Issuu

TRUTH AND TWO STAPLES

DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTON Binghamton Review REVIEW

INSIDE:

THE PIPE DREAM “BLACK FACE” CONTROVERSY OUR MANAGING EDITOR DOES HOT YOGA ROB FORD’S ANTICS AMERICA’S FIRST CANNABIS CORPORATION OBAMACARE STILL SUCKS

AND, OF COURSE, WHY CAPITALISM IS SUPER EVIL

Binghamton Review

P.O. BOX 6000 BINGHAMTON, NY 13902-6000

EDITOR@BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

FOUNDED 1987 • THANKSGIVING EDITION • DECEMBER 2013 “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years there’d be a shortage of sand.” -Milton Friedman

Contents

*Thanksgiving style!

Sam Bondy is thankful for his First Hot Yoga Experience

Jake Hayutin is thankful for America’s First Weed Corporation

Kathleen Koessler is not thankful for the Pipe Dream protests

Layout Editor William Schneider

Dan Milyavsky is not thankful for Pipe Dream’s apology

Treasurer Sean Glendon

Aditi Roy is not thankful for the Decline of Democracy

Webmaster Jordan Raitses

Sean Glendon is thankful for Rob Ford’s Crack Antics

Josh May is not thankful for the RNC’s actions in Virginia

Christoper Medrano is not thankful for Obamacare

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Daniel D. Milyavsky Managing Editor Samuel P. Bondy

Copy Desk Chief Amanda Harbour Editor Emeritus Jacob Hayutin Associate Editor Lawrence Gerchikov Contributors Jack Russo, Christopher Medrano, Aditi Roy, Ross Marchand, Josh May, Samson Audino Patriarchs of the Review Louis W. Leonini Adam Shamah

Jack Russo is thankful for pizza, but not for the Student Association19

Jake Hayutin is also not thankful for Obamacare

Dan Milyavsky is definitely not thankful for the birth control rant 21 Dan Milyavsky is thankful for JFK, though

Friends of the Review Dr. Aldo S. Bernardo The Leonini Family The Shamah Family The Grynheim Family The Menje Family The Leeds Family The Lombardi Family Binghamton Review is printed by Our Press in Chenango Bridge, NY. We provide the truth; they provide the staples.

REST ASSURED, THERE IS MORE. Head to www.binghamtonreview.com for more of our life-changing opinions. 2

BINGHAMTON REVIEW,

DECEMBER 2013

PAGE 8 EDITORIAL

From the Editor

To Our Invaluable and Dearest Readers – I hope you enjoyed your Thanksgiving! I have good news for you all – I’m delighted to say that the Binghamton Review is once again controversial! With protesters organized by far-leftists besieging the Pipe Dream office and Democrats making irrelevant outbursts during debates, we finally have some campus related stuff to write about, and for people to hate us for! We spent most of the past school year covering national and international political issues. This wasn’t totally our fault; there just wasn’t that much political stuff going on around campus. But, this past month at least, that has all changed! The biggest change by far to come to the Review recently is the development of a bona fide website. Whereas before all we had was a page where you could see the PDF’s of our past issues, we now have a website where we upload a new article at least every other day, and where you can leave online comments. This is good, since despite my best efforts, nobody writes letters to the editor anymore (aside from letters of praise – no really, there’s one in this issue). A good number of the comments are decidedly negative, but since I’m a libertarian, I’ve decided to not filter or moderate comments at all. Feel free to let loose! The URL is www. binghamtonreview.com, in case you haven’t noticed it yet on the back cover or on the bottom of every other page. I’d like to thank Jordan Raitses in particular for putting the site together and managing it with skill. Now, to briefly discuss the main event – that being the protest in front of Pipe Dream’s office over an article entitled “Dressing as Another Race Isn’t Always Offensive.” In my initial reaction to the protest, and Pipe Dream’s subsequent reaction, I put up an article on the website entitled “Pipe Dream’s Groveling and Pathetic Apology Misses the Mark.” It was an articulate and eye-catching headline, but in retrospect, the language might have been a bit harsh. We at the Review still hold the view that Pipe Dream’s three apologies were excessive, but we’re also coming at it from fundamentally different angles. Whereas at first I thought that Pipe Dream was caving to public pressure, what I later realized is that Pipe Dream’s editors actually thought

that the protesters were right in their grievance at PD’s lack of racial diversity. I also said that PD’s editors were self-described liberals, but I’ve been told that they actually aren’t (or not all of them are), so I’ll retract that claim as well. In reacting to this controversy, however, the Review is doing exactly what, at its very best form, it is supposed to be doing. That is, we are providing an alternative voice. Our mission statement, which goes back over 20 years, has the following sentence in it: “We seek to promote the free exchange of ideas and offer an alternative viewpoint not normally found on our predominately liberal campus.” In providing an alternative perspective on this campus controversy, we’ve enhanced the campus discourse. Last year, we did a great job of providing an alternative viewpoint on national political issues. There will be no other publication on campus that exposes Obamacare for the disaster that it is. You won’t see other publications talking about the five million people who’ve lost their health insurance because of this disastrous law. If you want to read about how evil Republicans are, any other publication will do. If you want to learn about how capitalism and free markets actually help the poor much more than socialism ever can, then you need to pick up the Review. I’m immensely proud of my staff, our contributors, and the Review as an institution for the great work we’ve been doing. This will be the last issue that we come out with this semester, but if you ever feel like getting enlightened or amused during the upcoming Winter break, please feel free to check out our website, and perhaps even leave a comment! You won’t be the only one. So far, according to our stats, we’ve gotten visitors from (aside from America, obviously): France, the UK, Canada, India, Germany, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg(!!), Sweden, and Japan. Not a bad start! Best of luck on your finals! If you have the intelligence and sophistication to appreciate the Review, I’m sure you’ll do great! Dan Milyavsky

Ask What You Can Do for the Review. Email:editor@binghamtonreview.com and I’ll always respond! editor@binghamtonreview.com

Binghamtonreview.com

CPampus resswatch For you first time readers, Press Watch is where we expose other campus publications for their mediociry and logical deficiency. Quotes from articles are in Italics, Our (My) Comments are in Bold

Casi-NO Editorial in Pipe Dream

“Today, in addition to mayoral elections, New Yorkers are voting on Proposition 1. It’s a proposed amendment to the New York Constitution that would allow for up to seven casinos to be built in the state…While casinos will yield a profit for the state, they won’t have the same effect for the economically depressed areas where they will be erected. We have a pretty strong idea of what would happen: These casinos would take money out of the hands of working-class New Yorkers and give it to already rich foreign investors. Casinos don’t make money for the poor.” I wonder, have any of the people on Pipe Dream’s editorial board actually been to a casino? It’s not “rich foreign investors” who deal hands at Black Jack, offer casino patrons drinks, work the cashiers’ booth, and clean the floors. The jobs created here aren’t just the jobs involved in physically building the casino. Not only that, but most of the people who patronize casinos don’t live in the immediate area. Just how many people do you think live right next to Atlantic City? “We’re not as worried about New York City, where a casino would resemble something like Caesars Palace. We’re more worried about places like Albany, where a casino might be something less glamorous, instead crumbling into an addiction-feeding den of sin.” An addiction feeding den of sin? Jesus Christ. Pipe Dream, is liberalism not working for you? Sorry, but you can’t become the campus conservative paper. That niche is already taken by yours truly. In all seriousness, though, not to make this sound too ideological, 4

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM Written by our Editor in Chief but what right does the government have to decide what qualifies as “sin?” If sexual promiscuity is to be legal (and it should be!), why shouldn’t gambling? Can’t people be allowed to make their own decisions, even if they make mistakes sometimes? “We’re not talking about one casino or even two, we’re talking about seven. Seven casinos. This would fundamentally change New York state. We want people associating upstate with things like leaves and apple cider, not slot machines and blackjack.” New York State has over 19.5 million residents. That would make one casino for every 2.8 million people. Oh how frightening! What a fundamental change! The problem is, that people don’t associate Upstate with things like leaves and apple cider. Instead, many associate it with endemic unemployment and freezing cold. This casino plan could at least alleviate one of those things. Luckily, the voters of New York State approved Prop 1, with 57% of the vote. This may be a blue state, but our voters don’t ALWAYS vote the wrong way. Just the vast majority of the time.

