Page 1

Truth and Two Staples

MAY 2010

Binghamton Review WE WON!

Now, here’s our shitlist...

Binghamton Review

P.O. Box 6000 BinghamTOn, NY 13902-6000

Founded 1987 • Volume XXIII Number 7 • May 2010

Editor-in-Chief Adam Shamah Managing Editor Randal Meyer


Associate Editors Edmund Mays Rachel Gordon Elahd Bar-Shai Copy Editors Lawrence Faulstich Stephen Herman William Obilisundar Brian Curatolo


Layout Editor Elahd Bar-Shai Treasurer Rod Alzmann Business Manager Michael Lombardi Secretary Marissa Beldock Contributors Nick Valiando, Jason Birriel, Aaron Sebag, William Griffin, Nicole Narmanli, Joseph Aguiar, Taylor Arluck, Gabrielle Pontillo, Katie Dermigny, Nicholas Fondacaro, Connor Hogg, Chris Nowack Godfather of the Review Louis W. Leonini Friends of the Review Dr. Aldo S. Bernardo The Leonini Family Mr. Bob Soltis WA2VCS The Shamah Family The Grynheim Family The Menje Family The Leeds Family The Lombardi Family The Packer Family Mr. Michael O’Connell Binghamton Review is printed by Our Press in Chenango Bridge, NY. We provide the truth; they provide the staples.

The Enemies List See Who’s Been Condemned

6 8

Cindy Sheehan Visits B.U. by Ethan Day As-Salamu Alaykum by Chris Nowack


** Safe at Last! ** by Adam Shamah

12 15

The Aegean Contagion by Taylor Arluck Overblown Hysteria by Connor Hogg



The Cost of Mismanagement by The Editors Sexual Orientation Doesn’t Matter by Joseph Aguiar


Interview with David Hagerbaumer


Common Sense by Nicholas Fondacaro


The Importance of Capital by Rod Alzmann

The Gutting of Binghamton University’s Arabic Department

Supreme Court Rejects City Student Eviction Practices

The Truth About Concealed Carry on Campus

It’s Time to Repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

David discusses university history, beer, and politics

Term Limits on the Federal Government and the 28th Amendment

Departments 3 4 5 30


Tell us what you think! Direct letters to


2 Years in Review


came to Binghamton University as a freshman eager to get involved in campus politics. I imagined my role would involve those activities that are typical of conservative student activists—challenging lefty professors, countering anti-war protests, debating College Democrats, and generally sticking it to the liberal orthodoxy. This is fully what I expected when I joined Binghamton Review. Boy, did I underestimate the Review’s place on campus. BR is about much more than challenging liberal policies and advancing conservative ideals. Sure, these things are important to us. We believe strongly that political correctness is the bane of our University, and spend significant time and print space articulating divergent viewpoints—but the Review’s impact is much broader than that. In a campus climate where apathy and complacency reign, the Review has led the way in challenging the status quo and fighting for things that all students, regardless of political affiliation, can support. We led the fight that successfully ended the University’s illiberal “failure to cooperate” policy, which required students to open their dorm room doors at the request of any university official. This non-ideological victory remains one of our proudest. We’ve exposed a university department that unconstitutionally restricts the speech rights of its students, and helped inform students of their rights in relation to the University. To this day, no student organization has done more to protect our off-campus housing rights than

Binghamton Review. It has been our hallmark. Apathy and inattention on part of the students is what the City needs. As long as the Review is around, they won’t get it. Our fight for common sense extended into the Student Association. There is a misconception that the Review “stacked” the Student Assembly to create a conservative voting bloc. But the truth is, only a handful of Review editors ran for government positions. There appears to be a large “BR” bloc because many unaffiliated assembly representatives quickly realized that the Review has the best interests of the student body at heart, and found themselves aligning with us on most issues. It has come to the point where there are more members of the “BR bloc” on the Assembly than members of BR the student group! Our success appealing to the needs of your average student continued in campus-wide popular elections. We competed in the marketplace of ideas and won. Though this editorial will be my last as editor-in-chief, I look forward to continuing to contribute next year as editor emeritus. With Randal Meyer and Rachel Gordon at the helm, I know the paper will be in good hands. Lastly, I would like to thank those ghosts of BR’s past who have guided me through my two years as editor. Rob, Lou, Chris…that’s you. The history of the Review is a rich and impactful one, and I am glad I have been a part of it. And finally, to our readers: our loyal fan-base is what keeps us motivated. Have a great summer and we’ll see you next year! -Adam Shamah

Tell us what you think! Direct letters to 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.


