Monday, December 30, 2002

Freedom of Association

Fire has out an excellent press release today on two universities that are actively restricting their students' Freedom of Association. A quick summary:
The InterVarsity Multi-Ethnic Christian Fellowship (IVMECF), a Christian Group at Rutgers University, has been banned from using campus facilities and stripped of university funding because it selected its leadership on the basis of religious belief. In an identical situation, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (UNC) has threatened similar punishment for the InterVarsity Christian Fellowship (IVCF)�as well as for other Christian organizations at UNC�because it also used religion as a criterion in the selection of its leadership.

Constitutionally implied freedom of association brings with it the freedom to exclude, especially in recent years. In Roberts v. United States Jaycees (1984), the Supreme Court recognized the right of organizations to determine their membership using explicitly (and non-arbitrary) selective membership criteria. But in Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte (1987), the Court limited its Roberts ruling: an organization's exclusive membership criteria must be read in the context of the group's mission.

As FIRE notes, Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000) provides some precedent as well, in that it specifically grants groups freedom from the forced inclusion of members whose presence "affects in a significant way the group�s ability to advocate public or private viewpoints."

Both groups in question now have open membership policies; that's not the issue. The issue is actually narrow in light of precedent: does the First Amendment's implied protection of selective criteria apply to groups with open memberships but restricted leaderships? The answer to this question necessarily applies to the policies of Rutgers and UNC, both state universities and so bound to uphold students' constitutional rights.

The two groups' specific, non-arbitrary or -incidental selection criteria and explicitly religious mission -- plus, perhaps, the extent to which that's tied up with protected religious practice -- would seem to call for an extension of the Roberts and Duarte rulings.

Finally, it is worth considering the sort of double standard that policies of the sort pursued by Rutgers and UNC create in today's university environment. Consider which sort of groups are the most exclusionary on university campuses. Speaking from my experiences at Dartmouth, groups with ethnic or sexual bases appear to be the worst offenders in terms of barring outsiders from their meetings and membership. A Dartmouth student need only look in the Women's Resource Center (or whatever they're calling it now) bulletin board to discover a vast array of events that he or she is explicitly barred from attending (unless the student in question is a bisexual, multi-ethnic hermaphrodite). While a student, I was asked to leave meetings of GLBTQAHGSODHG (yes, I made up those last few letters...probably) students, black students, and female students -- sometimes even by representatives of the College -- because my presence as straight white male was unwelcome. So be it. Rutgers (of which I have some first-hand knowledge) and UNC (admittedly, only second-hand) both support a myriad of such explicitly exclusionary groups. Groups that, unlike these InterVarsity Christian Fellowships under fire, don't even allow open membership, let alone leadership.

Rutgers and UNC pursue a politically-based, entirely arbitrary, and utterly indefensible double standard borne of some malice to the practice of religion, specifically Christianity. It is fortunate that these schools, being public, may not infringe upon their students' rights and that groups like FIRE are on the case when they inevitably do.

Who can use the Indian?

"If anyone�s earned the right to use the Indian logo, it�s UNC-Pembroke," said alumnus Bruce Barton to Frontpage.

Pembroke, originally the Croatan Normal School, was founded at the request of the Lumbee tribe in 1887. The school received a letter from the NCAA earlier this year demanding that it justify its "racially offensive" logo and team name, the Braves. Pembroke's case will be heard by the NCAA in late January.

"We�re going to fight this because it is not appropriate for the NCAA to order us to remove it because the American Indians cherish having the brave emblem," said Pembroke Chancellor Dr. Allen Meadors. "It�s political correctness run amok."

The more intesting angle is in the backstory, involving St. Cloud president and NCAA Division II officer Roy Hirofumi Saigo, who began his crusade against Indian mascots while teaching at Berkeley and is responsible for the NCAA's recent anti-Indian policies. "Someday our children and grandchildren will look back and say, 'Of course we got rid of the practice of American Indian mascots'," said Saigo at a conference on mascots held at St. Cloud last year.

Saigo made his case to the NCAA in March of 2001, claiming that the NCAA's values "are not served by the perpetuation of derogatory and stereotypical American Indian mascots, logos and nicknames as representatives of some of the organization's teams." And the result of his lobbying are bullying letters of the sort received by Pembroke.

Given issues like drug use among athletes, academic standards, Title IX, the continuing commercialization (and professionalization) of college sports, and spiraling athletic costs at many member schools (not to mention antitrust exemptions...), doesn't the NCAA have better things to do with its resources than pursue an unpopular quest against an institution generally favored by those it allegedly injures the most?

So who's against Indian mascots, then? Saigo cites (same link as above) these groups: the NAACP, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the American Jewish Committee, the National Organization of Women, and the United States Commission on Civil Rights. Well, in that case...

Sunday, December 29, 2002

Rewriting Title IX

In the mid-1990s, officials at the University of Rhode Island faced a quandary: the school had about 100 more male athletes than female athletes... So the school trimmed a little from each of the men's sports and added a women's rowing team in 1997, says Lauren Anderson, associate director of athletic programs.

Men's sports programs at colleges receiving federal funding--nearly all of them--have similarly suffered the fallout of Title IX since 1972, and growing female student populations have made effects of the law even more acute over the past decade. To be sure, at some schools, massive spending on football and other marquee men's sports has driven, in concert with Title IX, the demise of less popular programs as administrators seek to equalize (with respect to the makeup of the student body) participation and funding (as well as causing a raft of other problems), but Title IX has directly killed a great number of viable men's teams, for the sake of equality.

To assess compliance in athletics, Title IX regulations currently impose a three-pronged test. Schools must be able to show 1) that the rates of athletic participation of the sexes are "'substantially proportionate' to their respective undergraduate enrollments", 2) that the school has "a history and continuing practice of program expansion that is responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex (typically female)", and 3) that the school meets "the interests and abilities of its female students" in athletic offerings.

It is the first prong that has caused so much damage to men's sports as colleges strive for mandated proportionality. The first prong is also where Title IX athletic regulation goes beyond equal opportunity into the realm of affirmative action, applying what has been, in practice, a rigid quota system to college athletics. Were equal opportunity merely the goal, the second and third prongs alone should suffice in meeting women's athletic interests without creating, as have affirmative action and other quota systems, losers. According to the General Accounting Office, the number of men's gymnastics teams at NCAA schools has fallen 80% over the last 25 years. Over a similar timespan, 181 NCAA wrestling teams were eliminated (including Dartmouth's).

The Department of Education recently appointed a committee, staffed by college sports administrators, to propose changes to the Title IX regulations, and their report to the Secretary of Education is due soon. Feminist groups fear that the administration will try to alter or even remove the proportionality test once the committee's report is in, and they're already drawing ugly, and misleading, parallels between these feared changes and a recent happening in politics. "I hope the Bush administration takes from this episode with Senator Lott the understanding that civil rights is of critical importance to massive number of Americans," said Jocelyn Samuels of the National Women's Law Center to the CS Monitor (from where the above blockquote on URI is taken, as well) when asked about changes to Title IX. Ms. Samuels's quote is very representative; Title IX advocates are organized and doggedly on-message.

With respect to her expressed desire, I agree with Ms. Samuels entirely. That's exactly why the administration must strike down Title IX's proportionality test, which disadvantages male athletes and men's sports arbitrarily and unnecessarily. Its capricious quota system benefits no one except for those who spend their time litigating Title IX cases (like Ms. Samuels) or derive some bizarre pleasure in keeping men from wrestling or shooting or fielding their own gymantic teams. The proportionality test does not even benefit women's sport programs; it is nothing but malicious. If Title IX is a civil rights issue, Ms. Samuels and her feminist peers have put themselves on the losing side of the issue, actively advocating sexual discrimination.

Other sources: the Winston-Salem Journal (very complete reporting, timeline, etc.), CNNSI, USA Today (good summary of the committee's activities). Also see the DOE's "clarification" of the three-prong test.

Friday, December 27, 2002

Andrew Grossman Explains It All

Welcome to the new and improved (?) Dartlog. Over the past two weeks, we have revamped the layout, added a few new features, and made myriad improvements all around. Plus, it looks so now, doesn't it?

One change demands a bit of explanation. When we founded Dartlog way back in March, the intention was to provide the latest Dartmouth news on a site that could be easily updated and effortlessly consumed. More or less, we've managed to do that; at least, our growing readership presumably thinks so.

But there's so much to discuss taking place outside of Hanover (students: really!), and Dartlog wasn't really the best forum in which to do that. That's why we're launching "The Inner Office," where The Dartmouth Review staff and Review alumni and alumnae (hi, Alexis) will cover and comment on the events of the day. Visit the Inner Office by clicking here or by clicking on the image or one of the headlines in the right-hand column. If you have a standards-compliant browser, you can mouse-over (that is, position the mouse over) any of the headlines and a summary will appear.

We hope that you enjoy our new site and new look. As always, email complaints to dartlog@dartreview.com.

Saturday, December 21, 2002

Guns don't kill

People don't either. Movies do.

