suck this time of year as much as they normally do. They just want to get home.

Home, however, is the key word. It's not that people are going to go out of their way for complete strangers- this is America; but, looking in another perspective, people are acting like asses out there for the benefit of those close to them. They all want to get the right present, get to a party on time or just get back home in order to spread that mystical "Christmas/Hanukkah/Kwanzaa/Generic Agnostic Holiday spirit" to those around them.

So, to the guy who cuts you off in the parking lot, Merry Christmas... once I get home and out of this damn traffic.

Christmas Extravaganza! Christmas Eve Eve Eve Edition! Best. Thing. Ever.

2008-12-22T14:34:00.001-08:00

Best. Thing. Ever.

Snowbeards:

Although not as cool as some actual beards, the snowbeard is a wondrous byproduct of the snow. Usually discovered after the partaking in the activities of sledding, snowball fighting, or diving into the snow for some reason, the acknowledgment of a snowbeard immediately makes up for any negative qualities of facial hair. Trust me, I'm an expert of this.

I mention this because the University of Massachusetts recently experienced its first major snowfall of the year. Because of this phenomenon, the school was forced to cancel the last day of finals and push it back to Saturday, where the conditions were even worse (but that's another story).

Regardless, the usual UMass shenanigans occurred. The numbers of trays in the DC's suddenly plummeted while students flocked to the slopes of the campus when they (read: me) should have been studying.

Of course, the flocking was severly limited since the majority of the student body had already gone home for winter breaks. But, that didn't stop many students from commandeering trays, cardboard, pizza trays, and what I could only describe as an inadequate sledding device at hitting Orchard Hill. Yes, the actual hill.

Now, a person who may or may not have been me may or may not have "discovered" a tray that may or may not have been "stolen" from the DC for his sled (I'd rather not have dining services send me a bill. They've done it before), lined it with bubble wrap and put it all together with duct tape. If I get the motivation to find a camera, I may put up a picture of it, because it's awesome.

As some of you may have heard, a Daily Collegian... reporter admitting to taking a handful of trivial items (I think they were tea bags and soemthign else) and was subsequently billed for his alleged thefts.

If you know me, or happened to read a certain column, you'd know my stance on stealing stuff from the DC. Everyone knows that students steal trays from the DCs, let's just acknowlege that right now.

So why fight it? Shouldn't the school just put out the trays so people can just go on their merry way? There should be some trays that aren't really suitable for food, but alright for your butt.

That, or the school should sell some sleds! The school's in a financial crisis, it's about time they cashed in on the snow cow. The only sled I've seen for sale around here was at Hastings, and that's in downtown Amherst. There should be a sled stand at the DC's, selling the things for five-to-10 bucks per pop.

It's either that, or people keep going down the hills on DC tray/bubble wrap/duct tape sleds.

-Nick O'Malley

Christmas Extravaganza! The most expensive drawing of a seven-legged spider you'll see today

2008-12-17T20:08:00.000-08:00

Ok, I didn't think of anything Christmas related to put up today. But the extravaganza will continue under any circumstances!

This story is a little old, but is entertaining nontheless. Just roll with it, alright?

For your entertainment, I present to you a drawing of spider from one Mr. David Thorne, a revolutionary and pioneer. Mr. Thorne, as I understand was set to make payment to a certain company (the details of which I'm keeping obscured for both laziiness-related and privavy-related reasons) and, instead of simply abstaning from sending a payment, sent in his drawing of a spider, which he valued at $233.95.

Unfortunately, Mr. Thorne's drawing was rejected and, after a long exchange, the issue was settled through some other means (of which I will not mention for the reasons I said earlier).

The story, however, does not end there. The famed picture was put up for bid on eBay for the amount of $233.95. Surprsisingly, the picture was bid on and sold. Even more surprising was that the winning bid was $10,000. Yeah, I don't get it either.

Anyway, here's the original exchange with Mr. Thorne and the representative of the company to which he owed money. http://www.27bslash6.com/overdue.html

Of course, with the wonders of the Interwezbz, I put it right here also.

Note: And of course, the internet hates me and part of the conversation is cut-off. Just go to the link if you still want to read it, it was too long to put on here anyways.

-Nick O'Malley

Generic Holiday Extravaganza! Oh crap, there are other holidays:

2008-12-16T13:01:00.000-08:00

Before my friend Sami yells at me for not mentioning her winter holiday of choice (not that she reads this), it's time to put all of this in a broader perspective.

First, I really don't care what people say when I think of it this way. For me, it's Christmas time/tree/season. Sorry to all of those who celebrate other holidays, but American culture is so dominated by Christmas that it really doesn't make sense (for me at least) to identify this time of year than with the flagship holiday, which Christmas is.

In my defense, without Christmas, would the entire month of December (and most of November and, in some cases October) be dominated by these holidays? I don't think so, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa don't carry their weight like that.

I'm not trying to bash other religions (though I'll still get yelled at for it). You can call it whatever you want, that's cool. Can I just not get yelled at for it? In all honesty, though, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa don't really get a fair fight in this.