CPampus resswatch Pipe Dream April 27, 2010 “Budget Woes, Revisited” “After changing the rules to theoretically better represent students, our representatives spent almost 11 hours allocating money to student groups last Monday. Then, after conflicts of interest arose during the proceedings (see Friday’s coverage), they scrapped the entire thing and started over.” Ok..go on.... “But the problem is that a student can be on a student group’s E-Board, part of the Assembly and a member of FinCo at the same time, completely destroying any semblance of checks and balances.” Still with you... “One of the people who wrote the rules for the failed budget procedure is now one of its most outspoken critics. Newly-elected Vice President for Finance Adam Shamah was quoted in Friday’s Pipe Dream as saying amendments to the budget were “motivated by self-interest.” We hate to say it, but duh.” Its close to the end...could Pipe Dream have written an intelligent, well thought-out editorial for once this year? “But here’s a common sense quick fix: maybe people shouldn’t be allowed on both the Assembly and FinCo. This will allow for at least one level 4

Binghamton Review

of separation between the two bodies with control over the budget. We also tend to think that FinCo should have a dominant say —ideally the final say—in the budget.” NOOOOOO! They fucked up the endgame! Allow me to rephrase PD’s arguments: “Let’s remove people with the most knowledge about the budgetary process and helped form it according to objective standards from the Assembly so that reps can be completely without any sort of help,” and “Let’s have a committee of nine people have final oversight on the budget, because its not easier to stack a nine person body rather than a 60 person body!” Why, PD, why?

BR has come up with our own alcohol education program:

Pipe Dream, not satisfied with the already inane, comes out in favor of more annoying paternalism from the University...

Drink beer. Beer gets you drunk. As you get drunk you become more socially acceptable to those around you. Stop drinking when either a) you can’t speak or b) the frat boys start feeling you up and you think its a good idea. Drunkeness also results in: lack of stress; extreme sleepiness; symptoms similar to those of overactive bladder syndrome; loss of keys, wallet, money, discretion, dignity. Warnings about drunkeness: objects in bed are less attractive than they appear (she’s from Long Island bro, they only think they are hot). Drinking beer will make you learn more about how, when, to what extent, and definitely where to drink beer through experience.

“April should be a month of presentations, information sessions, resident assistant programs, tabling and pamphlets focusing on alcohol, drunk driving, binge drinking and the like. If these things are available and advertised to students, we will have the choice to attend and learn information we might be missing, or at the very least get a reminder of the realities of the situation. As of now, there’s no choice; they’re almost nonexistent, especially on a University-wide level.”

But seriously, prehaps a better approach would be to normalize the presence of alcohol in the life of teenagers and young adults. Prehaps beer and wine should be legalized for kids at age 16 and liquor at 18. Maybe this would introduce kids to alcohol and teach them responsible behavior through gradual exposure and real experience (see: the continent of Europe). Or we could just make it more of a forbidden fruit and make us sit through inane presentations we probably pregamed just to tolerate. B

Pipe Dream April 13th, 2010 “Alcohol edu is lacking”

May 2010



ey UPD, Binghamton PD, and Vestal PD: If you want to stop drunk driving, it might be a better idea to stop students at the parking garage downtown BEFORE they get in their cars, not after they arrive sloshed to the campus information booth. The former is a sound idea and likely to be effective; the latter is a useless and predatory tactic that has been a consistent practice this semester and in years past.


inally, after five years of successive cuts, Binghamton's chapter of the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG) is left with $0 for next year's budget. This has been a long time coming, with each incremental cut serving as just a step along the way to NYPIRG's destruction. In a letter to Pipe Dream, NYPIRG's Jeff Sagor accused the Student Association of across-the-board stinginess in allocating the student activity fee. How absurd? The Financial Council and Student Assembly have been anything but stingy throughout this year’s budget process. Nearly every group that requested a budget increase received one. Only a handful— those few that provided little benefit to campus with their funds—received a cut. This may sound unbelievable; how could the Student Association afford to increase the budgets of over 100 student groups in a single year, all while at the same time augmenting the funding of OCCT and the SA Programming Board? For that matter, how did the Student Association afford last year’s budget increases and the “fundraising stimulus” which matched student groups that fundraised with $0.40 on the dollar? Answer: it stopped funding NYPIRG. For many years, NYPIRG received over $110,000 annually from the Student Association; that is, from the pockets of students who pay the activity fee. That’s more than the combined budgets of the next four largest student groups on campus. Those funds were funneled into NYPIRG’s private bank account and used to pay for, among other things, the salaries of NYPIRG’s professional staff. In turn, NYPIRG supposedly provided “services” to the student body. Sagor points to NYPIRG’s lobbying operations as a “benefit” they provide “solely for students.” Perhaps he is forgetting the fact that most of NYPIRG’s lobbying targets issues completely unrelated to higher education. The so-called student service