"STUDY FINDS THAT YOUNG TEENS ARE EXPOSED TO TOO MANY VIOLENT MOVIES" A pretty lousy title for this article on a collaborative study by the Norris Cotton Cancer Center at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Dartmouth Medical School and Dartmouth College. Apparently this study is both quantitative and qualitative. It determined exposure to movies and authoritatively declared what is "too many"?

XXXmas is fast approaching

A collegiate gift idea

Friday, December 20, 2002

One last season

IvyLeagueSports.com's men's and women's swimming previews

Re: Lott to Step Down

This is not terrible. Frist will be a better leader, is more in line with the President's agenda, and isn't tarnished and comprimised as Lott would have been.

Think about how much easier this would have been had Lott resigned his post (but not seat) a week ago. The key thing now is to push this entire episode out of the public mind.

It's really too bad that Lott didn't step down early yesterday. Still, as I wrote earlier, "Thank you, Colin Powell."

Lott to Step Down

This is terrible.

On the up-side, it looks like Bill Frist will replace him. Frist is great. The Tennesseean is the only doctor in the Senate, he's young, and has no segregationist skeletons. He'll be good.

Si Vis Pacem...

Blair tells his troops in the field to prepare for war.

Excellent Piece on Conservatism

I am importing an article by Roger Scruton in Opinion Journal. It was posted on the Dartmouth Observer by John Stevenson. The article is a wonderfully articulate distillation of the Kirkean (that is, Russell Kirk's) view of conservatism: conservatism is a temperament; conservatism is the rejection of ideology; conservatism sets itself against the secular utopians; etc. etc.

Thursday, December 19, 2002

Thank you, Colin Powel

"Material breach."

Who's this Lott guy I was hearing so much about the other day?

Re: Must Have Missed a Story

This is amazing. Paging Henry Miller...

Re: Must have missed a story

A reader writes in to explain:
In response to Emmett's puzzlement over the posting on Senator Burns' website, it probably is a response to Bob Herbert's editorial in the NY Times today, which recalls an incident from 1994 in which Burns, when asked by a constituent what it was like to live in DC with "all those niggers", responded with "it's a hell of a challenge."

This, I presume, is what Burns' cryptic new apology is referring too, although Herbert also details some other, slightly less inflammatory gaffs that may be contributory.

cheers,
Matt Glassman
Yale University
Sigh, these really are lynching times. (Just to be preemptive for the idiots: I apologize for my tasteless and hurtful remarks, etc., etc.)

Re: Sound Familiar

Am I the only person on the planet defending Lott? (Pat Buchanan and other loonies aside...)

Sound Familiar?

A letter in the Corner regarding young conservatives, thought it was a pretty apt description of TDR:

Let me give you some "word on the street" anecdotal evidence to back up your article. I happen to know lots of conservatives and libertarians that span the range of thought. I don't know how to categorize them all - your phrases "neocons," "traditional cons," and "paleocons." - are confusing as hell to me. But, trust me, all of the various "tribes" are well represented. And, I will tell you, that the people who were quickest and most pissed off - were those like me: people who would describe themselves as "Goldwater Libertarians". We're in our late 20's to mid 30's, we adore the Founding Fathers, Reagan, Thatcher, Welasa, Friedman, Hayek, and especially bad asses like Barry Goldwater. We read NRO, and CATO, and many of us would like to work for the Institute for Justice. We're well educated from Ivy League schools, who know what the good years for cabernet are, but would rather drink cold Old Milwaukee longnecks. We're the ones who called and emailed each other, seething with anger, after watching any of one of Lott's public buffoonery to bemoan his asininities. We're also the folks who threw stuff at the TV every time some Republican, or pseudo conservative, tried to defend his remarks. Yeah, we're mad that every jerk in America is cashing in on this. But, we're more furious at Lott for hijacking the ideas we think are morally right, and are willing to fight for. And, to a man [sorry, not a lot of women in this group - which probably means something?] - not a single one of us has ever, ever, ever, been a liberal, before coming over to conservatism - in whatever form you might want to call it.

Why isn't my GPA higher?

The Registrar has posted fall term median grades. The bottom three departments on the chart alphabetically:

02F SPAN-001-01 18 A-
02F SPAN-001-02 22 B
02F SPAN-001-03 18 B+
02F SPAN-001-04 14 A-
02F SPAN-002-01 17 A-
02F SPAN-002-02 16 A-
02F SPAN-002-03 21 A-
02F SPAN-002-04 21 B+
02F SPAN-002-05 16 A-
02F SPAN-002-06 15 A-
02F SPAN-003-01 22 B+
02F SPAN-003-02 17 A-
02F SPAN-003-03 22 A-
02F SPAN-009-01 20 B+
02F SPAN-009-02 28 A-
02F SPAN-009-03 20 A-/B +
02F SPAN-030-01 17 A-
02F SPAN-037-01 19 A-
02F SPAN-056-01 13 A-
02F SPAN-058-01 11 A-
02F SPAN-079-01 18 A-
02F SPEE-027-01 16 A-
02F THEA-018-01 26 A
02F THEA-030-01 15 A-
02F THEA-030-02 16 A
02F THEA-040-01 19 A
02F THEA-045-01 11 A-
02F WGST-010-01 21 A
02F WGST-025-01 15 A
02F WGST-030-01 70 A-
02F WGST-032-01 13 B+
02F WGST-035-01 38 A
02F WGST-037-01 63 A-
02F WGST-043-01 24 A
02F WGST-047-01 16 A

Post-Senate Career

Fear not, Senator Lott! If you lose your job, you'll be able to find new work no problem. Here are a few suggestions from Free Republic...

Must Have Missed a Story

Can anyone out there explain this?

More Dem Hyprocisy

You'd think they'd get tired of being hypocrites... Here's a piece on the Lott imbroglio by Walter Williams, a very smart fellow.

Wednesday, December 18, 2002

Daschle to Run? Dems to Donnybrook?

Roll Call is reporting that Tom Daschle is leaning towards running for president, and that Senator Christopher Dodd (CT) is launching a stealthy challenge to the heir presumptive, Senator Harry Reid (NV). This is a two-fer: it seems that Daschle's seat might be vacated (Thune in 2004?), and it also seems that there may be a bloody battle for Dem leadership.

Other gossip: Ted Kennedy's Christmas party antics (when he's sober, at least) include dressing up as Ben Affleck and mocking John Kerry (alas, this has since been cancelled); Jim Jeffords apparently has come out in defense of Trent Lott; and Minnesota's seatwarmer senator, Dean Barkley, claims that he and basketball player Charles Barkley "have the same size butt."

I was just going to post that!

Can't wait to have our Review articles and conversations come back to haunt us while on the campaign trail.

More Dem Hypocrisy on Race

John Kerry, presidential wanna-be, is the Salome of today's politics: he's demanding Trent Lott's head on a platter. Oopsie. Turns out he is guilty of racial insensitivity himself.

Say "Know" to War


(via Instapundit)

Dems' Hypocrisy on Race

Quod erat demonstratum.

Chuck Schumer in Trouble?

I never thought it would be possible, but there's a glimmer of hope that Chuck Schumer might be ousted in 2004. A new Marist poll has him trailing Giuliani, with only 37% to Rudy's 58% (and only 5% undecided). But would Rudy run? Or would he rather stand again for mayor of New York in 2005?

In any event, Schumer's favorable rating is a rather anemic 53% -- about where Hillary's is, I believe. This suggests that it's not just the Rudy Factor. How would Pataki fare against Schumer?

It may be too early to tell, but New York seems promising as a potential GOP pickup.

Funny

Down with the Snowman patriarchy!

Tuesday, December 17, 2002

More on Michigan

"The Diversity Fraud" by Bruce Thornton at FrontPageMagazine.com.

State Department Report on Iraq

Appalling...

No wait, wait, let me guess... It's the sanctions, right? America's the bad guy here, right? Right?

Lott on BET

Here, and video clips here.

Plus, The New York Times actually listened to Andrew Sullivan, for once. Too bad it was on how conservatives have been leading the charge against Lott.

ApologiPalooza

I love Scrappleface.

I love this, too. Fo' shizzle!

Bush Plans to Deploy Missile Defense in 2004

Wah-Hoo-Wah for Star Wars!

More on Canadia

Here's a ludicrous site on Canada's hate crimes law. Check out the FAQ section, which contains this gem:

I've been hearing a lot on the news lately about hate crime. Is it against the law to dislike someone?
Of course not. Canadians want the right to express their likes and dislikes. However, hate involves more than bad feelings. Hate can lead to violence, and that is why the law sometimes steps in. As long as people attack others because of their skin colour, place of birth, or worship choices, no one will really be free.

This site is careful to point out that, by hate crimes, they do not simply mean mandated punishment guidelines for crimes motivated by hate; rather, they mean punishment for the hate itself. Amazingly, this site says that Canadian law distinguishes three types of hate crimes: advocating genocide, publicly inciting hatred and wilfully promoting hatred. These "crimes" also carry jail time (up to five years for "advocating genocide").

Here's another gem:

Some people were handing out hate leaflets in the parking lot of the neighbourhood shopping centre. What should I do the next time it happens?
Don't confront them. You may want to take a pamphlet to show the police. Contact your local police force right away and tell them what happened.

And another:

Is it against the law to advocate genocide using e-mail?
Yes, it is.