Hanukkah: Poor, poor Hanukkah. It's really not fair that tis holiday gets matched up against the grand spectacle of the Christian calender. In baseball terms, it's like the Jewish team's number four starter (we'll go with Carl Pavano) got matched up against Christianity's ace pitcher (Josh Beckett, so at least someone knows who I'm talking about).

It'd be nice to look at late December as a collection of the biggest holidays that different cultures have to offer; but, Hanukkah, Christmas' only real competition isn't even the most significant holiday (paling in comparison to Yom Kippur and Passover) for a group that is dwarfed by the Christian majority.

Kwanzaa: Ok, I'm sorry to anyone that celebrates Kwanzaa. At the time of writing this sentence, I have no idea what Kwanzaa is about, nor does anyone that I've asked. It is for this reason that is gets brushed to the side so abruptly and, in some cases, falls behind Festivus in the holiday pecking order. Hey, more people have seen that Seinfeld episode than know what Kwanzaa's about.

But, by the time I write some sentences further down, I hope to know what Kwanzaa's about.

We all know that, with about five minutes of research, we could find out exactly what Kwanzaa is about. But, if you're like most people I know, that five minutes is utilized in much more productive ways: Facebook, sleeping, stupid flash games...

However, I am willing to make that time commitment to research such a topic when I really should be studying for finals. So, here's a quick rundown of what Kwanzaa is.

My initial research has shown the following:

Wikipedia: “Kwanzaa is a week-long holiday celebrated throughout the world, honoring African heritage, marked by participants lighting a kinara (candle holder). It is observed from December 26 to January 1 each year.

“Kwanzaa consists of seven days of celebration, featuring activities such as candle-lighting and pouring of libations, and culminating in a feast and gift giving. It was created by Ron Karenga and was first celebrated from December 26, 1966, to January 1, 1967.”

Simple enough. But it sort of just sounds like an imaginary African Hanukkah. Let's delve deeper with some investigative reporting.

Kwanzaa.com: “This holiday is observed from December 26th through January 1st. Again its focus is to pay tribute to the rich cultural roots of People of the African Diaspora. Though first inspired by African-Americans, many of African descent celebrate this occasion today. Its reach has grown to include all whose roots are in the Motherland.”

Well, that makes sense, sort of like a “we're awesome” day like Independence Day, with less independence and more awesome. Not that a lot of independence is acknowledged July 4^th, it's mostly getting drunk, eating burnt hamburgers and watching your town's funding explode in mid-air.

Not that we've got the basics down, what does the word “Kwanzaa mean?”

From Believer's Web:

“The word "Kwanzaa" itself is man made. It is derived from the swahili phrase "matunda ya kwanza" which means first fruits. Karenga's history has it that the extra "a" was added to represent the seven children that were a part of his organization, (US Organization) as each child wanted to represent a letter of Kwanzaa. (Kwanzaa: A Celebration of Family, Community and Culture, pg. 108.) “

Okay, so what have we learned? Kwanzaa is a seven-day long holiday created by Dr. Ron Karenga during the off week between Christmas and New Year's that celebrates those of African descent and includes the lighting of candles as part of the ceremony.

We cool.

Now, to put this all in context, aren't there candles everywhere during the HanaChrismaKwanzukah time of year? There are two out of the three holidays that incorporate them and people continue to put of the Christmas-based tree and call it a holiday tree. Put up some candles and call them holiday candles. Or, if people actual wanted be truly politically correct and incorporate all of the holidays, get a tree and put a menorah and a kinara with it. Wouldn't that actually look cool?

I just want my tree back...

-Nick O'Malley

Christmas Extravaganza! It's Science!

2008-12-15T19:25:00.001-08:00

Seeing as how the Collegian has shut down for the winter, it looks like we'll have to generate content somehow, a challenge that I am more than willing to take up while I should be studying for finals. You just have to make certain sacrifices in the the name of journalism.

Anyway, I will be attempting to provide Chrismas/Holiday/Winter/Boredom-based content over break in order to keep up some sort of activity on this site. And here's what you have to look forward to:

-The messages your gifts give

-Why it's a Christmas tree

-The anti-gift

-Christmas Day Live Blog! It's some sort of journalistic breakthrough... somehow.

Whatever, without further ado, part one.

Christmas Extravaganza! A gift tells a person just how you feel:

The Ornament:

Congratulations, you don't care about this person. The tree ornament says "I don't know what to get you, but I assume you have a tree, take this." You most likely bought this at the 7/11 on the way to a Christmas party because you got that person you don't know in secret Santa. With your luck though, this person is actually Jewish and you'll become the biggest ass in the room.

Don't be that guy (or girl).

That Ornament up there, by the way, has been banned from the White House. According to the Washington Post, that ornament, presented to the White House by one of the artists chosen to create an ornament for the White House Christmas tree (one artist from each state is selected to create one).

Long story short, it's a pro-impeach Bush ornament and didn't go over well. Merry Christmas.

The Coffee Mug

Bought at a convenience store on the way there, good job. Well, you know (or assume) this person drinks coffee or will at some point before next Christmas (when someone else gets them a coffee mug).