focuses on environmental initiatives, consumer advocacy, and “social justice.” Worthy causes, maybe, but not causes worth funding with over one-hundred grand of student activity money. Sagor asks, "What is being done with the money that could have gone to NYPIRG?” It is being used by SAPB to bring a second and third event center show. It’s keeping the blue buses running and free for students. And, it is funding the activities of the 200 student groups that actually hold events on campus. In the words of a NYPIRG rep, it has been put back to work for the students.


or the second election in a row, Congressman Maurice Hinchey, Binghamton's representative in the House who famously called for the nationalization of the entire oil industry, faces a challenge from Republican George Phillips. Many have written off Phillips' chances, citing Hinchey's decade-long incumbency and institutionalized support from the local political class. But a new poll by Wilson Research Strategies shows that only 35% of the voting population is committed to sending Hinchey back for another term, and while Phillips' name recognition is relatively low, those who have heard of him prefer him over Hinchey 42 - 41%. This should worry Hinchey, because not only is Phillips' support surging as more voters learn his name, his ability to fundraise is too. In quarter one of this year, Phillips actually outraised Hinchey by $13,000. As he gets more cash on hand, he'll be able to raise his name recognition through advertising, which isn't good news for our dear Congressman.


niversity Plaza residents bore witness last month to the first major protest held by Binghamton students in years. The issue at hand? "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and gays in the military. Review staff have been divided on the issue in the past, so Instigations will decline to take a position on the underlying political issue. We will, however, take issue with the protest itself. The rally, which took place outside the UP military recruiter station, was in response to freshman Charlotte Rendon being rejected from enlisting for being a lesbian. According to Pipe Dream, Rendon "knew of the policy when she went to the recruiting center, and knew the consequences of trying to defy it. She said she felt it was necessary to bring up the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy when the recruiter told her she could serve in active duty for up to seven years." Hmm. Might this be a classic example of a staged spectacle meant to drum up liberal outrage? Coming out of the closet at the end of a recruiter interview is akin to admitting a meth habit at end of a Goldman Sachs interview; you don't do it if you're serious about getting the job. Here's some advice: target your outrage at those with the power to change the policy (ie. Obama and Congress), not at recruiters who are only following orders. B 5


Cindy Sheehan Visits Binghamton University The Misguided Demand for “Peace” at Any Cost by Ethan Day


n August 2005, Cindy Sheehan rose to national prominence for her antiwar protest outside the Crawford, Texas ranch of then President George W. Bush. Several years and dozens of arrests later, Sheehan found her way to BU to share her radical views on war with whoever would listen. So how was the liberal darling, who once rallied thousands of people at antiwar protests, reduced to Lecture Hall 8 on a rainy Thursday night? The answer is that people found Cindy Sheehan’s far left ideology so extreme it quickly alienated even the most broadminded freethinkers in the Democratic Party. At Thursday’s forum, Sheehan said; “If Hilary Clinton is on the left, I’m not even on the scale!” It is that kind of talk that took her from regular guest status on MSNBC all the way down to selling PDF files of her latest ramblings to a handful of 75 year old hippies at a tiny Binghamton bookstore. I was delighted however, to find that Cindy and I shared some common ground. We both strongly dislike Speaker Pelosi and are dissatisfied with the Obama administration. Of course we each

So how was the liberal darling, who once rallied thousands of people at antiwar protests, reduced to Lecture Hall 8 on a rainy Thursday night? reached these conclusions for drastically different reasons, but it made listening to the lecture bearable and even entertaining. To provide a fair analysis of Cindy Lee Miller Sheehan, I must commend her on one point. She says what she believes and acts truthfully on her principles. No matter how misguided, I have no doubt that when Sheehan says something, she means it, and that there is no other agenda behind her words. This was the key factor in her estrangement from the Democratic Party. Democrats are chronic liars and manipulators forced to hide their real agendas because if discovered, they would be voted out of office immediately. Cindy made the mistake of believing a Democrat, as she told us in the lecture; “Nancy Pelosi told me to my face, ‘Cindy, help us get control of the 6