What should I do when I see hateful messages on the Internet?
First, write down the web location (also known as the URL) of the web site containing the hateful message. The web location, or URL, is the address that usually begins "http://www." Then, contact your local police force right away and tell them about what you saw.

And check out the "Magic 8-Ball" tone of this one:

Someone in Australia posted this hateful Web Page. How does the law regard that?
The law is not sure on how to handle hate that is spread in Canada through Internet sites located outside of Canada.

"My sources say shut up."

More Evidence that Canada Sucks

Sasha Volokh has posted some interesting articles on censorship, Canuck-style. Apparently, the nutty ravings about Hitler of a "First Peoples" elder, David Ahenakew, do not merit protection in Saskatchewan. Here ya go!

Here's more on Canada's tepid commitment to free speech.

Interesting

From Jonah Goldberg in the Corner:

"Tim Russert this morning explained that if Lott resigns from the Senate this year, the Governor only gets to appoint a 90-day replacement until a special election. If he resigns from the Senate next year, i.e. next month, then the governor's appointment is permanent through the next general election."

Aren't constitutional quirks fun?

Ashcroft

The Ashcroft thing is an argument for getting this done with as soon as possible. The longer the Lott story is dragged out, the more pain it will cause. End it now and people will soon forget about it, especially with Christmas next week. There's a fairly short memory in politics so the sooner this is over with, the better for the Republicans it will be. Everyday Lott stays in power and in the news, the more likely it is that people will be snooping around old issues of Southern Partisan.

Clark

No, Trent Lott is not the conservative I want to go to the mat for on race. There's no question he's been boneheaded in the past, boneheaded now, and he'll be boneheaded again in the future. Perhaps now is the time to silently and covertly, a few months from now (maybe in 2004), have Lott "resign" his post. But under no circumstances can we give the impression that the Left can bring down a Senate majority leader for silly little comments like that. Pickering would be nothing compared to that. If we hand them that victory, we may as well all go home.

Of course the Dems will make this a campaign issue. All we have to do is make their racial McCarthyism (Lott, Pickering) and their racial hypocrisy (Jackson, Sharpton, Byrd) a campaign issue as well. Conservatives need to stand up for Lott -- not doing so risks way, way too much.

Speaking of Racism

Here's a great piece on the University of Michigan's racist admissions policy from Beth Henary, of The Weekly Standard.

Also, Terry Eastland on the matter.

Emmett

I think last night's performance on BET was pretty much proof of why Lott has to go. Saying he supports affirmative action, excuse me? Whether this is or is not racial McCarthyism is an open question, but a Lott resignation will end it much more quickly. If he sticks around, it will only be continous pain for the next few years. On top of handing liberals a campaign issue to bring up at every possible instance, which you know they will, Lott will be forced to go into full force CYA mode, selling out the whole Republican agenda. Futhermore, is Lott really the conservative you want to go to the mat for on the race issue? Aside from his comments at the Strom centennial, everyday some other detail comes out about his past that only hurt the Republican cause, many of them fairly accurate in being described as "segregationist." Do I think he's a segregationist today? No. Do I think he was once one? Yes. Were those feelings due to living in a particular time and place? Certainly. Does that context in any way insulate from attacks by Democrats? No, they will use any rationale possible to paint him as a segregationist in his heart today. For that reason, he will be forced to concede and compromise on every issue that comes before the Senate. Say Judge Pickering comes up again. He is eminently qualified for his position but was the subject of an intense racial witchhunt in the last confirmation process. Even with the majority now, do you think a GOP under Lott would have the capital to fight for his nomination? This would even be a drag on issues like welfare reform renewal. Lott's already lacking leadership abilities will be almost entirely wiped out. He gots to go.

Cassandra

If we give Lefties an inch on race, they'll take a mile. It seems their reaching already. Joshua Micah Marshall, whose Talking Points Memo blog has been vigorously peddling the Trent Lott Is A Racist line, is now setting his sights on Ashcroft the Racist. That's right, he's dredging up that interview Ashcroft gave to Southern Partisan. So they'll even fight old fights if they think the climate helps them. Again, this is why the GOP has to stand up for Lott -- whatever one may think of him as majority leader, allowing him to be crucified in this manner is very, very destructive.

Da capo:

Trent Lott: I want to say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either.

John Ashcroft: Your magazine also helps set the record straight. You've got a heritage of doing that, of defending Southern Patriots like Lee, Jackson, and Davis. Traditionalists must do more. I've got to do more. We've all got to stand up and speak in this respect, or else we'll be taught that these people were giving their lives, subcribing their sacred fortunes and their honor to some perverted agenda.

This is racism?

PS -- Marshall is also commenting that Lott's mea culpa (or should I say mea culpa maxima omnifaria -- can someone check my Latin?) on BET included an admission that the senator now "absolutely" supports affirmative action. They can't be allowed to do these things with impunity; now the head Republican in the Senate and an otherwise stalwart conservative "absolutely" supports affirmative action.

Hey, maybe he is a racist, after all.

Fear Not, Talcott

www.jimlarimore.com is still available!

Monday, December 16, 2002

I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier

I e-mailed a friend at the Cornell Freedom Project, URL www.hunterrawlings.com, about whether he was going to get a new URL in honor of Cornell's new president, Jeffrey Lehman, an alumnus and current dean of the University of Michigan Law School. He's already got it: www.jeffreylehman.com refreshes to the CFP site.

I was thinking about doing this, having www.jameswright.com refresh to the Review's website. But it's kind of taken.

At Barrett's request

The David Brooks article
1) It's very clear around the Hill that Lott is a goner as of Jan. 6th. Larry, I'd like to make a new mixology for you in Lott's honor.
2)Someone post David Brooks' new Weekly Standard article--12/23/02...TDR reference in his long article on hooking up, Yalies, and meritocratic ladder system ... "I did run across many conservative students, who dont seem fundamentally alienated from their peers. I'm happy to report that many of the smarter students one meets have some conservative opinions, especially about the UN and such things. You would not call them movement conservatives, however, many said they are privately embarassed by confortational conservatives such as David Horowitz and publications like the Dartmouth Review." way to be

Emmett

Lott is not who we should want as a leader, as a matter of substance and appearance. We'd all be better served if he remain in the Senate (avoiding his seat being filled by a Democrat Governor) but not as Majority Leader (personally, I like Nickles). We can't afford to have Lott standing next to W very much. And, unlike Cardinal Law, he should make this decision expeditiously.

Re: the racial McCarthyism (I like Horowitz too), Hume, Watts, the National Review, et. al, are not wrong to be distancing themselves. This is not the issue to be crying racial McCarthyism; we'll save save that for affirmative action, reparations, etc.

Kennewick Man

An amazing story, that some of you might be familiar with. Several anthropologists suggest that the ancestors of Native Americans may have driven out older populations -- some, perhaps, even from Europe.

From PunditWatch

Here's a gem about the Sunday morning talk shows, where the prime-time pillorying of Trent Lott continues:

Brit Hume of Fox, noting that Lott will continue his �apology tour� on Monday with an appearance on Black Entertainment Television, suggested additional events: �On Tuesday, crawl on broken glass; on Wednesday, lie on a bed of hot coals; on Thursday, submit to a public flogging.�

J. C. Watts said Lott could crawl across Mississippi on hands and knees and critics still wouldn�t think it was enough.


Hummel, this little matter of racial McCarthyism is much more important that Lott's merits as majority leader. The Left cannot be allowed to win this.

Sunday, December 15, 2002

Letters to a Young Conservative

George Packer, in The Nation, shockingly pans TDR alum Dinesh D'Souza's new book Letters to a Young Conservative. One particularly choice quote: "one can imagine an intelligent conservative like David Brooks begging liberals to find their voices so that conservatism doesn't stiffen like the liberalism to which D'Souza and his pals at Dartmouth delivered a few swift kicks on the eve of the Reagan revolution."

The Nation really seems to have missed the point on this one. The book doesn't seem to have been meant as to meet the sort of standard Packer argues it misses. Something like Lionel Trilling's The Liberal Imagination isn't a fair point of comparison but of a different genre altogether. The mismatch is obvious and just makes The Nation look silly and the review utterly uncredible.

No Gore in '04

Today, Gore made his first smart presidential campaign decision ever -- he announced that he will not run for president in 2004. No doubt he wants to set himself up as the savior of the Democratic party and the country in 2008 (by taking a page from Nixon's book). It's a bit of a gamble... But it might pay off for him. Gore's decision increases the odds that Bush will win re-election in 2004, but it also means that we might elect a President Gore in 2008, depending on who the Republicans can field (and on about a billion other factors). Very interesting news...

Saturday, December 14, 2002

Be on the lookout

Says John McWhorter in today's featured article at OpinionJournal, "We can be sure that as the second semester begins in universities across the country next month, professors will be referring to Mr. Lott's comment as evidence that 'America remains a deeply racist country.'"

Red Storm subsiding

While at home on Strong Island, I've always rooted for St. John's as a local college sports favorite. Unfortunately, they too are cutting men's and women's swimming, as well as men's track and field (including cross country) and football, though they will be adding varsity men's lacrosse. Apparently, this is not budgetary, but rather because of Title IX. Or so reports the semi-local rag, New York Newsday.