Ideas about sex will always elicit opposition By Jake Lewis in Pipe Dream

“What needs to be addressed here is that for every individual opinion on something in the very broad field of sex and relationships, there is a vast amount of opposition in our society. If there is incredible opposition for a single opinion, take all of your views on sex together, and it might seem like you face insurmountable odds.”

whatever kind of sex you want? “Societal change is always needed; we certainly see that when it comes to issues like body image and sexuality. Still, we’ve also seen with these issues that society doesn’t respond to change with any form of immediacy. While we work on creating this change in society, we also have to take a minute to reconcile our sex within ourselves. In this reconciliation, we have to try to remove ourselves from society.” Society doesn’t respond with immediacy? What is society? How can society respond? It’s just a metaphor! Individual people can respond. And what does it even mean to reconcile our sex within ourselves? Binghamton University, you are failing at teaching your students how to write. The purpose of writing is, at its core, to communicate ideas. What exactly is the blabber trying to communicate? It’s anyone’s guess! “The opinions of society will always be there.” No, they won’t. In fact, they’re not even there now! Society doesn’t have opinions. People have opinions. It’s important for me to get this across. Society can’t be racist; people can’t be racist. Society can’t pay for your college education; taxpayers can pay for your education. You don’t have an obligation to society at large; you can only have obligations to people. Sorry to get serious there for a moment, but it is important to deconstruct this fallacy, since it pops up everywhere.

I don’t mean to beg for pity, but Dear Reader, you must try to understand how hard it is to respond to nonsense like this. Why the hell would you face insurmountable odds? What does it mean to say that there’s opposition in our society? Is someone physically stopping you from having DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

WHAT YOU MISSED * It has now been 50 years since President Kennedy was tragically gunned down in Dallas. RIP JFK. (Despite his lurid sexual deliquincies, which you can read about in my article! Because I know that’s what piques your interest.)

* Guest Contribution: The Binghamton Food Co-op, the student owned vegan non-GMO restaurant on campus rejected local a man’s attempt to donate locally grown apples. When the local offered the apples free of charge, the manager rebuked the man stating “Ew, gross! There’re all icky and misshapen, why don’t they look shiny?” When the local reassured the manager that the apples were picked from a wild apple tree and that they were as organic as apples could get, the manager said in a hushed “shhh! Our customers aren’t supposed to know what organic food actually looks like.’ The local man then realized this shit went top deep, and backed away silently. However he quietly vowed to bake an apple pie using the exact same apples and donate the pie the following week. * There were two posts on Bing-U secrets relating to the Review. One praised us, saying the following:” Binghamton Review is the only publication left on campus brave enough and willing to expose bullshit for what it is and defend itself.” Another insulted us, saying the following: “Thank you Binghamton Review. Thanks to you, I don’t have to buy toilet paper anymore. That’s what it’s meant for, right?” In response, I attempted to print this issue on sand paper, but this ended up not being practicable. Oh, well. Not only do I not mind insults, but I’m even quite willing to reprint them! (even when they consist of infantile bathroom humor) * Obamacare continues to stumble and bumble. Meanwhile, Chris Christie handily won re-election to the New Jersey governorship, Terry McAuliffe won Virginia’s gubernatorial race by a smaller margin than expected, and Bill de Blasio won the NYC mayoral race in a gigantic editor@binghamtonreview.com

landslide. I live in Manhattan, so I weep. * Binghamton students held two political debates recently. The College Republicans squared off against the College Democrats, and the College Libertarians squared off against the College Democrats as well. To the people involved in these debates, they must have seemed very important (and I say this as someone who was a debater in the latter event), but to apathetic college students, which is to say at least 98% of the

BU student body, no shits were given. * This will be our last issue of the semester. I know, it’s sad. If you can’t get enough though, check up on our website for regular updates. And leave a comment occasionally, just so that I know people are actually reading. * The US and other Western powers reached a deal with Iran in Geneva. The deal involved the easing of some sanctions in exchange for Iran taking some steps to tamp down their nuclear program. The deal expires in six months, and is meant mainly as a temporary measure to encourage further negotiations. We’ll see what happens then. Prediction: This winds up being like the “Supercommittee” of 2011, and fails

completely, with the situation returning to the status quo. Number 2 prediction: Iran manages to permanently ease sanctions, while being able to continue work on a nuclear weapon. And, of course, there is the extremely remote possibility that Iran will actually discontinue its nuke program. * The Pope recently bashed free market capitalism, calling for more state control of the economy. He wrote: “Some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.” Harvard economist Greg Mankiw responded intelligently: “First, throughout history, freemarket capitalism has been a great driver of economic growth, and as my colleague Ben Friedman has written, economic growth has been a great driver of a more moral society. Second, “trickle-down” is not a theory but a pejorative used by those on the left to describe a viewpoint they oppose. It is equivalent to those on the right referring to the “soak-the-rich” theories of the left. It is sad to see the pope using a pejorative, rather than encouraging an open-minded discussion of opposing perspectives.Third, as far as I know, the pope did not address the tax-exempt status of the church. I would be eager to hear his views on that issue. Maybe he thinks the tax benefits the church receives do some good when they trickle down.” * M e e t Billy, the guy who compiles each issue of The Review. We felt bad b/c his picture wasn’t in here. ----------------> Binghamtonreview.com

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Letters to the editor The following was an online comment on Kathleen Koessler’s article about the Pipe Dream protest. Victoria Brown November 16, 2013 at 10:44 am If anyone actually took the Binghamton Review seriously, it might be worth a few flips through previous articles that the BR has published in the past. One would find how immature and thoughtless it handles issues on a monthly basis. Go ahead, BR, weigh in. No one expects anything remotely reflexive or intelligent from your pages. The Heritage Foundationsponsored Binghamton Review is a sheer and utter waste of time and has no place even remotely broaching issues of race (or class, or gender for that matter). Stick to your usual misrepresentation and falsehoods. Only by misrepresenting this important event, its content, and purpose can you find a way to report on this in your usual tone that represents in fact, very few voices on campus. Money from the conservative hacks at the Heritage Foundation has bought its way into Binghamton campus, a creative attempt to normalize bigotry. It is a good thing that no one reads it except for a good laugh at the desperate attempts of conservative thinking to opine on issues of inequality today.

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

Dearest Victoria, I wasn’t aware that we got money from the Heritage Foundation, but if you insist that we do, I suppose I’ll have to take your word for it, even though I doubt you’ve had access to our financial documents. I thought everyone had a right to express their views on race, class, and gender, but once again, if you insist that only silly lefties can express their views on these matters, we’ll promptly shut up. On a serious note, Victoria, regrettably not only is your comment factually challenged, but it consists exclusively of infantile ad hominem attacks, (I suppose this response is a little ad hominem too, but oh well) and doesn’t even suggest any ways to improve ourselves. I sure hope it made you feel better though, I can just imagine you huffing and puffing at the end of it. Other comments critical of us were actually helpful. In particular, my own piece about this incident was criticized for resembling a “bar rant” and being over the top. While in many ways this is what my writing style is like and many people find it hilarious and highly readable, I do see their point, seeing as how this is a serious issue. Furthermore, reading the other comments, it is indeed troubling to hear that Pipe Dream would have been willing to publish a Holocaust denial article, but since they have expressed regret for publishing this obviously far less offensive article, I doubt they would publish anything of such moral atrociousness. To put our own view about the protest in a more sober, and more concise way:

1. The original article was insensitive and incorrect; it is in fact not okay to dress up in black face, or even in make up to make your skin darker. The comparison to Oompa Loompas was particularly in bad taste. I have had internal disagreements with my staff about this, but in the end I am the one who sets the editorial policy of the Review. 2. Pipe Dream, seeing how it bills itself as the voice for all students, should not have published it. The Review explicitly defines itself as providing an alternative voice to the mainstream of political correctness, so in theory we have more leeway with publishing controversial opinions, but I still would certainly not have published that article. 3. The protests were conducted in a manner that, while protected by the First Amendment, had a chilling effect on free speech. Now Pipe Dream will be far more afraid to publish controversial articles, even if they are well argued, in fear of another such protest. In addition to this, the behavior towards Christina, based on what I hear from first hand sources, was rather boorish and disgraceful. 4. Perhaps the words “groveling” and “pathetic” in the initial article I wrote about the incident were a bit strong, but Pipe Dream’s multiple apologies (aneditorial, a Letter from the Editor, an apology from Julianne, and yet another from the author of the chivalry article) were too pleading in their tone and gave way too much in to the protesters. Daniel Milyavsky Editor-In-Chief Binghamton Review

DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Check us out online! @ www.binghamtonreview.com

According to our web stats, all of North America already reads us. With frequent views in countries like France, England, India, Germany, Israel, Italy, Sweden, and Japan, pretty soon our website (and with it our vision,) will conquer Europe and Asia as well...all in less than a month of existence! editor@binghamtonreview.com