Binghamton Review

House and Senate and we’ll help you win (stop) the wars’.” One of the first bills Nancy Pelosi voted for after Democrats took the House and Senate was a bill for additional funding for the Iraq war. So while Cindy Sheehan is wrong on the issues, at least she doesn’t stoop to the level of your average dishonest congressional Democrat. At this point my praise has run out, and the stark reality of Cindy Sheehan’s own fallacies must be dragged out into the light. Within the first five minutes of the lecture, the topic turned to former President George W. Bush. She began with saying that “our reason for living was to hate Bush” followed by this disgusting analogy; “George Bush is a boil on the ass of democracy. If you lance the boil and don’t cure the virus, it comes back. It was a cosmetic change getting rid of Bush.” This of course was another reference to the wars continuing into the Obama presidency. Sheehan mentioned her love of democracy often during the lecture, and this was very troubling. She seemed to ignore the source of our great democracy: It was not handed to the American people; our founders had to fight for freedom with everything they had. This is why we must also fight to defend the democracy that we now have from the growing number of people who want to take it away. War is not a magnificent or pleasing experience. The cost of war is horrifying and unimaginable to those of us who have never seen combat from the front lines as our brave soldiers do. There are widely accepted principles that can be followed to determine if the conflict is a “just war.” War must be waged only in response to, or for the prevention of, grave and lasting damage inflicted by an aggressor. The motive for war must be advancement of good or avoidance of evil. The ultimate objective of war must be to bring peace. Revenge, revolt, a desire to harm, dominate, or exploit are not justification for war. These are some of the basic principles that should guide leaders in their choice to go to war. Protecting our democracy or promoting it elsewhere is a justifiable cause of war and serves to keep us safe and free. According to Tony Blankley, the editorial page editor of The Washington Times: “Those who refuse to assimilate and who plot our overthrow and destruction cannot be ignored without ensuring our own destruction. It is increasingly likely that such a threat cannot be defeated while the West continues to adhere to its deeply May 2010

nose clean you too can be a robber – that’s the biggest piece of bullshit they ever told us.” Sadly, there are people today in positions of power actively working to make the American dream harder to attain, but it is a concept that is embraced by many Americans and will surely not go down without a fight. In an answer to a question from the audience, Sheehan mention that “We have passed the point of where a violent revolution is acceptable,” meaning that she believes it would be okay for her and others to inflict violence on Americans in order to force the change they want to see. That statement is blatantly contradictive for a woman who wants to see peace even if it means the loss of American freedom as we know it. For now, people who understand the impossible necessity of war outnumber the Cindy Sheehans of the world. Unfortunately, the people that would put our own security in jeopardy, rather than stand up to those that want to end our way of life are growing in numbers. It would be the greatest disservice of all to let our democracy be ruined from within when we have the power to prevent destruction. Our founding fathers had the great foresight and wisdom to lead us into the war that secured our independence and our freedom. We must not disregard their sacrifices nor deny future generations from experiencing the America that we so value and enjoy today.B


held values - as it currently understands them - of tolerance, the right to privacy, the right even to advocate sedition and the right to equal protection under the law,” Blankley writes. “The day is upon us when the West will have to decide which it values more: granting these rights and tolerance to those who wish to destroy us, or the survival of Western civilization.” The argument regarding the start of the Iraq war always sparks fierce debate. And for civilians who can’t possibly have a full understanding of the intelligence and reasoning that led up to the war, we may never be able to say decisively that it was justified or otherwise. What the American people must understand is that peace is not naturally occurring. There are growing forces in this world that want nothing more than to “disrupt” the peace of our nation in the most drastic sense of the word. However incongruous the concept is, we must in fact fight for peace. Sheehan’s lecture was sprinkled with other outrageous statements that did more to damage her credibility than build on it: “Tea Baggers have slogans –they hate people but don’t know why. Glenn Beck told them to hate people.” She also said; “The United States being the greatest nation on Earth is a myth.” If it’s not, I would like to know which nation is. “If you work hard enough, are smart enough, and keep your



As-Salamu Alaykum

The Gutting of Binghamton University’s Arabic Department by Chris Nowack


am an Arabic major here at Binghamton University. I was lucky enough to make it through my four years without having to worry about whether my major was going to exist next year. This is, unfortunately, not the case for the students just beginning to take Arabic now. Everybody knows that belts are tighter now and the university needs to make some tough choices in order to stay profitable and be able to provide the education it does at an affordable price. However, I am starting to wonder whether it should be academic departments like mine who should 8