Friday, December 13, 2002

Emmett, you're wrong.

Emmett, your passionate defense of Lott is inspiring, but wrong. He needs to go and he should have the courage to take one for the team here. I'm not suggesting that he leaves the Senate, that is up to the fine people of Mississippi, but to have him be in charge of the President's agenda in the Senate is problematic. There is no way he will be able to extract any good-will from the Democrats here. Regardless of hypocrisy (which you are correct to note), they know they will be able to gut Lott, and more importantly Bush's agenda, like a fish with him in charge. Do you think conservative judges will get their appointments? Or the tax cuts we need? Defense and security? Every time he needs a break, and with only a slim majority and some soft GOP Senators to boot this will be often, all the left will have to do is play a clip of him singing Thurmond's praises and mention re-election to make him offer his soul (if he has one left) to move a bill. In that slip of the tongue, Lott lost all credibility as a national leader.

Also, consider it this way... The Democrats may have flocked to protect the Clintons like flies to .... but we should have higher standards and not allow ourselves to be accused of hypocrisy.

Lott and Weblogs

Rhetorica is putting together a Lott/weblog timeline.

If you didn't read the Times today, Krugman points to Joshua Marshall's Talking Points for driving the story.

Enough of this; back to the bar.

Overheard in the business center of the League

(There has been a big holiday party going on here since 11 AM)

"Can you hear me now? Now? Can you hear me now? What about now? What about...ooops! No, silly, I tripped!"

Extremist flames

A reader writes:
Do you guys find it strange that very few opinion polls are being presented in the news as to how the general public thinks the Lott controversy should be handled? It makes me wonder how much of this is being fanned by extremists instead of actual opinion. My gut reaction is that most people find the comments stupid, irresponsible, and wrong, but really don't think they amount to needing as strong a rememdy as the extremists and partisans think should be applied.

I dunno, just a thought.

Matt Glassman
Department of Political Science
Yale University
The blogosphere has really been driving major media coverage of the matter. Bloggers tend to be reactionary (and, true, sometimes written by extremists; to a larger extent than the general public, anyway), and that's what we're seeing in this case: Insta-reaction.

Talcott

That's right, Byrd certainly hasn't shed his racist views. If anyone in the Senate is an unreconstructed confederate, it's him.

PS -- Isn't Michelle Malkin a hottie?

RE: Byrd

Some of those comments were oh-so-recent. I remember him using the "WN" term just last year!

More Political News

The Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that Carol Moseley-Braun will "definitely" run for her old Senate seat in 2004. If she wins the primary, she will face off against Republican Peter Fitzgerald, a Dartmouth grad who soundly defeated Moseley-Braun in 1998. (I interned for him in 1999.)

Roll Call thinks Fitzgerald is the most endangered incumbent going into the next cycle; I doubt that. Though he's angered many conservatives by being too John McCain-y, he'll cakewalk the nomination. He's very good on constituent services, and he's managed to keep his image free from partisanship -- critical for a Republican in Illinois. If Moseley-Braun wins the Democratic nomination, Fitzgerald will win reelection handily. If she doesn't win the nomination, there will no doubt be a bruising primary, because black voters in Chicago love her. Either scenario looks good for the GOP.

ALSO: Lott will not announce his resignation as majority leader at today's press conference, says Fox News.

29?

From Political Wire:
Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (D) "threw his first big home state fund-raising bash Tuesday night and 29 Democrats from all over the state came," the Barre-Montpelier Times-Argus reports.
So much for those presidential aspirations...

Lott to Bleed on the Floor -- Again

Matt Drudge is reporting that Lott is having a press conference at 4:30pm CST in Pascagoula, MS. This will be apology number three. The race-baiters will never be satisfied.

Eugene Volokh cites a GOP source saying that Lott may be on his way out. If he's right, then one thing is certain: this is racial McCarthyism.

Liberal Hypocrisy

I finally managed to find a great Michelle Malkin piece on the sordid past of Senator Robert Byrd (D, the Confederacy). Some choice quotes from the former Klansman:

"There are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time. I'm going to use that word. We just need to work together to make our country a better country, and I'd just as soon quit talking about it so much."

"[The Klan was an] effective force [in] promoting traditional American values."

"The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia" and "in every state in the Union."

"[I will never fight] with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

Trent Lott's comment, once again: "I want to say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."

Their hypocrisy isn't just humorous. It's disgusting.

Who Are the Real Segregationists?

With all this ballyhooing over Trent Lott's praise of Strom Thurmond, it's probably worthwhile to remind ourselves, once again, that the Left has absolutely no credibility on the issue of segregation. Today, they are the ones in support of it. Here's an article from Front Page Magazine about radical separatism at Cornell.

Which way to the colored water fountains?

Thursday, December 12, 2002

Save money at Amazon, B&N, etc.

This little script (scroll down to "Dartmouth") that you can install in your browser's toolbar will search the Dartmouth library catalog for the books you've located on Amazon, B&N, etc. Benefits: instant gratification (if you're on campus) and low cost.

Also

In the spirit of posting emails sent to administrators, I post the following which I sent to the Council on Libraries. I recommend checking out their minutes for a closer look at the proposed cuts to Sanborn et al. They are meeting today. http://www.dartmouth.edu/~library/col/col.html

------------
I write to address an issue I do not believe has been given attention in the recent debate over library budget cuts. I understand that the Council on Libraries will be meeting today, December 12, and it is my desire that the Council discuss the Sanborn Library Fund.

Attached you will find the relevant excerpts from Edwin Sanborn's will, penned in 1927; the other clauses do not address Sanborn House or Library. In the will, he establishes Sanborn House and Sanborn Library "as a homelife center for those especially interested in English literature and for the convenience of advanced students in that subject, and a place for conference and discussion on such topics." Sanborn Library is obviously the central component of this mandate. The current proposals would destroy Sanborn House's purpose. As the minutes from the Council on Library's October 16th meeting explain, 2,000 of the 4,000 books would be removed, the reserves shifted to Baker-Berry, the librarian positions eliminated, and the hours severely curtailed to "depend on the English department," which would, without a doubt, be much more limited than the present hours of operation. This cannot be what Edwin Sanborn meant by "convenience," nor can it even resemble what he had in mind for Sanborn to "house a library on English and topics related thereto." The operative word here is, of course, "library," not "reading room." While Sanborn Library might remain a reading room, its original purpose as a research and home center, as well as "library," would be entirely negated; the books remaining would even be removed from the card catalogue, and the barren shelves would ruin the library's aesthetic appeal.

Further, there is certainly no lack of money in the Sanborn Library Fund. While I do not doubt the severity of the present budget crisis, Sanborn House is endowed with sufficient money set aside with Sanborn House and Library as the absolute top priority (See attached will). In 1927, the original amount was approximately 1.1 million, but it has since swelled to around 20 million. The trust pays out somewhere around $900,000 annually. This is more than enough to cover all expenses associated with Sanborn--staff included--and then some. Yet, presently, most of this money seems to be going to general collections. This money should instead first be used to bolster Sanborn. There is no need to pare the library's functions, and any cutting would certainly go against Edwin Sanborn's final wishes.

It would also seem that elimination of Sanborn Library would be in direct violation of Edwin Sanborn's word and intent. Diversion of any money set aside for Sanborn House--be it to the general collection or to FO&M--would come under the jurisdiction of the New Hampshire Attorney General's office of charitable trusts as a violation of Edwin Sanborn's will. From my reading, axing the library under the proposed conditions would fall into this category.

I ask that serious attention be given to the Sanborn Library Fund. This trust has plenty of money to not only maintain the building, but also to support the necessary staff for Sanborn Library. These librarians have a level of expertise with the Sanborn collection that cannot be matched by staff in the general collection who are not familiar with the collection, which will be distributed throughout the vast stacks of Baker-Berry. There is no doubt that Edwin Sanborn intended his estate to benefit English students--and the student body as a whole--through Sanborn House and Library. These wishes necessitate Sanborn Library remaining open in its present capacity, not with most resources eliminated or removed to Baker-Berry. The proposed changes would be incredibly detrimental to these ends; they would render his every wish, and even his last will and testament, a moot point.

I hope that all parties involved in this decision, especially President Wright as executor, will have the moral integrity to uphold the word and intentions of the late Edwin Sanborn. Elimination of Sanborn Library would be a disgrace to his honor and an egregious disservice to the estate he so generously donated to Dartmouth College.

Sincerely,
Alston Ramsay

Wednesday, December 11, 2002

Odd

A few minutes ago a check-out girl at the grocery store said something perplexing. She attends Guilford College (Greensboro, NC) and recently had to fill out a course evaluation. Under the part for sex, the options were male, female, AND transgender.

Colonel Qaddafi

This has nothing to do with anything, but, for the record, if I were a colonel and I took over a country, I'd give myself a promotion. I mean, maybe just to Brigadier General at first, but eventually, why not make yourself a four-star? You're bossing around all your generals anyway, so you might as well outrank them.

Wright in NY

Apparently James Wright spoke at the Harmony Club in New York last night (no word yet on why he didn't speak at, um, the Dartmouth Club). He said to expect more (yes, more) budget cuts in April.