Much like the ornament, this would have been much more useful, you know, the day before, so they could've put the ornament on the tree when there was still space on it or made coffee in the morning. But they'll have one next year!

The Gift Card:

You either have no imagination or know this person well enough to know that may shop at Target at some point in the next six months. It at least has some use and can't really go wrong. That is, of course, assuming you didn't give someone the above card. Whoops.

Okay, let me as one question. Why is money not a proper Christmas gift? You can get gift cards and certificates (if you live in the 90's) but you can't get straight cash (homie). It just doesn't make sense. You get money, whether in cash or check form, for birthdays, bar mitzvahs, graduations, first communions, and confirmations; but, you never get money for Christmas. This is stupid.

Alcohol:

1: You got this for an underage person. You've broken the law, but you are also the coolest person in the world in that person's mind. You also need to rethink your gift-giving because this person most likely got the same thing last weekend and will vomit in your back seat.

2: You got this for someone of legal drinking age. Unless it's really nice wine, this is equivalent to getting someone a really nice 2-liter of Pepsi.

The Funny T-shirt:

Well, you got someone a t-shirt. It's either A) actually funny or cool or B) is terrible and is a waste of underprivileged child labor in Indonesia. Good job.

The Computer, Laptop, TV, or Video Game Console

There is a god!

The Terrible Video Game/Movie

You hate this person. Why... why would you do this?

Ok, you apparently know that this person likes video games, movies, or whatever; but, you didn't take the five seconds out of your life to find a decent item. Seriously, google.com, "most popular new video games," "good new movies," "books that don't suck."

My aunt did this to me once. I never told her about it. Sorry auntie.

-Nick O'Malley

The Hell That is Finals Season

2008-12-10T11:39:00.000-08:00

As you struggle for a seat at a computer in the lower deck of the library, battle group members for that final project that you've been pulling your hair out over and plead with teachers to extend the deadlines of that dreaded 20 page paper, try you best to remember one thing - you'll be able to shower yourself in the holiday season soon enough.

But in the meantime, it would be in your best interest and in the interest of others to do the following:

1. If you're using a computer at the library and you see people scouring the technological terrain for a free computer, be reasonable. When people who are desperately trying to get work done on one of the available OIT computers because their personal computer is flaring up with more viruses than Pamela Anderson or has been taken offline for the infamous "copy right violations," there is nothing worse than waiting for the group of hyena sounding girls to free up their computer that's been Facebook for the past 45 minutes. Rude.

2. If you have a big group project or presentation, show some team effort. Sending in your part of the assignment a half an hour before it's due is borderline reason enough for getting your car keyed. It's understandable that you have other work and commitments to attend to, but so does everyone else in your group.

3. For your own self betterment during this Dante's Inferno of a week, keep yourself in good condition. You want to be a well oiled machine for the fast track you're heading down. Although you think it's near impossible to catch up on sleep, make sure you get as much as you can. Even if it means a cat nap on one of the couches in Bartlet or in the lower dungeon of the Campus Center, every little bit counts. Also, as much as stress can take away even the more fierce of appetites, try to give your bod something to run on other than coffee. Also, it's beneficial to take the time to rest your wary mind in between cramming knowledge into it's every crevice and the 20 minutes or so it's takes to have a good meal is a great opportunity to take that break.

4. Possibly the hardest thing to remember during this killer time is to breathe. Getting yourself worked up over grades, time management, and work load are usually superfluous worries when it's crunch time. Do what you can, when you can and at the best of your ability. Lots of people (including myself!), spend more time worrying about what they have to do rather than doing it. It's only a disservice to yourself (and to the ulcer that is most likely growing in your stomach) at this point to focus on what you can't control.

5. The best thing (in the world, ever) when you're stressed out is - of course - a back massage. Bribe anyone and everyone to rub the stress-laced knots out from your back and in return, give them a little back love. Sitting at a computer screen all day staring at endless pages of black and white is torture on your spine. The relief that you feel after you've been pampered a little is the best. I also recommend ample amounts of chocolate (or chocolate's lusty subordinate, if you're so inclined) before or after a massage. It's the icing on the cake, really. (That was slightly dirty, oh well)

All in all, I wish you all the best of luck in your academic endeavors. I hope you're successful in keeping your head above water while still maintaining a good sense of happiness.

~Leigh Greaney

On the Worm and Its Host

2008-12-03T09:23:00.001-08:00

Well, it appears that my column yesterday generated a fair helping of controversy among the campus Muslim community. Good. I hate it when people nod and smile.

Upon attending the Arab Student Club's coffee-house last night (which I apparently shouldn't have done according to one commenter on the Collegian's website) a member of said Muslim community (not naming names, but a really cool guy) explained to me the error of my lack of clarity. Apparently quite a few people think that I've reinforced, or at least left open to reinforcement, the stereotype that all Muslims are terrorists.

So here's the corrections. I will explain my precise views upon the relationship between Muslims and terrorists. Also, I don't write those stupid headlines; my original headline was just "Oh Shit Mumbai", since when a terrorist attack actually happens there's really nothing more to say than "Oh shit". Also, "the Ramallah"? There's only one Ramallah; it's a city in the West Bank.