Binghamton Review

pay, or whether costs could be cut elsewhere in the university structure. The Arabic department is staffed by two professors: Dr. Kevin Lacey and Dr. Tayseer Gomaa. These two are responsible for teaching every class offered by the Arabic department at Binghamton; I have been taught by either one of them each semester for my entire four years at Binghamton. The sad fact is that these two incredibly dedicated professors are overworked and tired. Their tenure at Binghamton has not been made easy for them, nor is it getting any easier. There May 2010

are thirty two students in the Arabic department graduating from Binghamton University this semester. The influx of new students interested in beginning at the introductory level has been so large that Dr. Lacey and Dr. Gomaa have been forced to turn many away as a result of being unable to accommodate them. Classes are filling up, and without a new professor, which the administration has recently denied funding for, there will be no way for all interested students to begin a study of Arabic. The funding of an Arabic program at Binghamton is starting to lose support amongst the upper administration. Questions are being asked about the viability of the major in the face of budget cuts and why it would be important to maintain funding. Indeed, a language major may seem frivolous when compared to an accounting or economics degree. One might be tempted to ask why, in this political climate, a university

The political nature of the language in the modern-day context is the most important and compelling argument for maintaining a robust Arabic program. would be willing to offer a language that is so controversial. I believe the political nature of the language in the modern-day context is the most important and compelling argument for maintaining a robust program. The War on Terror has been a constant influence in most of every college student’s adult life. America has been a presence in the Middle East for nearly a decade in Afghanistan and Iraq. The basics of this conflict are common knowledge. We all know that an Islamic fundamentalist group, led by Osama Bin Laden, called Al-Qaeda staged the largest terrorist attack to take place on American soil. We know that Islam is a religion based on the Koran, which was written by Muhammad in Arabic. We know that Arabic is spoken in the Middle East (although the distinctions we draw about this place are hazy). We know that we are “at war” with a group of people who are from Arab countries and speak Arabic. We know that the people who attempt to perpetrate violence against us are a small group of people who adhere to the Koran and mostly speak Arabic. It is important to note, however, that the acts of a group of extremists are in no way representative of the larger Arabic and Muslim population as a whole. During the Cold War, the United States’ government offered federal grant money to students who were studying the Russian language. The logic behind this idea is fairly obvious: you need to learn the language of your enemy in order to have

a functional intelligence apparatus and, therefore, security apparatus. Without knowledge of Russian, how would you expect the CIA to understand the intelligence they acquire? How would you expect the United States to be able to effectively defend itself again the Soviet Union? Universities across the United States offered Russian and Russian Studies as majors and took them seriously. These programs were largely a success and the United States was able to field a large number of intelligence agents who were fluent, non-native Russian speakers. This was viewed as integral to the defense of the United States. If we as a nation were able to understand the importance of understanding the Russian language and the Russian culture during the Cold War, and the success of programs promoting this in American universities are widely accepted as integral to the US defense apparatus, then why does this logic not apply when we find ourselves at odds with a new, more protean enemy that has done more violence against the United States than the Soviet Union ever did? Beyond just the black-and-white motives that are easily espoused in relation to national defense, it is also important to understand that the conflict we find ourselves in is also a cultural one. This is not to say that Islamic and Western models of society are not incompatible, this could not be further from the truth. This is a cultural conflict because we, as a culture, are incredibly unwilling to learn about other ways of life, and as a result we are unable to understand them when dealing with them. The Bush administration’s lack of understanding of Sunni-Shiite conflict in Islam when invading Iraq is a major and unfortunate example of this, one that got Americans killed. As a generation, we have a responsibility to make sure that we do not repeat the mistakes of the ones before us. Cultural hubris has cost us money, time, and worst of all, lives before. When we are in positions of power, we should not make the same mistakes. Binghamton’s Arabic program is one of the few programs offered on the Eastern Seaboard. The company it keeps are programs like Middlebury’s and Georgetown’s, which are superb and widely respected. The difference between our program and theirs is that Binghamton is a public school which is affordable while Middlebury and Georgetown are private universities that are decidedly not affordable to a majority of Americans. We fill a niche here that is not found almost anywhere else, and a quick interview of upper-level Arabic majors reveals that most of us came here because the school offered Arabic. The demand exists for a larger program, and with the right resources, the program could easily become as prestigious as those at Middlebury and Georgetown. In the world we live in today, this would bring tremendous value to the overall university. B 9


Safe At Last!