One observation of the speech: "He spoke for twenty or thirty minutes, but it wasn't until afterwards that I said 'you know, he never actually said anything.'"

Swim Team Update

The Valley News reports that Dartmouth will continue to discuss plans to save the swim team. I don't buy it.

http://www.vnews.com/12112002/810356.htm

Interesting supreme court cases

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/cases/name.htm

Re: My Two Cents

Yah, I'm tepid on Lott myself.

Re: My Two Cents

Emmett, while this whole Lott thing may be blown out of proportion (especially by Gore, but when was the last time he said something rational), it neatly encapsulates part of the problem with Trent Lott: he's often politically stupid. The fundamental problem with his statement is that many minorities and white liberals believe that Republicans and conservatives, especially those from the South, still have a white sheet and hood hanging next to their Brooks Brothers suits in their closets. The reality of his statement only reinforces this false perception.

I, for one, certainly hope this is the final straw for Lott. Since assuming the leadership post after Dole ran for president, Lott has been completely worthless. In addition to frequently saying stupid things, can you name one accomplishment of his? Instead, he has been rolled by the Democrats throughout his tenure. He combines the spinelessness of the Bob Michel years with the added bonus of borderline racist statements. It is time for him to go. Actually that time was about five years ago.

Censorship at Concordia University

Hillel members at this Canadian school have been told that they cannot distribute flyers for the Israeli Defense Force. Amazing.

Supreme Court Doings

The Supreme Court today is hearing Virginia v. Black, an important free speech case. A Virginia law prohibiting crossburnings is being challenged.

Here's an important and on-point Supreme Court decision from 1992: R.A.V. v. St. Paul (written by the next chief justice, Antonin Scalia). Unless the Court is now willing to undo R.A.V., this looks like a win for free speech.

Tuesday, December 10, 2002

So confused

This is regarding the new art space in the Hop.

Date: 10 Dec 2002 16:37:28 EST
From: AREA
Subject: inform. recruit. submit.
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comrade,

You, you are the oppressed proletariat and must rise with the
movement. It has, unfortunately, come to our attention that you
have not been fully interpellated into our ideology. To fulfill
our programme for critical dialogue through art, we, the
revolutionaries must proclaim our ideas courageously, define our
principles and express our intentions so that no one is deceived,
neither friend nor foe.

O, the humanity.

When we speak of the struggle, we speak the name: 'area'--the
organization that runs the student gallery space at the Top of the
Hop. Thus, we hold two shows per term in order to exhibit student
artwork. We would like to invite you of the unredeemed masses to
involve yourself by working on:

installation,
opening planning,
adjudication of artwork,
publicity,
et al.

Reply to be added to our 03W membership.

******
::now:: collecting submissions for this winter's first show

Art & the Politics of Oppression
Opening MLK week
theme: socially pertinent artwork in a time of need

submission deadline: monday january 13th
blitz 'area' or nil for further information
******
�PATRIA O MUERTE!

Proof

Here's proof that Lott's statement is being blown out of proportion. Quotes are below:

Al Gore [calling Lott's statement "fundamentally racist"]: "It is not a small thing for one of the half-dozen most prominent political leaders in America to say that our problems are caused by integration and that we should have had a segregationist candidate. That is divisive and it is divisive along racial lines."

Can someone please show me where in Lott's remarks he said that our problems are caused by integration? Can anyone show me where Lott is saying we should have a segregationist candidate? Can anyone show me why Lott's comments are "fundamentally" racist? At best, they are inferentially racist, if we assume that what Lott meant to say was, "You know, America would be a lot better off if the Negro were kept separate from the white man." Does Gore really think Lott believes this? Hell, Thurmond doesn't believe this (he was one of the first senators to hire a black staffer); what makes Gore think Lott does?

Lott: "My comments were not an endorsement of his positions of over 50 years ago, but of the man and his life."

Sounds fair to me.

Tom Daschle actually showed grace and understanding in his comment regarding the flap (and makes Gore look like a pathetic busybody, to boot):

Daschle: "Senator Lott, in my conversation with him this morning, explained that that wasn't how he meant them to be interpreted. I accept that. There are a lot of times when he and I go to the microphone, would like to say things we meant to say differently, and I'm sure this is one of those cases for him, as well."

(Perhaps Daschle had his ridiculous comments about Rush Limbaugh and the "right-wing" media in the back of his mind when he said this.)

Certainly, Republicans wish Lott hadn't said it. It's given the Dems the kind of thing they love to carp about, and it's embarrassed Thurmond, who should be enjoying his final days in the Senate rather than reliving controversies that have been dead a half-century. But Lott goofed. Oh well. Everyone needs to get over it.

My Two Cents

Okay, I just want to wade in on this whole Trent Lott - unreconstructed confederate business. Frankly, I think it's being blown way, way, way out of proportion. In fact, it's gotten to hysteria levels.

Trent Lott was at a dinner commemorating Strom Thurmond, and one of the notable things he's done in his very long life was, yes, run for president. (Against Harry Truman -- think about that. Amazing, huh?) Now, I would be happy to stand at a dinner party in, say, 1946, commemorating the long life of, say, George Herbert Walker Bush. (At that point, he would be 122 years old -- certainly worth commemorating.) And if I were to say, "you know, the country would have been a lot better off if it had elected you in 1992," I think that would be a pretty understandable thing.

I'm sure there are a lot of people today who think that Thurmond would have been better than Truman. Hell, I'd have voted for Strom Thurmond before I'd have voted for Truman, that's for sure (although I really would have voted for Dewey, out of them all).

It's also worth remembering that Lott was speaking off the cuff about a friend and colleague. His comment, certainly, was intended to praise a friend for his long-standing conservative values and commitment to federalism -- not his one-time position on segregation. After all, fifty-year-old positions on issues long settled hardly come first to mind when one thinks of a friend. This was the case with Lott. His remarks were impolitic -- if for no other reason than because the media and the bloggers would, predictably, go ballistic -- but they certainly were not racist. The claptrap about Lott should stop.

Does Cornell Compare?

A newsgroup posting from upenn.talk. In 25 responses, no one disagreed.

Lines 12                   Penn is Not Ivy Worthy           25 Responses

sjwinter@unagi.cis.upenn.edu Career Criminal at University of Pennsylvania

Here's some insight I gleaned from TAing: most Penn undergraduates are
stupid morons. Most could use some remedial courses in basic English grammar
and spelling. Really, most of you are bragging how you came from elite
prep schools, yet you don't know shit academically. Anyone who has ever TA'd
or taught Penn undergrads will surely concur with me.

S.

Undergraduates at Penn are known as "pukes," according to other posters in the thread.

"Parents hope to raise money to save Dartmouth swim team"

Massive pickup for this AP story:
"We're not going to come up with $4 to $5 million overnight," said Bart Cameron, whose daughter, Kelly, is on the women's swim team. "We have to work out an understanding with the school on how this money is raised."

College officials said Tuesday that Dean of the College James Larimore was not immediately available to comment.

GOPers for Daschle via Johnson

NRO's Byron York on buyer's remorse in South Dakota.

Carter Bloviates

So Jimmy Carter, our one-time boob-in-chief, has received the Nobel Prize. (For peace; they don't do one for silliness.)

In his comments, he called for a "prohibition of the death penalty, at least for children." Curious. I guess the abortion advocate -- whose own special assistant in the White House had argued (successfully, alas) for the legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade -- has now changed his mind on the matter. Well, if Jimmy Carter's become a pro-lifer, we must be doing something right.

(PS -- This contradiction was noted earlier today by Kathryn Lopez on National Review's "The Corner.")

Carter also implicitly criticized Bush's adoption of a doctrine of preemptive strike against terrorist threats. My money says Bush's policies will save more lives than Carter's ever did... But who am I to quibble with the Nobel Committee? After all, they honored this great peacemaker.

Apartheid on Campus

The New York Civil Rights Coalition has released a report titled "The Stigma of Inclusion: Racial Paternalism/Separatism In Higher Education." The report decries the "balkanized campus environment" of pea-brained administrators who create minority orientation programs, minority advisors, minority housing, etc. etc. etc. Full disclosure: Michael Meyers, the executive director of the NYCRC, is a member of FIRE's Board of Advisors.

Even Better

Regarding Grossman's discovery of a swinger's club in Pelham, NH: Here's their website, courtesy of the Google cache (is there anything it can't do?).

21st Century swingers get e-nasty.

Monday, December 09, 2002

When it's cold in Pelham, NH,...

...swing.

Terrorists

You'll all be pleased to hear that you can now download the "Most Wanted Terrorists Pocket Directory Database." You download this program to your Palm Pilot, and it gives you photos, names, identifying features, DOB, etc. for a whole bunch of suspected terrorists in case you see Mullah Omar in Starbucks. Pretty sweet.

Also, did anyone else notice the DFP headline "No Reason to Fear Pakistani Islamists"? Unbelievable.