First, however, I'd like to ask a question: Does any person worth taking seriously really think all Muslims are terrorists?

Anyway... the precise relationship of Islamic terrorists to Muslims is that of a parasite to its host. The host (Muslims) exists independently of the parasite (Islamism, or Islamic Fascism), but the parasite cannot live without the host. Specifically, Islamist groups rely upon having a population of socially or economically oppressed, and preferably uneducated, Muslims from which to recruit.

A modern Islamist group tends to arise and maintain its existence for a mix of two reasons. Firstly, an established Islamist regime like the Shia government of Iran or the Wahhabists of Saudi Arabia may seek to exert influence over a population. Secondly, a population in a Muslim area perceives itself as having been invaded by a foreign power or occupier, as in Iraq (which really has been invaded and occupied by a foreign power), "Palestine" (which has been counter-invaded by its natives, who then proceeded to construct an idiotic military occupation...), or Lebanon (where there was an invasion and occupation, but it ended). Thus, Islamist groups are characterized by religious-fascist ideology based on the imperialism of the earliest Muslims and by recruitment/self-justification using the "resistance" and "revolution" rhetoric of 20th-century Communism (which actually fools many Western leftists into siding with Islamists on Middle-Eastern politics to this day). Most importantly, these groups rely on a steady stream of new recruits due to the way they tend to have their established mujahadeen (deliberately) die for the cause. This means that some Muslims somewhere, usually near the regions in which jihad takes place, must support the terrorism for it to continue. "Death to the infidel" may not be the slogan of all Muslims, but it is most definitely the slogan of a noticeable segment of the Middle-Eastern (and Pakistani) Muslim populations defined by their willingness to fight or materially aid the stated goal of expelling the Western and Jewish occupiers from what they think are Muslim lands.

Note that phrase: "stated goal", because of course Islamism only has one true aim: to establish for its own leaders an empire in the Middle East and traditionally Muslim regions of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh from which those leaders can wage a megalomaniacal jihad to convert the entire world to Islam or the state of dhimmi (subjugation to Muslim rulers) at the end of a gun. Hell, oftentimes those same leaders are too stupid not to say that outright and spout it off to the whole world, and the Mumbai terrorists hunting down a Chabad House to attack in India certainly belies this true motive.

Now we return to the genuine point of yesterday's column: almost the entire world Muslim population has caught on to the lie. Not only are the more traditionally moderate Muslims opposing terrorism, the host populations who used to send their sons to Islamism have begun opposing it. Iraqis wish for a third choice in the false dichotomy between Islamist "resistance" and American occupation. While Hizballah has succeeded in making Lebanese culture more religious, a recent article in the New York Times says that the secular people have not had any very substantial restrictions placed upon their own lives and everyone resents Hizballah's bringing the IDF back to Lebanon. Even in Palestine, Islamism is going out of fashion in favor of old-fashioned Palestinian nationalism, because people see with their own eyes that Hamas haven't made life better for anyone except their own higher-ups. In the Arab emirates where enough money can buy any sin, it never stood a ghost of a chance. And in America, where biting prejudice forces incoming Muslims, like all new immigrant groups to America (yeah, we all went through this guys... the Jews, the Mexicans, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Indians... the hicks always hate you for your first generation or so in the country... it'll get better!), to quickly Americanize themselves, I've met Muslims who have no almost no conception of how Islamic terrorism can legitimize itself, because these American Muslims grew up entirely around other peaceful Muslims.

Last weeks terrorist attack in Mumbai killed almost 200 people, but they may yet also kill Islamism itself. Muslims don't want to be oppressed by religious dictators any more than they want to be oppressed by the American military (and accompanying mercenaries and oil-company employees), and now even those who once supported Islamism in the name of liberating themselves can quite clearly see that religious oppression is the fruit of Islamism, not a more free Muslim world.

Remember the "Busy Work" Column?

2008-11-18T20:04:00.001-08:00

Remember how I complained that web-homework systems don't work for shit?

Remember how addition is commutative?

Not in OWL it ain't.

Presidential Pup.

2008-11-13T11:38:00.000-08:00

Boston Globe columnist Sam Allis weighed in on the example Barack Obama set by promising his kids a dog in his acceptance speech.

A few days ago, so did Bill Kristol

In our own Collegian poll, the Wheaton Terrier, my personal pick, is kicking ass. Though for the record I prefer dogs from shelters, because I've always liked underdogs, from Ralph Nader to, well, Underdog.

The Obamas might also consider a cat.

S.P.

Well Look at That

2008-11-05T06:29:00.000-08:00

Well, United States of America. I must say you've surpassed my expectations. I expected John McCain to win this election by theft if not by vote. As a matter of fact, Barack Obama won with 52% of the popular vote to McCain's 46% and a landslide in the Electoral College.

So congratulations, United States of America. You managed to turn off the TV, suppress your near-terminal oil addiction, look past religious demagoguery, and show a bit of courage in the face of a challenge to vote in a decent man for President. You earned that victory speech he gave you, too.