The New York State Supreme Court Puts the City in its Place by Adam Shamah


espite the uphill nature of the battle for offcampus housing choice, the past two years have seen several victories for students who wish to be able to live on the West Side. In 2009, student awareness and activism helped defeat Ken Kamlet on Mayor Ryan’s Housing Commission, which soundly rejected Kamlet’s proposals to zone students out of the city’s residential neighborhoods. Plans for a rental registry program have been soundly rejected by the city’s mainstream, and the recently-founded West Side Neighborhood Project has brought together students, landlords, and Binghamton residents with the common goal of a student-friendly West Side where students can live without disturbing their neighbors, and without being targeted by groups like the West Side Neighborhood Association. But the most tangible victory comes in the form of a ruling last month by the New York State Supreme Court. Judge Phillip Rumsey in Bayram v. City of Binghamton ruled that a violation of the city’s “functional family ordinance”--which bars non-families, and all those who are not the “functional equivalent” of a family, from living in the city’s residential districts--does not justify eviction under the law. This means the City may no longer evict students found living together on the West Side. The ruling was the result of an appeal of a Zoning Board of Appeals ruling which declared illegal the living arrangement of six students residing in a West Side home

ZBA ruled against a group of students living on the West Side. In 2008, seven students living on Lincoln Avenue were kicked to the curb after their neighbors reported them to the City. The difference this time, however, is

NYS Real Property Actions and Procedures Law may not be used to compel [student] eviction. without being “the functional equivalent of a family.” After the ZBA’s ruling, the City sent notices to the landlord and tenants informing them that violation of the city’s zoning ordinance is punishable by eviction, and that the students were to vacate the premises within a set time period. This is the second time in two years that the

Binghamton Mayor Matt Ryan



that landlord Emine Bayram is not one to take injustice lying down. She quickly responded to the City’s threats by filing a lawsuit with the NYS Supreme Court. Oral arguments were heard on March 8 at the Cortland chambers of the New York State Supreme Court. Representing Bayram was John A. Del Vecchio, a Binghamton University alumnus. Arguing on behalf of the City were Kenneth Frank and Brian Seachrist of the Ryan administration. Del Vecchio spent much of his time arguing that his client’s tenants were in fact the functional equivalent of a family. This argument was ultimately rejected by the Court; Judge Rumsey ruled that the students did not meet the City’s standards for a functional family equivalent. However, the ruling did not end there. The City relies on a section of the NYS Real Property Actions and Procedures Law (RPAPL) to justify its evictions for violations of the functional family rule. But according to Judge Rumsey’s decision, this law “only authorizes eviction of tenants who are themselves utilizing real property for an illegal purpose...[W]hile it has been determined that the landlord has entered into a residential lease not permitted by the local zoning ordinance, there is no proof that the tenants have used the property for any conduct envisioned by the statute, such as conduct of an illegal trade or business; therefore, RPAPL 715 may not be used to compel their eviction.” Thus, the City has been misapplying an irrelevant state law to justify its student evictions. Judge Rumsey even went so far in his opinion as to dismiss the City’s claims regarding the application RPAPL 715 with prejudice, the judicial equivalent of saying “there isn’t even close to a rational basis for the application of this law.” This leaves the City in somewhat of a paradox; it is free to apply its functional family standards to students, but cannot evict anyone for violation of such. As of now it is unclear what comes next. The City may still be able to impose other types of civil penalties, such as fines, against Bayram or her tenants. The City Council may also pass new enforcement procedures that would allow for eviction. When asked for comment, the City declined, citing the possibility of further litigation. Ms. Bayram plans to continue her challenge of the ZBA ruling with an additional appeal to the NYS Court of Appeals, the highest court in the state. Whatever the future may hold, students need to stay alert and ready to fight any counter-legislation from the City. In the meantime, we should enjoy the fact that the City has no power to evict students living on the West Side. B 12