Contrast

Dave Marmaros '01 directed me to a story in today's Valley News. A few choice quotes:
�We feel that the endowment is there to give you financial strength when you need support in a down economy."
...
Spending a higher percentage of the endowment -- 6 percent in the current fiscal year and 7.1 percent in the fiscal year to follow -- is a way to smooth over �a temporary condition of the economy.�
The above concern Vermont's Middlebury College and quote Middlebury spokesman Phil Benoit.

The article continues:
Further, Middlebury's actions raise questions about why Dartmouth, with an endowment of $2.2 billion -- four times Middlebury's -- is making budget cuts that include eliminating varsity swimming and diving, consolidating libraries, and laying off 30 employees.
...
Dartmouth looked at spending endowment money to bolster its finances, but ultimately rejected the idea, said Julie Dolan, Dartmouth's associate vice president for financial affairs.

�Over the long term we want to preserve the purchasing power of our endowment,� Dolan said last week. To do that during poor economic times, the college needs to spend less from the endowment, she added.
...
[Middlebury President John] McCardell said Middlebury would also be measured by �our commitment to people, which is a special characteristic of this college, and which I here reaffirm: to students �, to faculty, and to staff.�
In contrast to...

The winner

The first runner-up is former TDR editor of something or other Alex Wilson '01, who points out
Empirically, there is no reason to cut any program, PC or not, useful or not.
Of course, Mr. Wilson, being a site contributor, is ineligible to win. Besides, he has a subscription anyway, I think.

The winner of our budgeting contest is Michael Pazos '03, who sent his entry only fifteen minutes before the final deadline. Here is his suggestion of what the College might cut to protect its most important priorities:
That pesky student body
Well put.

Not only will Mr. Pazos receive a subscription and fine, high-quality Indian merchandise, but he will also be the first against the wall after some Parkhurst crony reads this and says to himself, "You know, that's not a bad idea."

Congratulations, Messrs. Wilson and Pazos, and thanks to everyone who sent in entries.

Sunday, December 08, 2002

"Ten Dollars a Vote"

Fox News is reporting on an ongoing investigation into South Dakota's close Senate election. Did Democrats buy Tim Johnson a second term in that august chamber?

National Review also asks this question in the cover article from its latest issue, but since it's not online I can't post it.

Legal Music Trading

Check out FurtherNet to legally trade live recordings of artists that permit that sort of thing.

Yes, there's a bit too much Grateful Dead and Phish, but there's also a lot of Pavement, Guided by Voices, Wilco, Tortoise, Radiohead, and many others. There's also a video recording section as well, but I haven't seen that. FurtherNet's light and fast Java-based client runs on Mac, OS X, Windows, Linux, etc.

DAC shows some spine

According to the Valley News, the Alumni Council has issued a statement critical of the administration's cuts.

Your favorite bitter '04

Just blitzed:

>Date: 08 Dec 2002 02:20:56 EST
>From: Alexander D. Talcott
>Reply-To: alex.talcott
>Subject: Delete
>To: James E. Wright, James A. Larimore, Barry P. Scherr

Go ahead. Delete this. Wouldn't be surprised if you had some automatic delete function for blitzes from students.

I enjoyed an evening with friends from the 2001 class tonight. We marveled at how unfortunate it is that the school has gotten worse and worse, year by year.

I recently participated in a journalism conference in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the Collegiate Network ant the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. I met with several students from Brandeis University, where they are members of a "fan club" for their president, Jehuda Reinharz. It is no surprise that no such fan club exists for President Wright. You have outworn your welcome.

As a matter of fact, you all disgust me.

How dare you? How dare you? The College has had no positive press in years. Granted, the Zantop tragedy was not your fault. But the SLI, blowing the Zete incident out of proportion, canning the swim team...honestly, what's next? Even the good press we may get is churned out by a bloated Office of Public Affairs (of which I'm an employee). If you need recommendations for cuts to be made there, I can help you out.

If anything, you have united a diverse student body against you. We stand united in opposition to you.

Why do you think all your donation offers are targeted? Nobody trusts you. What kind of disgusting modern piece of architectural crap are you going to build next?

The sad thing is, I'm actually in a good mood tonight. I spent time with old friends, chipped away at some end-of-term work, and wished my girlfriend good night and good luck before a final exam. Can you imagine the spite I feel on a bad day?

Don't ever expect a dime. I offer a public apology to William and Kathryn Talcott (~'31 and ~'33?), my future children, who may be blacklisted for their father's rants.

I've composed blitzes like this before at the end of long nights, only to delete them. Well, maybe like you, I've stopped caring. The send button is going to be clicked in a matter of seconds; your negative contributions to the College will last far longer.

Wah-hoo-wah,
Alex Talcott '04

Shiiitt!

Louisiana...

Saturday, December 07, 2002

I don't get it

The Dartmouth is reporting that the College has recently turned downed earmarked alumni donations for the swim team. One of these was around 1.5 million dollars. The article also claims that other earmarked donations, such as those for Sherman Art Library, have been turned down because they were not "capital campaign priorities."

Shop for your school and country

If you're in Hanover, stop by the Gap and the pool in Berry.

There are "Save the Rainforest" protesters outside of the Gap, one of whom is no more than 7 years old. Motivated me to head in and pick up a shirt for my sister.

Dartmouth swimming apparel (including nifty caps, sweatshirts, and T-shirts) for sale by the track in Berry Fitness Center. Also made some purchases there.

Jewish Studies ads

Underenrolled departments often advertize their course offerings in The D. No news there. But in the latest issue of the Free Press, Jewish Studies runs two ads--one for a lecture, another for a course. While we generally snub "Studies" departments, it's kind of strange that these ads run in a paper that shows such cowardice in terms of standing up for Israel.

Friday, December 06, 2002

The class with class

"Global Civility" etiquette class at Ohio State

Rubbers Revoked

Courtesy of Kristin's brother, a 2L at NYU Law:

From: "Ernesto Ferran- MD- Executive Director of University Health Services"

Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:19 PM
Subject: CONDOM RECALL: LIFESTYLES ASSORTED COLORS AND FLAVORS

> To: The NYU Student Community
>
> From: Ernesto Ferran, M.D., Executive Director of University Health
Services
>
> Date: December 6, 2002
>
> Re: CONDOM RECALL: LIFESTYLES ASSORTED COLORS AND FLAVORS
>
> Please be advised that Ansell Healthcare Incorporated, a manufacturer of
latex condoms, is initiating a voluntary recall of LIFESTYLES ASSORTED
COLORS AND FLAVORS condoms.
>
> These condoms are being recalled because information recently available
indicates that some of these condoms do not meet airburst test standards.
Therefore, there is a concern about the possibility of breakage in the use
of these condoms.
>
> The condoms that are being recalled are those with expiration date
November 2002 through June 2006.
>
> If you are in possession of these condoms, which were distributed through
the Center for Health Promotion at the NYU Health Center, please do not use
them.
>
> All other condoms that have been distributed through the Center for Health
Promotion at the New York University Heath Center are completely safe and
effective and are FDA approved for use.
>
> If you experience condom breakage, you have the option of using Emergency
Contraception (ECP) to prevent pregnancy. ECP, which is available in the
NYU Health Center at both Urgent Care Services and Women's Health Services,
is best used within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse, but can be
effective up to 120 hours after unprotected intercourse. For those NYU
students who have the NYU Student Health Insurance Plan, ECP is a covered
expense. It is also available to all other NYU students for a $55 fee.
>
> If you have any further questions or concerns, you may contact the Center
for Health Promotion at 212-443-1234, or visit the New York University
Health Center website at www.nyu.edu/nyuhc.
>
> The New York University Health Center is located at 726 Broadway (at
Waverly Place) on the 3rd and 4th floors.

Canadians Don't Know Squat

Free speech is making a tentative comeback at Quebec's Concordia University. Concordia, you may remember, banned all events -- including public speeches, debates, rallies and exhibits -- addressing the Middle East, after pro-Palestinian students rioted at a speech by Benjamin Netanyahu. A week ago, with the moratorium freshly lifted, Hillel students came out to protest the Canadian government's discriminatory attitude towards Israel. Let's see what happens next.

Here's Concordia's speech code.

Swim Team in the Times

"Online Bid Is Made, Briefly, to Save Dartmouth's Swim Team":
"We simply don't operate that way," said the college's dean, James Larimore. "We've made a painful decision to cut the swim team, and our priorities and program decisions are set by the college, not by the interests of outside parties. This may be a little like someone trying to sell the Brooklyn Bridge. I don't know that anyone would think it's a legitimate item."
It is some consolation that they aren't any better at dealing with the national press than the local press.


Also: Seattle Times, Boston Globe, Bloomberg, Columbia Daily Spectator, Washington Post (headline: "Swimsuit Calndar? Why not Buy a Whole Team?"), Daily Pennsylvanian, Yale Daily News, Daily Princetonian...(find more yourself with our Newswire)

Re: Sorority Life at Princeton

I am dumber for having read that.

Talc - are you sure that was Princeton University and not Princeton Community College or Princeton Tech or Cornell or something?

Thursday, December 05, 2002

PS

The Ultimate Guide to Anal Sex for Men is currently ranked #4,599 by Amazon. That's only 1465 behind Al Gore's newest pablum, The Spirit of Family.

I'll say nothing further.


Re: Customers also shopped for...