Now, however, comes the hard bit. You've elected a leader who ran from day 1 on a platform of hope and change, but Obama spoke absolute truth when he said that change does not come from above, from the federal government to the people. The federal government can do great things for this country, but only if you, the people, allow it to. Now that we have the leader for change, let us see if the people actually can change.

You voted in Barack Obama. Now we must see if you will earn Barack Obama.

Of course, this all assumes nobody assassinates him.

...Or not

2008-11-04T20:04:00.000-08:00

This is a place for opinion and bias. If you don't want that, go to the news blog.

Without further ado:
Obama Wins. Suck it long and suck it hard.

McCain Wins!

2008-11-04T16:27:00.000-08:00

It's 7:35 and I'm officially declaring senator John McCain as the next president of the United States.

He currently holds an 8-3 lead over senator Barack Obama, a lead that, according to this guy I know, has never been surmounted.

With a mere 270 votes to go for McCain, it's only a matter of time until he is named the winner.

This in depth analysis is based off of the yahoo.com headline "The results are in" and the fact that in the two pictures next to the headlines, McCain is smiling slightly more. You can't argue with facts.

I mean, in hockey terms, this thing's over. No one comes back from five down, it doesn't happen. And McCains the damn Maverick. He doesn't let the snake from his grasp once he's got it by the...snake... or something like that.

To vote or not to vote

2008-11-04T14:19:00.000-08:00

The electronic voting booth screen in my precinct has a button you can press at the bottom left hand corner - it says (roughly) "abstain from voting."

Should someone even bother schlepping over to the voting station if they're just going to exercise there right not to vote? Or is it a strong statement? Now there's a record of people who came to vote just to say they're not endorsing any candidate.

-Melissa

No, this is.

2008-11-04T11:13:00.000-08:00

Whenever there's a big protest on campus, in a big city, or on the Mall in DC, the crowd inevitably gets to chanting:

[CALL]: "Show me what democracy looks like!"

[RESPONSE]: "This is what democracy looks like!"

Catchy, but inaccurate. Democracy doesn't look like an organized crowd or an angry mob. It looks like a diverse group of individuals dragging themselves to public places to cast their ballots.

I voted today at the North Fire Station, just above Sylvan. The views to the east and west are half decent, from the hilltop. I thought about the 3,000 mile stretch of land we inhabit, and the millions of everyday people getting out on their own two feet to make what might be the most important decision.

Voting is a powerful thing, and election day is a day to be proud of, if only quietly so.

It's 2:22 PM, and that's my opinion.

Don't Worry, Be Happy

2008-11-04T07:57:00.002-08:00

Looks like Obama's going to win and its a good thing...Peggy Joseph certainly needs him.

Good thing Barack's gonna take it, otherwise we'd have to pay for our gas and mortgage, but now we can quit our jobs! It'd be funny if I didn't have reason to believe that a very large portion of Obama supporters harbor views equally as irrational as Peggy's. Same goes for McCain supporters.

Thus is our democracy.

Voting Schmoting

2008-11-03T15:53:00.000-08:00

In part to respond to the post below, and in part because I want hate mail, I'd like to talk about how irrational voting tomorrow actually is.

I live in a suburb ten minutes north of Boston. Today after class I drove two hours all the way home (disregarding the precious time I would have had to write my column for the Collegian this week, finish up homework due, et cetera) because I was a slacker and forgot to get an absentee ballot. So, tomorrow (voting day) I have to get up at 6:30 am, vote, leave for another two hour ride back to school and make it in time for my first class. I'll be exhausted, unprepared, and grouchy.

So, just minutes ago I'm surfing around online and come across this video of economist Gordon Tullock telling me an argument that I've heard before, but didn't need to hear at this particular point in time (being so preemptively sleepy and grouchy as I am over going through all this trouble to vote).

Watch this. He's saying voting is irrational because the chances your voting is going to make any difference in the election is less likely than winning the mega-millions lottery.

People say that claiming "my vote doesn't count" is a cop out. People say that if i don't vote I have no right to say anything about the election or the issues. Truth is, I've done more by provoking the interest of my friends and family (through conversations and intellectual intercourse), and strangers I'll never meet (through my columns at the Collegian) about real issues than I ever could through voting. I've done more to rightfully claim my thoughtfulness and regard for important national and international issues by my own independent study and my devotion to the classes of my PoliSci major than voting ever could do me.

So to the vote or die crowd, I say "Relax, I voted." But tomorrow morning when I'm unprepared for class, poorer from the gas money I wasted, tired from the sleep I lost, and grouchy because of the rush I was in to get to class from two hours away...I'll sure wish I didn't. And I probably shouldn't have.

listen to p.diddy.