My First Hot Yoga Experience

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

My First Hot Yoga Experience Written by Sam Bondy I drink a lot, so this semester, I decided that as a panacea for my ailingliver, I would endeavor to try hot, holistic, hipsteric yoga. Catharsis. Or so I thought. As I entered “Yoga Body Shop” (the old place for all you noobs), near Wegmans, I felt terrified, like going to the doctor for a shot kind of terrified. I was with my bffl, Jake, a three-year yogic veteran, as if I wouldn’t look inflexible already. For those of you who haven’t met me, wise choice, but I’m pretty tall and lanky, and not in the wacky waving inflatable arm flaling tube man-way, but more Sheldon Cooper-esk. Thousands of years of evolution did not groom my gene pool for any Goddamn-“asana”. There are only a few essential items you need for hot yoga: undies, shorts, yoga-mat, hand towel and a bath towel to cover your mat from the deluge of sweat. Of course, this last part wasn’t explained to me, so I simply brought a hand towel. How hot could it be, right? The class was set to start at 7, but obviously Jake and I got there around 6:57. During the car ride, I showed Jake my towel and he started to die laughing. The car is swerving side to side and I’m freaking out trying to find out what’s so funny. If we’re gonna die, I wanted to go out with a smile on my face. When I found out, there was no smile… As we rush in to change, I asked our instructor for a bath towel. He was happy to oblige. I was in the clear on that front. When I went into the back where Jake was hopping on one foot putting on his shorts, I dug into my backpack to find mine. I began to start rummaging, as I didn’t feel them anywhere. Oh no… I told Jake what new horror I was facing and he began laughing 8

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

hysterically, again. Thanks man. At this point, we hadn’t entered the hot room of death, but I was already sweating from embarrassment. I was wearing boxers and jeans. Our instructor walked by and I had a stroke of pure unintelligence. “Hey” I said, “I forgot my shorts.” He replied, “well I can’t lend you mine, I guess you can go in your underwear”. Great first yoga experience I was having. As I opened the door to the yogaroom, which I could swear had printed on it, “abandon all hope, ye who enter here”, a gust of hot air battered my face. A disgusting, sweltering blast of heat. The kind you feel when you open an oven that has just finished preheating to 10,000°. No way I thought… As I walked in, wearing nothing but my boxers, I realized I was the last one and that everyone was waiting on me. Thank Vishnu Jake saved me a spot. I quietly set up my area and adjusted my briefs. Class was about to begin. Our instructor started us off by walking us through some “Sun Salutations”, I was pathetic. For those who live under a rock, yoga is full of gorgeous, curvy women. All 20 of them were privately laughing at my misery. “It’s all in the hips”, as our instructor walked around “correcting” the ladies’

positions, it looked like a Friday night at the Rat. What a champ. By now, I was drenched in sweat, running out of water and holding in laughter whenever the instructor said downward dog or happy baby (yes, I’m immature). And it didn’t help that one of the only guys in the class kept blurting out “ohhhh yeahhh” whenever we sat deeper into a pose. The whole experience made me feel like I was in a movie, a terrible, sad movie that refuses to end. But needless to say, several weeks later, I am now a die-hard yoga fan and will continue to try to touch my toes until the end of my days. I’ll be there next Monday so, if you want some comic relief come say hi.

DECEMBER 2013

America’s First Cannabis Corporation

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

America’s First Cannabis Corporation Written By Jake Hayutin

According to the most recent Gallup Poll 67% of millenials support the end of marijuana prohibition. As our generation comes to dominate the voting population we are sure to see a change over the next few decades. Though, the success of Jamen Shively may catalyze the process. The former Microsoft corporate strategy manager has engineered and is postured to implement a corporate marijuana empire that will pressure the Obama administration to honor Washington and Colorado’s new legalization laws (state Initiative 502 and Amendment 64 respectively). Just a few weeks ago on CNBC, Shively advertised his new company, Diego Pellicer, as the future “Starbucks of pot.” His story is so romantic that it is hard to imagine a figure more fitting. Though, inspired by a few tokes of high quality cannabis, Shively’s resume puts all stoner stereotypes to rest: with his bachelors in civil engineering from Berkeley, graduate work at MIT and fellowship with the National Science Foundation. His powerful ethos has given responsible consumption an entirely new life, as he casually admitted to National Geographic that roughly 70% of his most successful peers and colleagues throughout his career share his marijuana habit. Marijuana is in my blood he joked, but beneath what is obvious lie a quaint family history. Diego Pellicer was the name of Schively’s great grandfather, who was the Vice Governor of the island Cebu (a Spanish Colony) in the Philippines during the editor@binghamtonreview.com

Spanish American War. Before he was killed by American soldiers Pellicer was the largest grower of hemp in the world at the height of the Spanish Empire. Shively hopes to honor his great granddad’s legacy by creating the first premium marijuana brand. Like fine wine, high quality cannabis can have delicate and eclectic value, appreciated only by the most refined consumer. If the Department of Justice continues to (begrudgingly) tolerate the state sanctions (as it has most recently) Diego Pellicer has the potential to make all marijuana users and libertarian advocates’ wildest dreams come true. The black market for marijuana is projected to be worth somewhere between 100-200 billions dollars. Shively is postured to professionalize this market first, by commissioning over 700 grows in Washington. His projections indicate each month they will produce 2,000 pounds generating twenty million dollars in retail sales.

and allowing those like Pellicer to do business will eliminate a great many wasted tax outlays and generate tremendous revenues. Taken one step further, Pellicer could be as crucial for American’s current economic recovery as Ford was to post war manufacturing. As the Federal Reserve continues to delay tapering because the fundamental indicators of our economy’s health suggest sickness, and speculators warn of another bubble in the stock market, the question of prohibition should be a no-brainer. Imagine someday in the near future when Pellicer offers a product so good and cheap it is exported all over the world and like Apple products - a point of American pride. What will you be smoking?

At best, if this federalist experiment is successful we can expect more states (especially the heavily indebted and socially liberal ones) to adopt similar laws in the future, beckoning more green ventures, jobs and prosperity. With the end America’s longest and most costly war (on drugs), green entrepreneurs like Schively may have the opportunity to help alleviate our overstuffed and costly prisons, quell the devastation of Mexican drug cartels, create much needed jobs and inspire countless others to do the same. Ending the war on marijuana 9

The Pipe Dream “Sit-In”: Why This Wasn’t Martin Luther King’s Protest

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

The Pipe Dream “Sit-in”: Why This Wasn’t Martin Luther King’s protest Written By Kathleen Koessler I understand that this article may hurt some, unfortunately. I also understand that it is impossible for me to have the perspective of someone who is African-American when reading an article comparing wearing blackface as part of a Halloween costume to wearing orange makeup as part of an Oompa Loompa costume. I do know, however, that racism is still a huge problem in America. All you have to do is go on YouTube or any other site where people aren’t afraid of saying what they think due to online anonymity. It’s not just on web media; empirical evidence shows that racism is still a serious issue in our nation. Every serious issue, however, needs to be addressed with a serious and thoughtful approach. Unfortunately, it is not always addressed this way, and last Monday night was an example of when it is addressed the wrong way. For those of you who didn’t hear about it, here’s what happened: A group of about 50 students went down to the Pipe Dream office at 6 pm to protest an article titled “Dressing as another race isn’t always offensive: Sometimes a costume is just a costume”. The protestors demanded not only that an apology be made in the next issue of Pipe Dream (and it was), but also that the author of the article be dismissed and that the paper appoint affirmative action writers from multicultural groups on campus. A majority of the protestors were of minority race but there were many white protestors as well. The editor-in-chief of Pipe Dream, Christina Pullano, came out and completely sympathized with their concerns, promising an apology in the next issue of Pipe Dream, but was still humiliated by them. Instead of showing her mutual respect, she was screamed at 10

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

for forty minutes and she was compared to an editor allowing an article denying the history of Holocaust or slavery to be published. The worst comments were the ones directed at her personally, saying the article was “poorly written” and “sucked anyway” and that she “wasn’t doing her job as an editor”. This was after she agreed to write a personal apology and address all of their personal concerns and requests. To be fair, a few people at the protest were respectful, but many were not. The following day, a news article was written describing the protest, and apologies were stated in the back of the issue from both the original author, Julianne Cuba, and the editor of Pipe Dream. In Christina’s own words, “In short, I’ve never felt worse about myself. I stood as a group of my peers shouted, demanded, glared and, at times, laughed in my face. And they were right.” She went on to say that the article never should have been published in the first place and that she was deeply sorry for what happened. I can understand why some were offended by her article. It was a naively written, and did not present the other side of the argument over the usage of “blackface”, which is its historical usage. Starting in the eighteenth century and ending in the early nineteenth century, dark facial makeup was used in minstrel shows and other theater performances that depicted African-Americans in very demeaning ways. Also, although the author was not trying to call “black people Oompa Loompas” by comparing blackface to Oompa Loompa costumes, it was easy to misconstrue her article as doing so. Her article also implied that those offended by blackface are themselves racist, which is not true.