Not just that, Talcott... apparently, they also recommended The Ultimate Guide to Anal Sex for Men, by one Bill Brent. Though given that three people recommended this and that Robertson's book is ranked #1,025,786 , I smell a prank.

Customers also shopped for...

Pat Robertson's latest book and clean underwear, inextricably linked

Fighting the good fight at Cornell

Released to: Ithaca Journal, Cornell Daily Sun, Ithaca Times, The Dartmouth Review
Contact: mtg23@cornell.edu, 607-277-0993

Cornell Freedom Project Speaks Out Against Student Assembly Liaison Seats; Formal Complaints Filed

Matt Gewolb, Executive Director, speaking on behalf of The Cornell Freedom Project (CFP), issued a strong statement condemning the Student assembly for their illiberal, undemocratic and discriminatory liaison seats this evening [December 5, 2002] at the Student Assembly's final meeting of the semester. The oral statement is transcribed below. The issue is expected to come up for a vote early next semester. The CFP made a formal discrimination claim to the office of Workplace Diversity and Equity early last month only to be told the issue was outside of their jurisdiction. The organization will be filing formal complaints with several University departments over the next few days in an effort to force the Student Assembly to publicly address the issue of fairness and equality in that body.

The Cornell Freedom Project (CFP) is dedicated to securing the rights of free speech, due process and equality for all persons at Cornell University.It boasts a large student membership and enjoys support from scholars and public intellectuals nationwide. It is located online at www.hunterrawlings.com. Hunter Rawlings is the President of Cornell University.
-----

Special minority seats on the Cornell University Student Assembly create an
unnecessary instance of double representation in this supposedly democratic
body. These seats are products of arbitrary designations and suffer from a
lack of definition. Deliberately constructed to advance a so-called
�progressive� agenda, this system of representation creates artificial group
identities and group agendas and poses a dangerous threat to individuality.

The Student Assembly, according to its official governing procedures, is
made up of a total of eleven designated undergraduates from the seven
colleges. In addition to these eleven, the Student Assembly also consists of
a variable number of undesignated seats. These include four at-large
representatives, two Minority liaisons, one International liaison and one
Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender/Questioning liaison. The charter also calls
for new Student elections in the fall to bring the number of elected
representatives to twenty-three.

This system of representation is highly problematic and undemocratic.
Whereas the entire student body elects Minority, International and LGBTQ
liaisons, these elected officials are charged with representing the
interests of particular campus enclaves.

The practice of giving some students a more-than-equal say in student
affairs (for example, by virtue of this system a student from one of the
three �special groups� in The College of Arts & Sciences is entitled to
double representation; one vote from the duly elected Arts & Sciences
representative and one from their particular liaison) creates a terribly
unjust situation for those individuals who do not happen to fall under one
of the various minority banners. There is no rational justification for such
a blatant disregard of the One Man or Woman--One Vote principle. By allowing
certain �minority� groups special treatment, the Student Assembly has
created an unequal system of representation that is utterly incompatible
with the most fundamental tenets of representative democracy.

And just what is a minority, anyway? It stands to reason that this
impossibly broad definition would cover just about every Cornellian with the
exception of white Protestants. The term �Questioning� presents the same
problem�namely, the lack of a decent definition. In fact, to demonstrate
just how ridiculous these liaison positions really are, it is useful to
consider that the number of individuals legitimately falling under the
definition of minority is actually greater than the number of students who
make up the so-called majority. Take the Cornell Admissions Office
statistics for the class of 2005. With 54% of the class identifying
themselves as Caucasians, White people are only a mere 4 percentage points
away from becoming a minority. Of this same class, only 49% are female,
clearly making women minorities. Further, 30% of this class reported that
they are African-American, Native American, Hispanic or Asian American.
Combined with the 49% of the class who are females, this makes Caucasian
males the only real minority group left on campus. The minority majority
does not need special representation.

By seeking to pigeon-hole groups and further segregate the Cornell campus,
the so-called liberals have succeeded in creating a climate in which an
individual is no longer acknowledged as such, but rather is lumped together
as part of a group with easily identifiable needs and wants. To assume that
all identifiable groups have the same interests as far as University
policies are concerned is terribly na�ve.

The problem of double representation on the Student Assembly must be ended.
It is an undemocratic practice that violates the One Man /Woman--One Vote
principle and presupposes the interests of International, Minority and LGBTQ
students at Cornell. It is time for the administration and the student body
to acknowledge this unjust and undemocratic practice. The Student Assembly
must adopt a resolution abolishing the four liaison seats and designating
them as at-large seats.

This body [The Student Assembly] has a responsibility to fairly represent
the interests of the student body. It has failed. I urge you to vote to
eliminate discrimination from student government.

Sorority Life at Princeton

This was a letter the Rush Chair of Pi Phi sent to her sisters at the Princeton chapter....


Hi Pi Phi,

This is SUPER important information regarding our fabulous Pi Phi's and
the bid night which is TOMMOROW that you should all be getting so
excited for! We need to look the best we have ever, ever looked
tommorow night. Please bear with me and read this through.

Envision this: You are Tom Cruise's date to the premier of Minority
Report. What do you look like? You look fucking HOT!!! Perfect hair,
impeccable make-up, celebrity-esque, elegant.

We have one more night of rush, this is the final push and our time to
really shine! We have done a great job showing how laid-back, cool and
sporty we are, now let's wow these guys with our classiness, elegence
and style.

The basic outfit: NICE black pants or black skirt + Martini glass tank

1) Hair This means Blowdryed, Clean, Sexy. You judge how your hair
looks best, if you like it down, wear it down. If you like it half up,do
it. If it looks best curly, go for it. You could also do a low bun
with a fresh flower in it.

This does NOT mean: hair in a loose bun with danglies, hair in
greasy ponytail (like me today for example), or coming straight
from the gym.

2) Make-Up
Take a little bit of extra time and get glammed. Not vegas-y but
elegant and beautiful. It should be clear that you have make-up on
but in a good way. We are all good at this we just need to make the
effort!

3) Shoes
This is the time for your favorite pair of fabulous, high stilletto type
heels that you cherish. The look we are going for is SEXY
CHIC.

4) Jewelry
Use your best judgement here. Make it classy and stylish, make it
whimsical, make it appropriate to what you look good in while staying
within the parameters of the theme. Gold hoops, chandelier earrings, or
even diamond studs if that is more your style. If your ears arent
pierced pile on some bangles. Look like you are going out in
NYC!!!

Thank you so much for reading this through. These details may sound
stupid but they do MATTER and we want to get these girls!

if you are bored and need inspriration go to www.hbo.com....

Go Pi Phi!

An Email Exchange

Dean Larimore, in a form response to an impassioned email, has ignored my question.



> Dear Emmett,
>
> Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts regarding
> the recent elimination of the swimming and diving teams. It was
> a difficult decision and one that we hoped would not be
> necessary. Director of Athletics Josie Harper did examine a
> range of alternatives, including another round of
> across-the-board budget reductions that would have affected the
> competitive ability and overall experience of all teams, before
> reaching the decision to eliminate the swimming and diving
> program.
>
> Students gain much from their experiences outside of the
> classroom and I very deeply regret that it has become necessary
> to reduce the number of varsity sports offered at Dartmouth. We
> will continue to be one of just eleven Division I schools in the
> nation to offer more than 30 varsity programs (the average number
> of sports offered by Division I schools is 19). However, I
> realize that this does not diminish the range of emotions that I
> am sure you and others are experiencing as a result of the
> elimination of our swimming and diving program.
>
> I hope that you will continue to offer support to the
> student-athletes, coaches, parents, and alumni who are struggling
> with this difficult news. The College has extended its support
> to the swimming and diving coaches and team members, and Athletic
> Director Josie Harper has indicated willingness to help establish
> swimming and diving as a club sport if students are interested in
> that option.
>
> Thank you again for writing,
>
> Jim Larimore


Extended your support? You cut the rug out from under them! You've done nothing but harm to them!

And you flat-out ignore what I said in my email. WHY was it necessary? WHY does it come before all that gobbledegook that the College seems intent on forcefeeding its students?

I never expected to get a response, but I would have been less upset than I am now if you had simply ignored my email. This response -- or non-response -- has infuriated me. You don't address a single criticism I raise. Instead, you blithely send me a form letter.

Below is a post, made by Alexander Wilson '01, on www.dartlog.net yesterday:

"...I fear you guys are not focusing on the important issue about the College budget. Empirically, there is no reason to cut any program, PC or not, useful or not. Whatever the exact size of the endowment, it is more than it was in 1999, and at least several multiples of what it was in 1990. Tuition has increased above the rate of inflation, while labor costs have not kept pace as far as I know. Certainly the past year has witnessed no increases in labor costs, fixed operating expenses, or similar expenditure problems. And the College admits to no major decrease in alumni giving. So the College has a far larger endowment, and at worst the same annual revenue to expenditure ratio that it had in 1990, yet is cutting programs. In other words, it is willing to sacrifice those programs, academic, athletic, or otherwise, to maintain the endowment.

"The question you should be asking isn't what programs could be cut more painlessly, but why any programs should be cut at all."