Binghamton Review

The Aegean Contagion by Taylor Arluck


uropeans upon the conclusion of the Cold War saw their compatriots unite under the banner of a singular Europe to grace the dawning of the 21st century, integrating its brethren via the historic Treaty of Maastricht in 1993. Quixotic were the notions of grandiosity that this supranational entity would come to wield, Silvio Berlusconi declaring in 2003 that “Europe will only be able to look at the United States as something other than a subordinate if it becomes a great Europe.” It appeared that Old Europe had dawned the ancient cloak of Byzantium once more, reviving European nationalism as the specter of nuclear war receded with the defeat of Communism in the East. Aggrandizing well into the 21st century, the European Union (EU) would come to command greater numbers of peoples, resources and industries to challenge the undisputed hegemony of the United States. Triumphant at the collapse of its ideological opposite, the United States would now find challenge from its western allies across the Atlantic. However, recent events have rescinded the vindication of Mr. Berlusconi’s “great Europe” as the formerly united Europeans partition their once immutable trust in one another. Debt was the fatal cancer that would break the heart of the Europeans’ stoic tenability, a contagion Wendell Phillips recognized as “the fatal disease of republics, the first thing and the mightiest to undermine governments and corrupt the people.” The Europeans’ disease appears malignant with symptoms that may prove fatal for the alliance they contrived in the hopes of avoiding such an affliction across their once mighty continent. Europe’s tourniquets have proven mere patchwork against the financial chaos a penultimate Greek default would pose to the global community given the desperate state of the former’s finances. Europe’s most prized currency, the Euro, has suffered a precipitous decline as investors flee both Greek debt as well as the larger Eurozone in light of recent revelations regarding faulty accounting practices on the part of the Athenian government. However, Greece’s woes (and their implications for the EU’s social and political stability) are but one May 2010


example of threatening sovereign debt for the fractured continent to contend with. The so-called PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) are all European nations currently suffering from high ratios of debt as a percentage of their respective GDPs. The fruits of Greece’s folly are being reaped now as the world only begins to recover from the global financial crisis that began in earnest towards the end of 200Y8. Their dystopian financial Eden is fraught with international condemnation, reduced credit ratings, draconian austerity measures and internal political strife. Barring an uncertain guarantee by the Germans the Greek government faces increasing nominal interest rates on its riskpremium bonds as investors flee their debt offerings causing only further increases in the demanded rate by skeptical creditors. One might be inclined to ask whether Greece is a failed state. While the consequences of an Athenian default in the Mediterranean strikes many as startling given the insignificance of Greece’s economy with respect to the EU’s (Greece’s GDP is only 2.5% of the EU’s GDP), its implications become piquing when Greece’s condition is emulated across the Atlantic here at home. For contained within our union there appears terrifying similarities to the Greek ailment, the three apparent examples being California, New Jersey and New York. When one considers that California’s economy alone accounts for 13% of U.S. GDP the situation becomes even more precarious. The three aforementioned states have suffered similar symptoms of

the Greek contagion as capital flees and bankruptcy looms from their structurally insolvent governments and unfunded pension liabilities. Consequences of a California or New York bankruptcy would assuredly reinforce the skepticism creditors already reserve towards our federal government, itself a Gulliver beholden to debts it cannot repay. While there remains a possibility of debt restructuring or liquidation for little Athens, we must excavate further to discover the moral bankruptcy on which their crisis is predicated. The source of Greece’s debts derives from a belief that conspicuous

consumption can perpetuate without an appropriate financial catharsis. The wanton abandon of individuals in reverence to the masturbatory culture of profligacy cannot be maintained, and it is only now when the music stops do they realize the depravity of their ways. We are no different the world confirms as international bodies and crediting agencies leer at the spurious pledges our governments make towards fiscal responsibility. Our habits in both the private and public tier are shameful reminders of our contemporary indiscretions. One can only hope that our habits become undone before they turn us into something we are not. B 13

Binghamton Review We already control campus. SOON, IT WILL BE THE WORLD.

This whole year, you looked at this ad and laughed, but it’s been true for a while. Notice any similarities between our masthead and the SA’s letterhead? We do. Join us, before it’s too late. Email,,, or to join the revolution.