Although the article may have sounded insensitive, it was not intentionally racist or hurtful, and was not condoning other usages of “blackface” that have been intentionally racist. It was fine to disagree with the author, but it could have been handled in a mature and thoughtful way. A letter to the editor disagreeing with the article could have been sent in, or a peaceful assembly could have gathered to calmly address their complaints. What was not okay was to humiliate Pipe Dream’s editor and Ms. Cuba and to try to have her fired. Ms. Pullano was not even thanked for writing an apology letter, and no apologies were issued to her for making her feel “worse about herself” than she’s “ever felt”. Not only do these kinds of reactions cause tensions, but they also draw attention away from true instances of racism. Many believe that racism largely does not exist anymore in America and that those who are deeply concerned about racism should not be. Reactions such as these only propagate this belief. When truly racist events occur, they are worth protesting against, but reacting to minor issues such as this draws attention away from major issues. The protestors also had additional criticisms of the newspaper that were unwarranted. For example, at the protest it was pointed out that there were no African-American students writing opinion articles or on editorial board of the Pipe Dream staff, hinting that the newspaper was discriminatory or even racist. There already was, however, an AfricanAmerican Social Media Manager on Pipe Dream’s staff, Shavonna Hinton. Also, as was stated in the Editorial Board’s apology, “We have open GIMs every semester, which we advertise DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

all over campus and in B-line, but every semester, disproportionately few students of color apply.” Automatically turning every instance of perceived underrepresentation into an instance of discrimination hurts the fight for an end to racism. When perceived racism is brought up in the media and in public discourse as often as it is, the conversation about race in America becomes cynical, pessimistic, and angry. The divisive rhetoric of identity politics makes it seem as though no progress has been made at all in the past 50 years, even though so much has. We elected an African-American president in two landslide elections, when 50 years ago Jim Crow laws prevented AfricanAmericans from even voting. When we focus on how much hasn’t changed instead of how much has, we make it harder to make even more progress. When minorities feel as though they are constantly under the threat of racism and that our society has not changed, it disempowers them. Why was Martin Luther King’s civil rights movement successful? It succeeded because its champions had an optimistic vision for the future and believed that they could overcome their incredibly difficult circumstances, which they did. The modern-day discourse about race has instead been negative, debilitating, and obsessed with what hasn’t changed instead of what has. Another reason why this was not Dr. King’s protest was its mean-spiritedness. The editor-in-chief was incredibly patient with the protestors and yet she was screamed at and mocked by many (though not all) of the protestors the entire time. This wasn’t even what Martin Luther King did when confronting true racism. He always insisted instead on “loving your enemies”, quoting Jesus, “I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you.” If we cannot editor@binghamtonreview.com

The Pipe Dream “Sit-In”: Why This Wasn’t Martin Luther King’s Protest

do this when a newspaper publishes an article that was insensitive but not truly racist or hateful, what will we do when we have to fight true racism and hate?

Although the article may have sounded insensitive, it was not intentionally racist or hurtful.”

“

Binghamtonreview.com

Why Pipe Dream’s Apology Misses The Mark

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Why Pipe Dream’s Apology Misses the Mark Written By Daniel Milyavsky

In their November 8th issue, Pipe Dream published an opinion article by Julianne Cuba entitled “Dressing as another race isn’t always offensive”. The article defended Julianne Hough, who recently dressed up for Halloween as a black character from a new Netflix show. Hough had the extremely poor judgment to put dark make up on her face, in order to make her skin look more like that of a black woman. In the end, she ended up looking like she put on too much spray tan, but nonetheless I completely understand the angry reaction to this costume; it was almost as stupid as the girl who decided to dress up like a Boston marathon bombing victim. The United States truly has a shameful history when it comes to our treatment of black people, and blackface was a disgustingly racist comedic routine. This past summer, I went to the Civil Rights Museum in Birmingham, and it is truly horrifying how just 50 years ago white people were willing to use extreme violence, even murder in some cases, to prevent black people from gaining equal rights. Thus, some sensitivity is certainly in order. However, it’s important to point that that Julianne’s article was not racist. It was insensitive, and her comparison of dressing up as a black character to dressing up as an oompa loompa was moronic, but nowhere in the article did she say or imply that black people were inferior in any way. Julianne is guilty of writing an insensitive, and perhaps offensive, article, not one borne of malice. She doesn’t deserve to be harassed, as some people have told me she has been, and certainly Pipe Dream should not fire her, as the protesters who were organized by leftist agitators demanded. 12

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

Should Pipe Dream have published her article? I don’t think so. There is a difference between publishing a brave and controversial, but well-argued opinion, like one claiming that affirmative action is racism (which we’ve published before), and publishing a poorly argued and poorly thought out one. But it happens; publications publish stupid opinions all the time. We’ve done it before too, although certainly much less frequently than Pipe Dream, since we have higher standards and have more sensible worldviews. On Pipe Dream’s website, the article has about 70 comments. A far more offensive article they published last semester, in which they referred to townies as “creatures” who could attack at any moment, got 980 comments and prompted significant backlash from the community. But the reaction to the article was completely inappropriate, and in some ways even went against the spirit of free speech. Far-leftists like Joe Tannenbaum

and Tyler Albertario, who would turn America into the authoritarian and destitute communist wasteland my parents fled from over 30 years ago if they had their way, took advantage of this stupid article. They mobilized students from the various cultural groups on campus, and apparently around 5070 of them protested outside of Pipe Dream’s office. Although Joe and Tyler are white, the majority of the protesters were students of color. I’m not really a fan of protesting articles in this way, since it can be intimidating and have a chilling effect on free speech. But the protesters had a First Amendment right to do what they did. They were not violent, and did not physically harass or intimidate Christina Pullano or Paige Nazinitsky, the Editor-in-Chief and Managing Editor of Pipe Dream, respectively, who came out to meet the protesters. First, they read a prepared statement to the effect that the opinions of Julianne were not the opinions of Pipe Dream.

Actress Julianne Hough’s Halloween Costume Credit: Jonathan Leibson/Getty; NPG.com DECEMBER 2013

Why Pipe Dream’s Apology Misses The Mark

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM The protesters’ “demands” were ridiculous. The first was to fire Julianne. If Pipe Dream fired all of their opinion columnists after they wrote a stupid article, they wouldn’t have anyone left. This is crazy. The second was to establish an affirmative action position at Pipe Dream to get more students from cultural groups to write for Pipe Dream. This is unnecessary; anyone can apparently apply to write at Pipe Dream, and no students should be given special treatment depending on whether they’re part of a cultural group or not. The last “demand” was to announce these policy changes in the next issue, along with a public apology. The editor, Christina, chose not to accede to the first two demands (at least not yet), but certainly surrendered under pressure to the last one. The apologies published were truly pathetic and nauseating to read. Time for a Review tradition, some good old fashioned Press Watch. First up, the editorial published after the incident: “While we do have varied perspectives, with a wide range of races, religions and cultures among us, there are perspectives that we lack. Though it’s something that we’ve noticed, until now, our cultural makeup was not something that we deeply internalized enough.” What the hell does this even mean? You didn’t internalize your cultural make up deeply enough? Unless Pipe Dream is lying about having a racially diverse staff, this makes no sense. “The column that gave rise to the protest does not reflect the collective opinion of our staff, but we question whether or not we would have published this piece if we had a more diverse staff.” You need a diverse staff to realize that an article about how it’s okay to dress up in black face is offensive and silly? What about using your judgment and knowledge? “We have open GIMs every semester, which we advertise all over campus and in B-line, but every semester, disproportionately few students of color apply.” Well, that’s not your fault! Stand up for yourself! Don’t do this groveling and begging for forgiveness routine under editor@binghamtonreview.com