2008-11-03T11:13:00.000-08:00

okay, so maybe vote or die is a little extreme.
but, the heart of the matter still beats strong.
tomorrow is the cause to a four years effect.
as american citizens, you have an option to be part of the butterfly effect.

i understand the voting process can be a little confusing or disagreeable to some.
it takes time out of your day. it takes effort to figure out what precinct you need to show up at. it takes time to decide who/what you want to vote for. all and all, it seems to be a good deal of time and effort. i know your time is precious, one day is minuscule compared to the four years of reflected result.

here's a time saver:

find out where you vote (if you're registered) here.
find out what the ballot questions are, what they mean, and what they'll do here.

making choices makes us part of a whole.
making choices that directly effect america, as a whole, makes us americans.
this is a democracy. if we refuse to act as a one of the many dominoes that fall in place landing on our future leader and changes to law, we will still will feel the earthquake of that fall.

why not be part of the cause if the effect is an imminent part of your life?

the excuse that "voting doesn't really make a difference" is a cop out.

be part of your america tomorrow.
exercise your rights.

vote.

-leigh greaney

What's a debate?

2008-10-29T08:54:00.000-07:00

I wrote my column this week on the ongoing assault on American intellectuality, the diminishing of diverse thoughts and the marginalization of critical thinking.

Debates are supposed to be the culmination of intellectuality, where great thinkers and great ideas clash through dialogue in the search for truth (i.e. Plato's Dialogues). We should expect our Presidential Debates to be just that, a tremendous give and take where policies and ideas battle in an attempt to discover what's best for our country.

Yet, it's quite clear that nothing has developed out of this election's debates. Each candidate merely harped upon the same talking points and each successive debate merely became a sickening repeat of the last. No development of ideas, just repetition of talking-points.

Just watch this clip, synching the debates together. Did we get anywhere?

Get the latest news satire and funny videos at 236.com.

Just doing my part

2008-10-21T22:26:00.000-07:00

It has been well-reported that The Daily Collegian has undergone financial turmoil, long before the economy broke and Wall Street embraced socialism and welfare.

"We're back on point and making money," editor-in-chief Michael King told The Daily Hampshire Gazette in September, adding that the Collegian had over $25,000 in net income at the end of the 2008 fiscal year. "We're really on our way."

However, we at The Collegian are still far from economic independence, still relying on loans from the SGA that they like to bring up every time we make them look bad - you know, for the sake of transparency.

Well, tonight I was night editing and discovered a bounty of untapped resources in the Collegian Graphics "graveyard."

So I decided to do my part.

"Suggestion: The Massachusetts Daily Collegian should alleviate debt accrued from past unscrupulous spending by selling off its chair surplus," I wrote in an attached memo to "edi-chair in chief" King. "I have compiled our resources for a speedy and efficient liquidation."

I placed the chairs where Mike would find them as soon as he came in on Wednesday. I think this is an issue that should be addressed immediately.

And then I signed it.

S.P.

Humans v. Zombies: Losers Losers Losers!

2008-10-16T20:16:00.000-07:00

First off, sorry Melissa. I hope you don't kick me off the Collegian staff.

The show must go on.

The participants of Humans vs. Zombies are all losers. Literally. A bunch of losers. Sour puss losers. Neckbeard losers. McCain losers. Big dirty losers. It must be noted, direly, that I am using the term in its most literal sense - although not completely. Everyone who participates in Humans vs. Zombies is a loser.

"Why, why, why?!" You ask. "These young folk are just trying to have fun. They want some exercise. They need to run around to get their runner's high, the only high they'll ever get. They meet people this way. Maybe one of them will talk to a girl for the first time, albeit that she is a zombie who only wants to eat his brain!"

You're missing the point. The whole point of the game is to lose. To be a loser. The only winners of the game are those who are the first zombies. The original five zombies - representing one for each of the five sections of campus.

Frankly, the casting for these original five zombies upset me. I find it no coincidence the zombie from Central ran around with a joint in his mouth, the one from Northeast was an Asian, the one from Orchard Hill refused to not carry around his Math textbook, the one from Southwest was a rejected football jock, and the one from Sylvan was a transexual anime fiend. What, are we trying to give in to stereotypes now?

These five zombies are the only ones who got it right. They knew if they didn't choose to be a zombie they would be a loser eventually. See, the thing is, these five zombies slowly got the humans. And those humans turned to zombies. And then those zombies got other humans, turning them into zombies. And so on. This system makes everyone but one person a zombie, thus, it makes everyone but one person a loser.

And for that one person, he truly is worth much more than the dishonor of being called a loser. I'm not even joking.

See, they really are are losers. They sign up to play a game where it is literally impossible not to be a loser.

Sadly, though, this whole idea was ignited by my utmost curiosity as to why these people actually walked around with the bandanna on. "You idiots!" I thought, "You know you can't win if you do that! You eventually will be tagged and turned into a zombie!" What this means is, if I were playing, I would sign up and not walk around with a bandanna on. That way, I would never and could never get tagged, and I would probably win, as long as I didn't have to do any check ups, participate in anything to do with feeding the hungry homeless people, and definitely not actually touch any of these players or play with them.

I'm not sure what that implies. To me, it implies that I'm a winner, and I win by any costs, and that all these hundreds of people are losers, who will lose at any cost.

