Anish Mitra
I have been to India three times in my life,and thus,I believe that I should be George W.Bush’s Secretary of State because I have developed foreign policy experience beyond human comprehension. I know how others view America, especially Indians. I also believe that I am more qualified in the foreign policy realm than Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.),even if we take into account his time spent in Indonesia. Furthermore, and with all due respect to Indonesians of course, India is more important than Indonesia, despite the similarities in their respective spellings; as a result, my experience is more valuable. However, although I have already demonstrated that my back-ground is far more of an asset than his, Senator Obama and I differ on one key issue: I have not done any lines of cocaine.
Lily Tran
It is that time of year again. As autumn has set in, and as the leaves have run the gamut from brown to red to bright yellow,the smell of pumpkin pie seems to be constantly wafting through the air, and hundreds of naked Brown students make their way toward Alumnae Hall. Ah, SexPowerGod. What would we ever do without it?
That exact question was taken up on Tuesday,November 6,at a debate concerning the existence of SexPowerGod on campus of Brown University. As a somewhat objective observer, it was clear that the most important point in the round was made by Joshua Unseth when he argued that no one wants any permanent proof of attending the party.
The truth is, if SexPowerGod is meant to push people’s per-sonal boundaries and allow them to explore their sexuality, why is there a charge for admission to the event? Why are people so ashamed of how they are dressed that very night? Through no fault of the QA, why do others insist on showing up to the event wasted?
Kristina Kelleher
While members of our staff frequently discuss the issues of race and inequality, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, and rationally-minded students across the coun-try, achieved a victory on November 2nd when the University of Delaware agreed to drop its ideological reeducation program designed to cure the approximately 7,000 students in Delaware’s residence halls for their racist attitudes and beliefs. Among other things, the University of Delaware set the record strait on racism.According to their program,a racist is: “one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (rac-ist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class,gender, religion, culture or sexuality.”
Andrew Kurtzman
Brown University is currently sifting through early applications for the class of 2012 – doesn’t that make you feel old? This cycle is especially interesting: both Harvard University and Princeton University have abolished their early admissions pro-grams (See “The Battle for Applicants,” The Brown Spectator,Feb. 2007). This means that, when the University releases figures (which they may well do as this issue goes to press), we will see a larger early-applicant pool. This also means that, during the regular cycle,Brown will likely receive several thousand applicants that it otherwise would not have received – individuals who would have committed early to Harvard or Princeton. Of course, many of these individuals will still commit to Harvard or Princeton when admitted regularly, making Brown’s admissions game even more unpredictable than it normally is; yield on admitted regular-applicants will certainly drop, dramatically increasing the likeli-hood that we will over-enroll. My prediction? Keeney septuples will be a hot commodity in next year’s lottery.
Sean Quigley
It always amazes me that so many college students claim to be non-conformist, anti-authority individualists, while in real-ity they can often be the most predictable, militantly conformist bunch in all of society. The confused and awkward faces, often from the clueless drifters who claim to be movers and shakers,which stare me down whenever I brave to wear a tie around cam-pus, are evidence enough of this glaring contradiction. Greater still, however, is the evidence presented by the recent poll, from The Brown Daily Herald (“Brown loves Ruth: Simmons’ approval rating still sky-high,” Nov. 27, 2007), that showed that 84.9% of students either strongly approve or somewhat approve of Presi-dent never-seen-her-once-around-campus Simmons. She is es-sentially a phantom,and a mighty expensive one,yet students line up like sheep to sing her praises, while concurrently denouncing President Bush for any number of trumped-up faults. Perhaps those hordes would become truly non-conformist, and write for The Brown Spectator while dressed in traditional attire?
Christopher McAuliffe
The right to fail: “May the Family Court properly recognize,for the purpose of entertaining a divorce petition, the mar-riage of two persons of the same sex who were purportedly married in another state?” Such is the question now to be taken up by the Rhode Island Supreme Court in the case of Margaret Chambers and Cassandra Ormiston, a lesbian couple who, having obtained a civil marriage under the laws of Massachusetts, are now seeking to dissolve the union in their home state.Conservatives have often pointed out the very real danger of a national, creeping imposition of same-sex marriage by judicial fiat, a fear that this case does nothing to allay.Still,the controversy has not been without its own manner of redeeming value in the form of unintentional humor.”We have the same right to fail as anyone else,” claims Ormiston.Ah, yes, the unalienable right to fail.While not quite Jeffersonian in its ringing appeal to human liberty, such a statement does at least clarify what is at stake for liberals in this issue.