“

But the reaction to the article was completely inappropriate, and in some ways even went against the spirit of free speech. Far-leftists like Joe Tannenbaum and Tyler Albertario, who would turn America into the authoritarian and destitute communist wasteland my parents fled from over 30 years ago if they had their way, took advantage of this stupid article.” pressure! Next up, Christina’s Letter from the Editor, which was a separate article and separate apology tour: “Any writing dealing with a topic of such a sensitive nature should be mature, well thoughtout, and delicately handled. This column was none of these things… I should not have given [the article] the legitimacy of being published in the pages of Pipe Dream.” As one commenter on Pipe Dream’s website said: “So does that mean an end to the sex columnist as well?” Being published in Pipe Dream doesn’t give an article any added legitimacy; Pipe Dream publishes shitty articles all the time. In addition to these two apologies, Julianne published her own apology. The poor girl has been through enough, so I’ll refrain from critiquing that one. And, apart from all this, a male Pipe Dream columnist issued an apology for some column he wrote about chivalry. Maybe Pipe Dream should change its motto to “Please forgive me!” Anyway, this entire incident is shameful. As another online commenter noted on Julianne’s apology, “I am eternally sorry you were forced to apologize to these raving mad armchair sociologists and social justice warriors. Score this one in the books as another win for unjustifiable offense and manufactured outrage.” I actually wrote Pipe Dream a relatively nice Letter to the Editor (in retrospect, probably too nice, but I guess everyone has their kind moments, even me) a week ago, but Pipe Dream’s almost total capitulation to leftist agitators is really embarrassing. This can set a precedent that if a bunch of people find an article offensive, they can start a mass protest and get public

apologies issued, and this will surely deter people from writing about controversial subjects in the future. The end goal of far-leftists like Joe and Tyler is to silence opposing viewpoints on campus and to go back to the early 1990′s when political correctness ruled the day. Pipe Dream made it easier for them to achieve this goal. In this civil war between moderate liberals and far leftists, the crazy and evil lefties won (I say evil because if their socialist plans were implemented, you’d be seeing bread lines in no time. It’ll make the millions of cancellations of health insurance due to Obamacare look like a joke.) But fear not! Binghamton Review is here to bring reason, logic, and liberty to the political discourse at Binghamton University. Pipe Dream may have caved, but we never will. If you want to have a reasonable conversation with us, we’ll be happy to oblige you. If you to send us a Letter to the Editor, we’ll publish it. But if you try to intimidate us by starting a mass protest in front of our office, we will slam the door to our office, and no apology will be forthcoming. You’re welcome, Binghamton. We’ve been helping you out since 1987.

Binghamtonreview.com

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Decline of Democracy

Decline of Democracy Written By Aditi Roy Freedom of speech is one of the basic pillars of democracy. It is a crucial element in self expression by citizens to bring control over the authoritative figures in government. Mass media is said to be the “fourth power” after the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of the democratic system. Without freedom of speech, democracy is no different from a tyrannical polity. Governments across East Asia have been suppressing the rights of journalists, and Kenya is in danger of falling into the pattern of their neighbors. Kenya has maintained a consistent democratic government since it gained its independence from Britain in 1963. However, a new bill has been proposed that will implement harsh penalties on journalists if they publish articles considered “harmful” by the government, which has already managed to shut down independent newspapers across the country. Journalists are seen as supporters for the trials against current President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto in which they were accused by the ICC for committing crimes against humanity for allegedly funding violence during the 2007 elections. If this bill is passed, the government may impose fines up to $240,000 on media companies and seize journalist properties, strong control of the media, and restrictions against advertisement from foreign companies. Critics argue that this sort of censorship would be bringing Kenya back to the pre-democratic era of British dictatorship when all media was strictly censored. This law would cause many journalists to reside from their positions of self censor as with the elections of March 2013 when instead of focusing on media coverage, journalists were self censoring in order to avoid election conflicts and maintain peace. This type

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

“

Without freedom of speech, democracy is no different from a tyrannical polity.”

of oppression is in full effect and even more despotic in neighboring countries such as Ethiopia, where journalists have been imprisoned on “terrorism claims” and arrested without charge. Even in Burundi, journalists are prosecuted if they publish articles about national security with fines up to $6000. Such fines are detrimental to journalists in these areas who barely make a few hundred dollars a month. Journalists all across East Africa remain in jeopardy as their governments become more and more rigid about their publications and freedom of speech. If citizens are unable to be informed about their country’s regime because journalists are unable to have the right to have their voices heard due to government oppression, how can that country be considered a democ-

racy? If their freedom of speech is being seized from their hands today, what will be their fate tomorrow?

DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

The Most Interesting Politician in the World

The Most Interesting Politician in the World Written By Sean Gleandon I thought Drake and Justin Bieber were the only sources of entertainment that came from Canada. Then I did some research and realized that Seth Rogen, Ryan Gosling, Michael J. Fox and Michael Cera are all Canadian, so I guess they’ve got some entertaining people. But forget about them, and everything else that you ever thought was cool about Canada. They’re nothing compared to Toronto’s mayor, Rob Ford. Rob Ford is Politics Game Britney Spears in 2007. He’s the Teflon Don of Scandal: the middle-aged personification of a Disney star reaching the end of the teenage years and acting up. He’s what 2013 Miley Cyrus wishes she was. He’s a snowman that won’t melt when it gets warm out… because he’s made out of crack cocaine instead of snow. But calling Rob Ford “the crack smoking mayor” isn’t enough. He’s much more than that. Rob Ford is amazing. Americans learned about Rob Ford on May 16, after a video showing the mayor smoking crack cocaine and making homophobic comments was rumored to exist. A week later, Ford made a statement: “I do not use crack cocaine, nor am I an addict of crack cocaine.” TECHNICALLY, this is only a lie of omission. Most people in this position would stay out of the public eye as much as possible. Nope, not Rob Ford. Pictures of him with gang members have surfaced and his driver was arrested for marijuana trafficking. There was a groping incident he was involved. On November 5, Rob Ford finally spoke the truth. “Yes, I have smoked crack cocaine but … am I an addict? No. Have I tried it? Probably in one of my drunken stupors, probably approximately about a year ago” he said, and when confronted with the fact that he lied about his use in the past, he said ”I wasn’t lying… You editor@binghamtonreview.com

didn’t ask the correct questions. No, I’m not an addict and no I do not do drugs.” You have to respect that technicality right there. Just two days after this, a video of the mayor drunkenly threatening to “kill” and “murder” somebody. About a week later, court documents showed that former staffers said that Rob Ford had been intoxicated at work, drank while driving and associated with suspected prostitutes. The day after these documents came to light, Mayor Ford was pressed on these issues that had just come to light (while wearing a personalized football jersey that said “Mayor Ford”). His response? “Oh and the last thing was Olivia Gondek, it says it says that I wanted to eat her pussy. Olivia Gondek. I’ve never said that in my life to her. I would never do that. I’m happily married. I’ve got more than enough to eat at home.” I’m going to let that one sink in for a moment. He said this on live television while surrounded by reporters. Since then, Rob Ford attended a CFL playoff game that he was explicitly told to stay away by the league’s commissioner. While his brother was speaking during a City Council meeting, Rob Ford imitated drunk driving towards Paul Ainslie, who had gotten a warning from police about drunk driving in the spring. Remember, Rob Ford confessed to drunk driving in the past. During a City Council vote that would potentially strip him of more powers, he literally tackled Councillor Pam McConnell, and later apologized,

claiming that it was accidental. In his closing remarks of this meeting, he remarked that his ongoing situation “reminds [him] of when — and [he] was watching with [his] brother — when Saddam attacked Kuwait.” And President Bush said, ‘I warn you, I warn you, I warn you, do not.’ Well, folks, if you think American-style politics is nasty, you guys have just attacked Kuwait,” before threatening opposition by saying “Mark my words, friends, this is going to be outright war in the next election, and I’m going to do everything in my power — everything in my power — to beat you guys.” Covering all of the ridiculous things Rob Ford has done would take more space than this entire issue, and that’s what makes him amazing. Had he been an American politician, he would’ve been out of office months ago. But he’s still the Mayor of Toronto. His current approval rating is at 42%, which is higher than it was in late October, when it was 39%. HIS APPROVAL RATING HIS JUMPED SINCE HE ADMITTED TO SMOKING CRACK. Currently Barack Obama’s approval rating is at 41%, so maybe he should give the crack a try. Throughout November, Rob Ford has been Googled 100 times more than he had been in the past. That is not an exaggeration. In a perfect world, Rob Ford becomes the Prime Minister of Canada. He said that he would like to, so maybe this is all just a giant marketing campaign to get his name out there. Regardless, I hope his future is one that is heavily publicized and full of scandal, because his entertainment levels are unmatched and I’m loving every moment it.