Throwing a wrench at Joe the Plumber

2008-10-16T13:12:00.000-07:00

During last night's presidential debate, an Ohio man named Joe Wurzelbacher took center stage. Wurzerlbacher, better known to the country as "Joe the Plumber" was the centerpiece of John McCain's attacks on Barack Obama's tax plan.

Under Obama's plan, McCain claims, small business workers, like Joe, would receive tax hikes and struggle to continue their business.

Joe the Plumber is currently seeking to purchase the company that he works for, but under Obama, he would receive fines and higher taxes.

Shut up Joe, no one cares.

The detail that is left out of McCain's argument is that, with the business, the poor plumber would be making over $250,000 per year, placing him into the section in which Barack Obama would be raising taxes.

According to Obama, his intended tax increase for those that make more than $250,000 per year would only affect about five percent of the U.S. for everyone else, Obama claimed, there will be a tax decrease.

Not that McCain cares.

With the plight of poor six-figure salary Joe the Plumber in mind, McCain repeatedly declared that Obama was raising taxes. McCain argued that, in the country's current economic crisis, no one should be getting higher taxes.

Especially rich people - rich people love John McCain.

The argument boils town to the pure democratic and republican views on taxes. Republicans want to keep the money they make, democrats want to "spread the wealth." And that's not getting settled any time soon.

Joe the Plumber's had his fifteen minutes of fame. We've heard the struggle of this real-life Mario and he crawls out of his economic hole because he can't purchase the company he works for.

Poor Joe, his life's going down the drain.

Nothing wrong with a little HvZ action

2008-10-16T12:01:00.000-07:00

Now that HvZ has started up again for its third semester, I thought I'd take a little bit of time to defend the game. To start off, I don't play. I will never play it. I have no interest in nerf guns and zombies. But that doesn't mean I think everyone who does choose to participate is some sort of weird enigma.

Unlike many of my peers, I don't brand players as mouth-breather nerds who can't get laid. I don't understand why so many college students have gotten on their high horse to condemn people having a good time.

When did college students become pillars of maturity? Sure, shooting marshmallows at "zombies" with nerf guns is juvenille. But who cares? What is so great about what the rest of us are doing?

At least HvZ is doing something truly great. In just two semesters, players contributed a ton and half of food to the Western Massachusetts Food Bank. This year, the game is hosting a blood drive.

Over 1000 students have played HvZ. How many RSO's are engaging that many students on campus in just three semesters? So not only is HvZ keeping students occupied, but the game is also contributing to the community.

HvZ isn't for everyone, but that doesn't mean we have the right to unfairly judge those who do choose to play. You don't have to like it. I don't even like it when the sock launching gets a little to close for comfort. But I respect what HvZ is doing and has done in the past and so should you.

-Melissa

Be Weary of Power: Thoughts on the Financial Bailout

2008-10-15T12:36:00.000-07:00

One of the most astonishing things about this most recent excessive usurpation of power by the federal government and the Federal Reserve is perhaps not the depth and extent of power now held by these institutions, but rather the failure of many to object to such a seizure of power. Economist Arnold Kling chimes in:

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/10/the_political_e_1.html

Note from the Underground #1

2008-10-13T23:21:00.000-07:00

Herein commence my digital contributions.

It's 2:22 AM. I'm settled into the Learning Commons with a Coca-Cola Zero (Coca-Cola proper was sold out @ Chadbourne vending ...,) a pack of Camel Reds and four unwritten pages of 'close reading.'

('Close reading' is a painful process of textual analysis. A frustrating rock, upon which an English major's degree is built.)

There are only a few of us here -- from my console I count 8, including myself, in the main computer block.

Per usual, I will spend much too much of the night with MS Word closed, and Firefox open. Facebook is the great black hole of undergraduate time. It will suck up my early morning hours, and drive me to a desperate last-minute rush. I will compose my first page in two hours, and my last page in twenty minutes.

Often during the week, I stand in the line for the computers here and fume at the Facebook-checkers, YouTube-watchers and MySpace-updaters who are wasting away my precious daylight internet time. I might need to send a few quick emails, or print a paper for my next class.

Standard fare.

As long as my needs are academic, I'll allow myself to be secretly self-righteous. "Who do these people think they are?" "Why doesn't someone yell at them?" "I would never be caught dead checking Facebook instead of working ..."

Put a computer in front of me, and my tune changes. I want to update my status. I want to tweak my "Favorite Movies" entry. I wonder if that Springsteen show in July was really as good as they say. I check "YouTube." I'm guilty on all charges.

It's getting near 3:00, which, as you know, is the officially accepted start-time for 'close-reading.' Homework calls.

The moral of the story is this: unless you are 100% immune to Facebook-checking, YouTube-watching and the likes, you are no longer allowed to complain. Not even to yourself.

It's 2:58 AM, and that's my opinion.

James M.

Justice for Jason, The Collegian's complicity and UMass Yak Back!

2008-10-09T18:19:00.000-07:00

Recently, The Collegian drew the ire of the Committee for Justice for Jason Vassell, a community group advocating justice for a UMass student who allegedly stabbed two men that attacked him and yelled racial slurs.

The Collegian has covered the case in recent months, and ran a column written by SGA Speaker Shaun Robinson this spring in Vassell's defense.