How about a thoughtful (and, dare I ask, honest) answer to this question, not to mention my own?

...but I won't hold my breath.

Emmett


Re: The Big Picture

Stan Horowitz responds to Mr. Wilson:
Alexander Wilson has it right. It is not at all obvious why Dartmouth needs to cut anything.

My hypothesis is that there are some things (maybe having to do with the research university in all but name) that have received increased funding. It was expected that normal operations could be maintained in other areas because of the increase in money available from the endowment. This turned out to be false. In order to keep the high priority items going at the desired level in the face of market losses and low interest rates something had to go.
I agree with Messrs. Wilson and Horowitz but suspect that much of the bloat from the late Nineties that the College now refuses to cut comes from social and diversity-enhancing programs, which seem to be staff-heavy, littered with expensive consultants, and sometimes involve the College eating the costs of building construction and facilities renovation (i.e., when donors can't be found; ever wonder why "Poison Ivy" or whatever they're calling it this year isn't, e.g., "The Chet Johnson Diversity in Nightlife Project"?). I just can't think of a commensurate rise in graduate-level activities over the same time-frame. If anyone has any facts to the contrary, please post 'em.

First Time for Everything Department

Wilson has a point. Why are we cutting programs? Brilliant deduction, Alex. Hear hear.

Alas, I can't go up to campus this weekend. I'm taking the LSAT on Saturday and promptly hanging myself thereafter. However, I wholeheartedly endorse Alex's candidacy. He's just the sort of Mencken-like fellow we need on the Alumni Association -- a cure for their cossetting ways. What's more, he performs the singular feat of being both cynical and sincere at the same time. That deserves rewarding.

Wednesday, December 04, 2002

Last Thing, I Promise
Review Alumni of the last few years in particular, you should come up this weekend. I'm bringing Clark and Vagianos with me, it'll be a mini-reunion. I see Murphy's, complaints about how no one rages anymore, wonkery about the 1st Amendment on campus. Menashi, Grossman, Emmett?? All the young uns will be in the library studying for exams, so you won't even have to feel old.

"The Diamond as Big as the Ritz"

Fitzgerald's best short story is available in its entirety online.

Get it and save it now before someone thinks about the status of its copyright...
On a Related Note
The annual meeting of the Dartmouth Alumni Association is this Saturday, December 9, at 12 noon in Alumni Hall. The agenda is here. It will be preceded, at 11am by a special session to consider the report of the Joint Committee on Alumni Governance and Trustee Nominations. Over the next year, as the recommendations of the Committee are considered and possibly adopted, the alumni as a whole may lose a great deal of their ability to influence exactly the types of broad questions we are now dealing with. I recommend that everyone who can possibly make it attend this meeting, mainly for the reasons I talked about a ways back, here and here. Full Disclosure: I am a candidate for Secretary/Treasurer of the Association as part of the Dartmouth Alumni for Open Governance slate. If people who simply don't care about these issues but like me personally want to show up and vote for myself and my colleagues, I certainly won't judge you harshly.
The Big Picture
Why is a huge endowment more important than programs and facilities that have been in place for 50-100 years? That is the real question, and I think you Reviewers should dedicate a significant amount of print and effort to finding out. Have the Trustees and/or the administration bought entirely into the notion that the prestige generated by an endowment is more important than what it actually provides on campus? Trustees of other colleges with whom I've had this conversation suggest that evaluation wouldn't be uncommon or entirely irrational. Are they, as Grossman suggests, planning massive new PC programming?

My guess is that with alumni contributions to a major capital campaign no longer as assured as in the past, the College wants the endowment to be sufficient to make up the difference when (or if, for the less cynical) it moves forward with a massive North Campus expansion to make Wright's famous "research university in all but name" less boast and more reality. If that guess or anything like it is true, it means this question may have tremendous significance for the future of the College. So my suggestion (and request since I have no way of doing it myself) is that the Review focus on this issue. Its the most important one the Review has covered in many, many years.
Missing the Point
With the exception of the Stan Horowitz/Andrew Grossman posting tandem, I fear you guys are not focusing on the important issue about the College budget. Empirically, there is no reason to cut any program, PC or not, useful or not. Whatever the exact size of the endowment, it is more than it was in 1999, and at least several multiples of what it was in 1990. Tuition has increased above the rate of inflation, while labor costs have not kept pace as far as I know. Certainly the past year has witnessed no increases in labor costs, fixed operating expenses, or similar expenditure problems. And the College admits to no major decrease in alumni giving. So the College has a far larger endowment, and at worst the same annual revenue to expenditure ratio that it had in 1990, yet is cutting programs. In other words, it is willing to sacrifice those programs, academic, athletic, or otherwise, to maintain the endowment.

The question you should be asking isn't what programs could be cut more painlessly, but why any programs should be cut at all.

Swim team on MeFi...

...here.

CONTEST

Get your entries in by Sunday (email them here). Dave Marmaros '01 send these in:
-Fire the dean of Plurality, hire a dean of Dichotomy. (not much money would be saved this way, but at least the office would be correctly named)

- Football Team vs. Fencing Team, winner keeps funds.

- Sell tickets for above. I for one would go watch.

- Contract out to EBAs to run DDS. They know how to manage a food business profitably. [editor's note: is EBA's profitable? Above the table, that is...?]

- Stop putting up those silly ropes on the side of every road. Do they actually stop anyone from walking on the grass?

- Replace Dick's house with a drug dispensing machine. As was proven in an earlier Review article [editor: see here, especially if you're a freshman], it's functionally equivalent.
Contest details are at the top of the page. Send 'em in.

Defunding The Princeton Tory

"I am apparently an enemy of free speech. If The Tory is receiving University monies, the University has every right to pull funding from a magazine publishing opinions it does not endorse," says Princeton student Arthur Dudney in this letter to the editor in the Princetonian.

Mr. Dudney: "apparently"???

Re: Here's a Thought

Stan Horowitz replies to Mr. Begley:
Reducing the number of accepted students is a really silly idea. Keep your eye on the ball. Financial aid is just money the College is giving to itself.

Put, I hope, more clearly, there are large fixed costs involved in running Dartmouth. As long as the additional students pay more than the marginal costs associated with them the school is ahead of the game. I bet that the marginal cost is markedly less than $12,000.
I'm not sure what the marginal costs are, but remember that there are opportunity costs associated with the sunk costs of maintaining Dartmouth, paying faculty, etc. To get at those, though, need-blind admissions would have to go out the window, which really isn't an attractive option.

Local coverage

Today's Valley News also has an article on the swim team issue. Highlights include this quote by Jimmy L.
The decision stands. What we have been talking about is what to do now with what we know about the impact on our students.
So that's what all those discussions have been about.

Here's a Thought

Why not reduce the number of accepted students?

According to the Admissions Department website, we aim for an incoming class of 1,070. 40% of the class is on financial aid with an average aid package of "nearly two-thirds" of the total cost of $36,000. If we reduce the incoming class by 50 students (2%), then 20 of those fifty students will be receiving, on average, $24,000 each. This totals $480,000 in savings. Keep in mind that this would in no way affect Dartmouth's need-blind admissions policy, since we're simply relying on the law of averages in deciding which students wouldn't be accepted.

The savings would actually be MUCH greater than that because tuition is subsidized by the endowment (that was the original idea for this post, but I couldn't find the percentages for that, so I can't provide the dollar figures). This plan has the added benefit of eliminating (or at least reducing) the need for the Tree Houses.

"Dartmouth students press college to keep swim teams afloat"

In the Boston Globe

More on Britain

They really don't understand free speech across the pond. Here they are outlawing a commercial that poked fun of George W. Bush. The advertisers would need to get permission from Bush to run the commercial, officials said.

What morons.

Motivated and organized

The "Support Dartmouth Aquatics" Web site

Be on the lookout

A piece on this matter will be in the Boston Globe today (12/4).

I don't know why

...but this blitz just left me speechless.

________________________________________

If you enjoyed A Thanksgiving Taco....

This Wednesday in Brace Commons

Thursday Night Salsa Presents:

A TACO BEFORE FINALS

Featuring:

Free Homemade Tacos! 7:45pm
"Salsa" The Movie, an 80's classic! 8:00pm (In McCulloch if no TV set up in Brace)

AND
AS ALWAYS

THURSDAY NIGHT SALSA
burning down the house with FUEL, 9pm-1am
Beginner classes at 9pm
Last chance to dance this term!

Tuesday, December 03, 2002

Affirmative action in education on the docket

The Supreme Court agrees to hear two cases concerning racial preferences at public universities and may decide whether such admissions policies violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.

What they really want at Berkeley's Boalt Hall

The dean of Berkeley's law school resigned in disgrace last week, amidst accusations of sexual misconduct. His accusor's lawyer had this to say, according to the Herald Tribune:
[Lawyer Laura] Stevens said Berkeley is obligated to "train and educate the whole community about this social phenomenon of sexual abuse and heighten people's interest in the subject in a positive way to prevent it, to create an environment that is likely to prevent it and likely to aid a victim in a positive way if it still does occur. That has not happened and that's what we want to have happen."
Blogger Erin O'Connor also points to a SF Chronicle piece on the potential plaintiff's goals.