Death in Virginia

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

DEath in virginia Written By Josh May One of the most common criticisms of the right by the left is something along the lines of, “There go the Republicans again, same old same old.” The attack is meant to imply that the GOP has no fresh ideas, sticks to the same, outdated philosophy election after election and offers nothing new or positive for the country. As a conservative, I would be expected to refute this. I do not. I’m not talking about the GOP platform- on the whole, I’m rather pleased with it, and anyone saying the GOP is out of ingenious ideas clearly hasn’t taken the time to read any budget Paul Ryan has ever made. I am referring, instead, to the particular fetish that the GOP establishment has of purposefully sabotaging its own candidates and their electoral chances. Recently, this has come down to a death struggle between the establishment (I’m looking at you, Boehner, Priebus and McConnell) and their cronies (McCain and Romney, inter alia) against the genuine conservatives of the party: Tea Party warriors like Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, and Ken Cuccinelli. Going against both the traditional roots of the party and the ever-increasing groundswell of popular support, the establishment appears to have made it their goal in life to torpedo the campaigns of anyone who does not fit the bland, boring, moderate mold. The rationale is perfectly clear. Most Republican voters are, wonder of all wonders, conservative and proud of it. They look fondly upon the legacies of Ronald Reagan, Calvin Coolidge and Barry Goldwater and they hold dear the bedrock constitutional principles our nation was founded on. Faced with such an intimidating forbearance of power, the moderates who run the party rightfully fear for their jobs. Their power base is in money, not voters, but all too frequently they 16

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

“

[Democrats] imply that the GOP has no fresh ideas, sticks to the same, outdated philosophy election after election and offers nothing new or positive for the country. As a conservative, I would be expected to refute this. I do not.”

have found a profitable exchange rate between the two. So, with moderates clasping desperately to power and conservatives hell-bent on getting it back, a confrontation is inevitable and, in a proper democratic system, healthy. What is not healthy, however, is the extent to which the establishment has gone to attack the “enemy.”

The 2012 Republican primary was my first election. I remember watching the very first debate and knowing very few, if any, of the men onstage. I took notes after each man answered, taking care to thoroughly research each one of them to see who I liked. After a few weeks and lots of investigation, I settled on Senator Rick Santorum, who I think everyone can agree was the most conservative of the bunch by a mile. I was delighted to see his success in debate, and I kept the faith even when 3% in the polls was a miracle. As time went on and successive candidates dropped out of the race, and Santorum’s poll numbers

slowly grew, I prayed for a miracle. The Iowa Caucuses, however, soon shattered any illusion I had had about party politics. Although Santorum was declared the eventual winner, attempts by the media (about whose leanings I nursed no illusions) and the GOP establishment, particularly Romney, to besmirch, degrade and belittle the campaign ended up costing Rick his momentum. As the campaign turned into an unquestioned SantorumRomney two-man show (just please go away, Newt) I watched as big money and Establishment reactionaries shut Rick out on every front. As we all know, Romney eventually won and Santorum had to settle for increased name recognition. Still I was naive enough to hope that this was a one-off thing, that the establishment truly believed that Romney was (ahem) “severely conservative.” I didn’t really remember the particulars of the 2008 election, but hearing other conservatives describe Romney as “just another McCain and Dole” really got me thinking about the disturbing tendency of moderates winning nomination of the premier right-wing party. I wouldn’t have to wait long to see the results of that awful primary season- Romney was trounced in the polls against a very beatable and very vulnerable president DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

and he had only himself to blame for it. The key factor, I would read in later days, may have been the fact that many conservatives and values voters had stayed home rather than vote for someone they saw as no different than Obama- a collective decision that may have made the difference in Ohio and Virginia. I myself came very close to voting third party but decided finally that almost anything was better than Obama, and voted Romney. I have come to regret that choice following the 2013 gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia. There was never, ever a doubt that Christie would win resoundingly (I never once even heard the name of his opponent), and the GOP stood a very

editor@binghamtonreview.com

Death in Virginia

good chance of keeping the critical swing state of Virginia in GOP hands. But where did the vast majority of the funding, clout and attention of the establishment go to? New Jersey. Terrified of Ken Cuccinelli’s rising star, the moderates in power knew they had to act decisively against him as they had Santorum. Something about those Italian Catholic family men just doesn’t sit right with the likes of Boehner and Priebus. So, effectively abandoning Cuccinelli to the slaughterhouse of the Clintons’ advertising machine, the GOP washed their hands a la Pontius Pilate. The Democrats have now taken Virginia, rubber stamping their 2016 victory there and losing us a crucial swing state. This is an untenable and unacceptable situation. Conservativesand the American population at largeappreciate bold colors, not pale pastels, and they will only be moved by great visionaries, men of resolute character and standing in stark contrast to the incumbent. That’s how Ronald Reagan pulled off the greatest landslides in our country’s history, winning 49 states and causing a huge amount of Democrats to defect. If strong conservatives cannot win elections, as the liberals and the establishment may claim, then they have yet to explain the Reagan Revolution.

Therefore, I have made a pledge never again to vote for the establishment hacks. If we are truly to put the country back on a path to prosperity, which I believe only timehonored conservative policies can do, then we need a truly conservative candidate leading a truly conservative party. We cannot give in to the lie of moderates being “our only hope,” that Doles, McCains and Romneys are the last hope of a dying party. I contend that the Romneys are not the cure but the cancer, and it’s time to amputate the limb once and for all. Do your party and your country a favor- vote conservative.

Binghamtonreview.com

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

The Trouble With Obamacare

The Trouble With Obamacare Written by By Christopher Medrano When the Obamacare website launched on October 1st, it was far from being well received. It should seem that the faulty launch only served to prove the Republican view that the government cannot be trusted to be in charge of healthcare in the United States. The representatives of this institutionalized system have been answering to the public through hearings before the House Ways and Means Committee. It should appear that those constructing the website were in too much of a hurry to analyze quality assurance. Marilyn Tavenner of the Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services explained that the final testing of the website was too rushed. Many are questioning why it was that the system was not tested until two weeks prior to its launch or why the government was unprepared for five times the number of people signing in than expected. It is expected that the site should be up and running efficiently by the end of November, but many citizens and politicians remain pessimistic that HealthCare.gov will persevere. This pathetic incident far from aided the people’s general confidence in the government’s performance as a health care provider. Especially since it has now become public knowledge that emails and other documentation exchanged between webmasters and the Obama Administration clearly explained that it was known how inconsistent and unreliable the website was with regards to technical performance. The Affordable Healthcare Act serves as a piece of legislation that will be most directly helpful to those are not currently covered by a healthcare plan, particularly the elderly and younger generations who are not eligible for it. 18

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

To people who already have insurance, Obamacare stands as a looming cloud in the distance formed by the government stepping outside of its bounds. While the president vowed that those with health care policies would be able to keep them, many people are discovering that their policies won’t be available next year and that it will be more expensive to replace them. One of the biggest targets to suffer the brunt of the Affordable Healthcare Act is the class of college students who benefit from their university’s coverage. The institutionalization of healthcare declares that most college’s coverage plans do not meet the strict standards, which leaves many schools with a puzzling decision to make. They can either opt to get rid of their coverage plans or provide far more expensive ones, an estimated 1500% increase. For most college students, the stress of affording books will now be burdened by the need to afford insurance that will cost around four times the cost of the most expensive textbooks. Another recent dilemma that has emerged since the launch of the Obamacare website has been the question as to whether the system truly promotes a citizen’s right to privacy when it comes to their medical information. The disclaimer on the Terms and Conditions page of the site clearly states, “You have no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system,” and that, “At any time, and for any lawful Government purpose, the government may monitor, intercept, and search and seize any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.” These statements

out and out confess that the government simply is not prepared to take on such a large responsibility as social healthcare. Perhaps someday in the future, a more efficient system can be implemented, but, for the time being, the government’s plan for institutionalized health care is not capable of doing all it can to satisfy the privacy needs for those who purchase plans through it. Citizens will, no doubt, be disclosing private medical information through this electronic setup, which runs the risk of allowing hackers to gain access to such documentation. In addition, such information could be manipulated by various departments of government to snoop around patients’ confidential files. This is how individuals become just numbers in a computer system. It has already been recognized that the government’s intrusion in the medical field has had many debilitating effects. Obamacare has an even more threatening potential to cause further harm.

DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Four Lies Exposed About the Affordable Care Act

War Of the Pizza My Frivolous Crusade to Get Reimbursed for Nirchis

Written By Jack Russo This was the fifth time I stared into the hopeless piece of paper: “Has not taken treasurers exam,” it read. The open wrath I had unleashed on the S.A. office on previous occasions didn’t seem worth the hot air anymore. My crusade was over. For the prior month and a half I had played a game of legal pingpong with the S.A treasurers office. I had bought pizza for my group’s GIM under the assumption that the S.A reimbursement process would be a breeze. Boy was I in for a treat. The paperwork seemed relatively straightforward, Name, purchase, receipt, and mailing address, what could possibly go wrong? When I returned a week latter the rejection notice was crammed on to a post-it-note in barely legible handwriting. I was miffed, but undeterred. I wanted to learn to do the voucher process right. “The receipt’s not itemized, we don’t know what you bought” said the S.A Financial assistant. “But it’s Nirchis!? Who the hell buys anything other than pizza from Nirchis?” I protested. “It’s just S.A protocol.” “O.K, are there any other problems with the voucher?” I asked. “Just use the typed voucher form next time, and you’ll be good to go.” Later that day, I hoofed it back to Nirchis only to find they had to hand write the receipt because the original was no longer in the database. After finagling with adobe reader (this involved being spoken to like a child by the SA VP for finance), I was ready for another go. One week later, I was rejected again. The stupid yellow post-it-note was once again crammed with barely readable objections. I was furious; I made sure everyone in that cozy office knew it. The editor@binghamtonreview.com

SA bureaucracy had consumed more time than the money was worth but I was determined to get what was mine, if for no other reason than principle. And so my game of molasses ping pong continued with the S.A. Every time I got a little closer, but with every voucher a new objection that was previously absent was added. After several more tries, an S.A staffer who had been helpful remarked “Why you doing this? This is your treasurer’s responsibility. Have you ever read Atlas Shrugged? You’re libertarians right? When people put their responsibility on your back, you should just shrug it off.” I was truly in Alice in Wonderland. An SA staffer was preaching the virtues of Objectivism. Ultimately, It was our group’s fault. Unbeknownst to me, neither our President nor our Treasurer had taken the treasurer’s exam and therefore I could not be reimbursed until one of them did so. However the other objections should have been addressed the first time I asked, “are there any other problems with the voucher?” Not after six trips to the SA office.