The CJJV took exception with a column by Alana Goodman, however, which was critical of CJJV and expressed skepticism over Vassell's innocence. Student Government Association President Malcolm Chu demanded The Collegian print his 1,800 word response, unedited.

I used to edit the section, and I can tell you this is something that would never, ever fly.

Chu and the CJJV were told they could have 750 words in response to Goodman, which is in of itself an exception that is occasionally made for special circumstances. The typical limit for a letter is 550 words.

They weren't having it. I would have liked to tell the CJJV that their letter, which can be found here, could've been under limit if they cut out those pesky modifiers like "dismissively," "reckless," "irresonsible," etc. In their defense, Goodman used quite a bit of them, too - bemoaning those "furious activists" - but she kept it under word limit, at least.

I digress.

The CJJV website said that The Collegian published Goodman's piece "without reservation" - members of CCJV can't possibly understand why the racist Daily Collegian wouldn't publish Chu's "Honest Look at Justice for Jason," for which he provided no sources, unedited.

The SGA tried a similar stunt last year when they asked us to print their "news story" about the student strike, written by their own members in the first person, on the front page of the paper.

These are smart, dedicated and good-intentioned human beings. But they have no clue how a newspaper works. None.

Again, I used to edit the section, and I can tell you we're terrified when stuff like Goodman's piece comes in. But we're also first amendment-o-philes, and we don't dare shut someone up just because what they have to say is controversial.

I pored over the police report Goodman handed in with her column. Despite allegations to the contrary, she did have one, and she did quote it accurately - if not selectively - in stating her case. People were incredulous that a college journalist would have access to such privileged information as a police report.

They should familiarize themselves with the Freedom of Information Act.

The "factual errors" that Chu and Vassell's attorneys "corrected" in their letters were made by the police, not Goodman, if they were made at all.

I am not of the opinion that Goodman's piece is an accurate account of what happened that night in Southwest. I think the CJJV and Vassell's lawyers were right in responding to Goodman's piece, which detractors claimed was "biased."

Well, I hope it was biased - it was in the opinion section.

But Goodman is entitled to her opinion, which I don't agree with, just as CJJV is entitled to theirs, which I also don't agree with.

Goodman's most solid argument - the one she should have focused more attention to, and less attention to trying to prove Jason Vassell guilty with a police report - is that the CJJV has left out facts.

Of course they have. They are a well-intentioned advocacy group, and what they are doing is great. But advocacy groups always skew things in their favor. While I am sympathetic to the CJJV's cause, their attempts to lionize Vassell, rather than humanize him, are misguided.

Anyway, beloved blog-dwellers, I urge you to familiarize yourselves with the subject. Read The Collegian's news stories on the case. Read Robinson's column; read Goodman's column; read Chu's and Vassell's attorney's responses; read them all. And make up your mind.

Because a man's life is at stake - a member of our community nonetheless.

Goodman appeared on UMass Yak Back!, everyone's favorite editorial talk show which I produce with UVC's Matt Volpini [he does the better part of the producin']. On the panel were Afro American Studies professer Ekwueme Michael Thelwell and yours truly, the hapless buffer between the two.

Without further ado, this is UMass Yak Back!:

S.P.

Check out Nick playing the Bassoon

2008-10-09T09:05:00.000-07:00

First!

2008-10-07T13:11:00.001-07:00

With the editorial/opinion section's triumphant transition to the Internet, it seems only appropriate to discuss the rabble that inhabits this electronic realm.

With the advent of message boards, digg.com, farm.com, 4chan.com and countless other internet forums that are laden with inflammatory comments and communities of sarcasm and cynisism. That's not to say that everyone on these sites are terrible people, they just act like it.

There's a well known equation that directly explains how people behave while on the internet:
"Normal person + Annonymity + Audience = Douchebag."

Just look at any youtube video or blog, you'll see negative comments for some of the most obscure things. I have a youtube video of my bassoon teacher and I playing flight of the bumblebee on bassoon at a community concert. We didn't have much time to practice, so it wasn't very good.

The Internet could care less, though. The video, posted so my mom and my teacher could see it, somehow now has 20,870 views and has 109 comments, which include:
"I know whats next, two cats, a chainsaw and and electric knife! " -keeppeacer
"00:30 sounds like screwed up pokemon yellow version when doing missing no. cheat....." DrKiwiHouse
And finally,
"We'll never forget that cause it sucks. " -itsnotanoboe

Only time will tell how this blog will end up. We certainly have some characters in the ed/op section and have some equally colorful commenters on the Daily Collegian website.

Hopefully, this blog will prove impervious to the pressures of the annonymous rabble on the internet. And if you do end up not liking this, well...

STFU N00b

Welcome to the Ed-Op Blog

2008-10-06T15:06:00.001-07:00

This is the official Ed-Op blog for the Massachusetts Daily Collegian at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Blog posters are Ed-Op columnists who seek to voice their opinions in a new medium. Let's face it, there are never enough pages in the newspaper to accommodate everyone's beliefs.

This blog solves that problem.