“

The University is holding back the student community, not supporting it.”

I’m not trying shame anyone. Rather we should confront the obvious. The University is holding back the student community, not supporting it. The $95 that gets sucked out of our wallets every semester to pay for our student group’s budgets needs to stop. Student should have the choice of making a difference, not be forced to jump through hoops to get their money back.

V.S. 19

Pretensive Protection in the Affordable Care Act

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Can’t Buy Me Health: Why Obamacare is Destined to Fail Written by By Jake Hayutin

ronze, Silver Gold and Platiunum, these are our options in the ACA. Ironically, this language unwittingly bespeaks the central problem of our health care crisis – the conflation of health, health care, and health insurance. Our consumer-capitalisticKeynesian-QE culture is all about making and spending money. Hence, the hierarchy of precious metals used to define our policy options - save catastrophic (likely because iron lacks luster). Following suit, most overhaul plans of the last two decades have focused on regulating insurance companies or health-care providers, when the answer to the crisis lies in no institution, but in health itself. Many libertarians and conservatives argue the problem with our health insurance crisis is the misallocation of costs/prices. An argument popularized with a viral article in the Atlantic by David Goldhill. I agree. Though, this pricing problem may have exacerbated the crisis, it is the focus on money as the only means to improve health that, as Roger Waters proclaimed, is the root of all evil today. Self-proclaimed politically agnostic, but economically libertarian genius (look him up), Nassim Taleb, suggests in his book Antifragile: Things that Gain from Disorder, a panacea for the iatrogenic affects of our health care system - via negativa. It’s not what we should be doing more, but what we should be doing less. Let us start improving our health, one individual at a time, by removing things from our lives as opposed to adding policies, institutions and taxes. 20

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

“

The Green policy is built on the principle of preventative care and the health intelligent culture that fills each and every yoga studio.”

Eat less, sit less, drink less, smoke less – although, I do have one caveat, do yoga. This will require standing-up to consumer culture in a Chuck Palahniuk’s Fight Club kind of way. A phantasmagorical grass-roots approach juxtaposed to the central leadership of Kathleen Sibelius. I recently had a premonition of an addendum policy for the healthcare. gov website – the Green option. This policy would provide the catastrophic insurance with an added incentive for young people like me who are healthy and more willing to accept the penalty tax than pay for coverage we don’t need. The Green policy would allow states to provide health insurance subsidies for anyone who clocks, let’s say, 5 hours a week at a state-accredited Yoga studio. Increase the balance of payments by encouraging the young and healthy to sing up in the short-term, and encourage life-long healthy life-style practices that will pay dividends - personal and economic. The Green policy is built on the principle of preventative care and the health intelligent culture that fills each and every yoga studio. Unlike triathlon

clubs or pick up ball games at local parks, Yoga removes potential physical harms; while improving flexibility and muscular and cardiovascular strength. Moreover there are zero physical or age limitations. Anyone can practice. Already, several non-profit institutions like have begun work implementing yoga in our culture. Bikrim Sonoma (though facing legal battles) has attempted to bring yoga into elementary P.E. classes. James Fox of the Prison Yoga Project has even found success in rehabilitating felons, both physically and mentally via the power of yoga. So, tell all the statist politicians to take the Obamacare bill they passed without reading and shove it you know where. I for one am going to complain every time anyone in D.C. tries to invent a new excuse to tax me, and continue to take individual responsibility for my health at the Yoga Body Shop in Johnson City. Namaste.

DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

The Silly Birth Control Outburst at the Democrat VS Libertarian Debate

The Silly birth control outburst at the democrat vs libertarian debate Written By Daniel Milyavsky The most heated moment in the College Democrat vs. College Libertarian debate, which I participated in (on the latter side, of course) occured when one female Democrat debater irrelevantly and impolitely accused me, and white males in general, of wanting to control her sexuality and of our ignorance of the price of birth control . Before I start to address that, though, I’d like to say that with the exception of this one incident, I was extremely pleased with the debate, and thought the College Democrats conducted themselves very admirably and displayed a large amount of knowledge about their respective topics. The subject was Obamacare. I was debating this subject along with a fellow libertarian, and was making a point of how insurance should not be used to cover routine and predictable expenses; this is not the purpose of insurance. Every definition of insurance you can find contains the word “risk.” You wouldn’t use your car insurance to fill up your gas tank, or to get an oil change, because this isn’t what insurance is for – it would make no sense for insurance to cover that, since then people would drive with absolutely no sense of how much gas they’re consuming. Similarly, it doesn’t make sense for health insurance to cover a routine medicine like birth control. If a woman thinks birth control is worth the money, great. If not, then she doesn’t have to buy it. Now, maybe this claim of mine was incorrect. Most health insurance already covered birth control before Obamacare, and birth control pills also have medical uses not related to contraception. Furthermore, the expense of an unintended pregnancy is obviously greater than that of birth control. (These are all points that were brought up to me after I published the preliminary, online version of this article). However, I was editor@binghamtonreview.com

in no way saying that women should not be allowed to purchase birth control - I was only talking about the best way to finance it. My point was so crystal clear that it could only be willfully, and not accidentally, misinterpreted. However, this is exactly what the female debating for the Democrats (whose name I will deliberately withhold since I wish to make a point about our political culture in general, and not just this individual) did. She went on an irrelevant rant about how “white males” sought to control her “sexuality,” and how us libertarian men don’t know anything about birth control and how much it costs. Perhaps. I’m sure most people don’t know how much it costs to print a monthly issue of the Binghamton Review. But how is that relevant to anything?

Even though she was only supposed to have a brief portion of time remaining, she exceeded her time and was uninterrupted by the moderator. Her little “feminist” rant (I use scare quotes because I don’t think there was anything genuinely “feminist” about it, since nothing about female equality implies that both men and infertile women have to pay for the birth control of fertile women) was greeted by enthusiastic applause from a small female portion of the audience, who responded as if on instinct. I insisted on responding to this diatribe, and the moderator gave me only thirty seconds to do so. After the applause died down, I said roughly the following: “I am a white male, guilty as charged. But I have absolutely NO

interest in controlling your sexuality. You’re erecting a straw man here. I was making a point about how birth control should be financed, not whether or not it should be used.” My response received applause, although less than the birth control rant did, although the reaction from my little corner of fellow libertarians was rather enthusiastic, and I was complimented by my debating partner for keeping my cool in response to such obnoxious provocation. In retrospect, I should have made a point to point out the breach in decorum that the rant consisted of. While us libertarians were quite happy with 99% of the debate, this one moment infuriated all of us. Which brings me to our political culture. There’s certain topics we just can’t discuss anymore. A conservative or a libertarian can make an intelligent point about the best way to finance contraception, and his point can be refuted by a completely irrelevant “stay away from my uterus!” rant that will always be enthusiastically received by many liberals. Yes, your uterus belongs to you and you alone. Fear not, for us free marketers lack any desire whatsoever to tell you what to do with it. Republicans have made it way too easy for the Democrats to play this War on Women trope, with idiotic comments about rape and abortion by such morons as Todd Aiken and Richard Mourdock. However, the truth of the matter is, this whole War on Women thing is a fabrication by Democratic political strategists. It’s a rather brilliant fabrication, but a fabrication nonetheless. Nobody at all is proposing banning birth control. Can we at least have an honest debate on what the purpose of insurance is, from an economic stand point, without it degenerating into a gender war straw man? Binghamtonreview.com

Pretensive Protection in the Affordable Care Act

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Jack Kennedy: 50 Years Later Written by By Dan Milyavsky

This past November 23rd marked the 50th anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s assassination. Most of the media coverage has focused on the assassination itself, and the various conspiracy theories behind it. Texas Governor John Connolly, who was sitting in front of JFK at the time and during the course of the shooting was hit in the chest, wrist, and thigh, questioned the single bullet theory, although he did believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. Like most Americans (a majority, according to polling) I too have my doubts – why did JFK’s head go back and to the left, if Oswald was behind him? Why do so many witnesses claim to have seen a shooter in the grassy knoll? Why were the CIA and FBI so secretive about their investigations? These are all vital questions. However, in this art I’d like to focus more on JFK’s virtues as President, and why the man who succeeded him, Lyndon Johnson, was, if not the worst president in U.S. history, at the very least an extremely strong contender for the title. It’s true that Kennedy royally screwed up the Bay of Pigs invasion by failing to provide the Cuban refugees with any sort of military support whatsoever, while still authorizing the attempted invasion. And he was quite late to address the issue of civil rights. However, during the most pivotal event of the entire Cold War – namely, the Cuban missile crisis – Kennedy performed the duty of Commander-in-Chief with distinction and skill. After Soviet missiles were discovered in Cuba by a U2 spy plane, the Joint Chiefs of Staff urged Kennedy to bombard and invade Cuba. This attack against one of the Soviet Union’s staunchest allies would have surely resulted in some sort of retaliation by the USSR. Perhaps this would have fallen short of a nuclear attack, but at the very least the Soviet Union would conquer and decimate West Berlin, and perhaps all of West Germany as well. Despite powerful pressure from his generals, Kennedy instead insisted on a blockade of Cuba. This was an excellent middle ground which indicated that the United States was serious about removing the missiles from Cuba, without actually killing any Cubans. In the end, with the help of his brother Robert, who was the Attorney General, Kennedy secured a deal in which the United States secretly agreed to remove its ICBMs from Turkey in exchange for the Soviets removing from Cuba. This was a fair trade – after all, it would be unrealistic for us to expect the Soviet Union to live within striking distance of our nukes without insisting on having the same 22

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

capability against us. Furthermore, the secret nature of the deal meant that if anyone lost face, it was the USSR. JFK was also reasonably fiscally conservative. He successfully urged Congress to cut taxes, saying, “Our present tax system… exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time; it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; [and] it reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking. In his personal life, JFK was a flawed man. His sexual delinquency, aside from just being adulterous, bordered on abusive, according to some of the women involved. One of JFK’s mistresses, Mimi Alford, recently published a book entitled Once Upon A Secret: My Affair With President John F. Kennedy And Its Aftermath. In his wife Jacqueline’s bedroom, Kennedy took Alford’s virginity on her fourth day of work in the White House (he never kissed her, or any of his mistresses on the lips). In one passage, she describes swimming in a pool with the President, while Dave Powers, a member of Kennedy staff, was sitting on the side. Alford writes: The President swam over and whispered in my ear. “Mr. Powers looks a little tense,” he said. “Would you take care of it?” It was a dare, but I knew exactly what he meant. This was a challenge to give Dave Powers oral sex. I don’t think the President thought I’d do it, but I’m ashamed to say that I did. It was a pathetic, sordid, scene, and is very hard for me to think about today. Dave was jolly and obedient as I stood in the shallow end of the pool and performed my duties. The President silently watched. This episode of sexual humiliation speaks for itself. On foreign policy, Kennedy was certainly a Cold Warrior, and a believer in the Domino Theory, which claimed that if Vietnam fell to the Communists, the rest of Southeast Asia would follow, and then possibly South Asia as well. Many conspiracy theorists say that Kennedy had decided to pull U.S. troops out of Vietnam, but if you read an interview with his brother Robert, this is clearly not the case. It is impossible to know what Kennedy would have done in Vietnam once the war started really escalating and once American casualties started mounting. Still, the action that Kennedy took that harmed America the most was actually taken before he even became President – that is, when he picked Lyndon Johnson, a putrid human being, to be his running mate. (Milton Friedman said that Ronald Reagan’s biggest error was picking George H. W. Bush to be his Vice-President). Aside from being a terrible

person (LBJ got satisfaction from humiliating his staff members by making them listen to him as he sat on the toilet), LBJ was an excellent legislator and politician. However, in his case, since his goals were highly detrimental to American society, this was a very bad thing. LBJ’s War on Poverty greatly accelerated family breakdown and single motherhood among the poor of America. Because of income limits, welfare programs didn’t give money to married citizens, thus encouraging divorce. Among African-Americans, the out-of-wedlock birth rate before the War on Poverty was 24%. Today, it is 73%. When it comes to Medicare and Medicaid, LBJ hurt America’s health care system by taking out market incentives in price competition for health care. Today, half of all money that is spent on health care is spent by the federal government. This has encouraged doctors and hospitals to raise prices, which in turn results in higher insurance premiums and overall health care costs. Lastly, LBJ let almost 60,000 American soldiers die in a war in Vietnam that he himself thought was unwinnable. I’ve been to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., and it is a rather sobering and depressing experience to look on those thousands names etched in stone and realize that they all died in vain. I write all this to emphasize what a tragedy JFK’s assassination was, since Lyndon Johnson would never have gotten elected President if Kennedy wasn’t killed. Kennedy may have been a morally flawed man, but he was also a war hero. He commanded a motor torpedo boat in the Pacific, which ended up being rammed by a Japanese vessel. JFK told his men: “There’s nothing in the book about a situation like this. A lot of you men have families and some of you have children. What do you want to do? I have nothing to lose.” Kennedy received a Navy and Marine Corp Medal for his actions. The award read as follows: For extremely heroic conduct as Commanding Officer of Motor Torpedo Boat 109 following the collision and sinking of that vessel in the Pacific War Theater on August 1–2, 1943. Unmindful of personal danger, Lieutenant unhesitatingly braved the difficulties and hazards of darkness to direct rescue operations, swimming many hours to secure aid and food after he had succeeded in getting his crew ashore. His outstanding courage, endurance and leadership contributed to the saving of several lives and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service. Human beings are complicated, and Kennedy was certainly no exception. Rest in peace, Mr. President. DECEMBER 2013

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Praise for the Review

Praise for the review A Binghamton Student: “Hello editor! My name is ANONYMOUS and I just read my first school publication beginning to end, this being the Halloween issue of the Binghamton review. Needless to say it made me lol more than any snide Facebook comment that merits a ‘lol” ever could.” A Visiting Parent: “On a recent visit to BU I spotted a pile of the BR outside of a lecture room. Hammer & Sickle, Ché …. I was ready to burn the stack. Then I noticed the list of topics - which were too bad to be true - even for an “ostensibly” lefty rag. When I opened to the second page my suspicions of satire were confirmed. It was a Halloween costume! Absolutely brilliant.” The Review E-board: “Uhh, hell-yeah! We’re hillarious.” Winston Churchill: “The ever raging Blitz over London is amoung the most demoralizing things a man could face... thats why, when I get really down about the Nazis, I pick up a copy of the Binghaomton Review. I laugh from cover to cover, and it lasts longer than one of my trademark Churchill Cigars. I would be lying if I didn’t attribute most of my reslove and leadership to the Binghaomton Review.” Alright, that last one was a lie. But if we were around back then...

Thats it for this week, but keep ‘em coming guys. Thanks to all the angry lefties that set up shop in American Colleges, we tend to attract hatemail for expressing even commonplace conservative opinions. Fortunatly the posetive feedback shows us there are still kids with their heads screwed on. Whether you’re for us or against us: check us out online, keep those emails flowing, and before they “donate” your computer to Africa, keep up the discussion! This is your layout editor signing out.

Our Mission Binghamton Review is a non-partisan, student-run periodical of conservative thought at Binghamton University. A true liberal arts education expands a student’s horizons and opens one’s mind to a vast array of divergent perspectives. In that spirit, we seek to promote the free exchange of ideas and offer an alternative viewpoint not normally found on our predominately liberal campus. It is our duty to expose the warped ideology of political correctness that dominates this university. We stand against tyranny in all its forms, both on campus and beyond. We believe in the principles set forth in this country’s Declaration of Independence and seek to preserve the fundamental tenets of Western civilization. Finally, we understand that a moral order is a necessary component of any civilized society. We strive to inform, engage, and perhaps even amuse our readers in carrying out this mission. editor@binghamtonreview.com

A big thanks to the Collegiate Network for sending our top two editors, Dan and Sam (yes, those actually are our names) to the CN conference at Fort Worth, Texas!

The Binghamton Review always wants new writers, contributors, and editorial and production staff. Come join the ranks of Binghamtonâ€™s premier news and opinion outlet. We need writers, editors, artists, and business managers. Contact editor@binghamtonreview.com for more information.