Overblown Hysteria

The Truth About Concealed Carry on Campus by Connor Hogg


f you have followed Pipe Dream’s coverage of the court ruling that overturned a Colorado law barring people from carrying concealed firearms on state campuses, you likely have painted in your head a picture of a chaotic and unsafe environment that would result if the law barring concealed carry on campus were reversed in New York as well. Ending with a powerfully fearful quote from a Binghamton student, Pipe Dream’s news story evolved into what seems like more of a biased opinion article: “I think [concealed carry] would be a threatening idea,” saying, “It would put the well-being of the faculty and students at risk.” Luckily, Binghamton Review exists as a counterweight to the often biased views of Pipe Dream and has granted me the opportunity to write a response detailing the truth behind concealed carry. You might wonder what gives me the authority to write such a response. Well, the truth is that I am probably the only undergraduate student, if not the only student, to currently attend Binghamton University and at the same time possess both a New York State pistol license and a carry conceal permit. My history with guns goes back a long way. I have fond memories and pictures of my first time shooting a 22 (a type of small rifle) in which I probably was even too young to spell the word “gun.” I got my first pellet gun when I was nine years old, a rifled-barrel shotgun when I reached fourteen, a black powder gun a few years ago, and a savage .270 caliber high powered hunting rifle just recently. I have been properly trained in gun use, and have taken several hunting safety courses. Indeed, my story conforms in most ways to those of every other person I have known that has applied for concealed carry and pistol permits—we have been around guns all our lives and know the responsibilities that come along with carrying a gun. Given my history with guns and my desire to enjoy the full rights afforded to me as a citizen under the Second Amendment, I decided to apply for both a pistol and concealed carry permit, both of which you need to be at least 21 years old to apply for. The permit itself costs about $160, an expense that many noncommitted college students and residents would arguably not be willing to make. In addition, the application takes about 9-12 months to process. Thus, students and residents carrying around concealed weapons would be at least 21 going on 22. Not only that, but those downstate students likely to be inexperienced with the responsible use of fire arms would be unable to obtain a carry

conceal permit under any circumstances— on the Island, and especially in the City, it is terribly difficult to get a concealed carry license, let alone a pistol license. Also, New York does not honor other states’ permits, so only New Yorkers could carry anywhere in New York, and you must have a residential history to apply. Given these restrictions alone, it is safe to bet that students with pistol and concealed carry permits on this campus are few and far between, and are mature citizens who are knowledgeable in the use of guns. However, if these requirements are not enough to put you at ease, the application process probably is. When I turned 21, both my father and I applied for our pistol and concealed carry permits at the same time. We were each required to cite four people in our county of residence who could vouch for us. These people all had to be adults with a good record and had to be thought of as honorable members of the community. Each reference was called and interviewed by a local sheriff, who asked questions like “how would you describe his temperament,” “would you recommend him for these permits,” and “describe his behavior under stressful situations.” Additionally, any police officer with which we had ever come in contact—from those who had issued us traffic tickets to those that we had worked with in the past—were involved in the review process. On top of all this, our paperwork went through an additional background check at the state level, which required our names to be cross-checked in criminal databases. Throughout this process if anything fishy ever turned up—someone saying we had any sort of temperament, a past criminal record, or if it just simply appeared like we didn’t have a good reason to apply for the permits—we would have been rejected immediately. So there are the facts, anyone that has a carry concealed permit and a pistol permit is likely to be very knowledgeable and respectful of the responsibility that comes with carrying a gun, most likely having dealt with guns all their life. They would not be young freshmen coming back from their first few drunken escapades out on the town. In addition, just to get the permit you need to be a respected member of your home community and have recommendations from fellow community members. So consider yourself informed; whether you agree with me that carry conceal would not be such a dangerous idea, at least now you can judge both sides of the issue. B 15

The Cost of Mismanagement

by the Editors

Binghamton Mayor Matthew T. Ryan recently announced the acquisition of a digital "Cost of War" calculator to be mounted on the front of City Hall. Ryan hoped that having a visible display of the War on Terror’s cost to the city would motivate voters into action against their national leaders. Instead, Ryan mobilized city residents against his budget and liberal bias. The mayor backed down. We appreciate Ryan's brazen approach to sending a message. Here’s a message of our own for the Mayor: stop blaming Binghamton's problems on the federal government and look to your own mismanagement for ideas on keeping the city solvent. All we've seen in Ryan these past five years is a 50 year old man acting like a child with A.D.D., moving from one irrelevant issue to another while a city with great potential crumbles away beneath him. In his tenure as mayor, Ryan has tried to make Binghamton a national model for everything except fiscal stability. We'd like to see Mayor Ryan calculate the impact of a few of his own unnecessary costs:


Binghamton Review

... and his tab at localMay bars. B 2010


Sexual Orientation Doesn’t Matter It’s Time to Repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell by Joseph Aguiar


n April 12, Charlotte Rendon, a Binghamton University freshman, entered the military recruiting station in University Plaza on the Vestal Parkway, with the intention of enlisting in the United States Army. She met all of the criteria needed to enlist except for one crucial discrepancy: she is a homosexual. Her encounter localized for us at BU the controversial question that asks if gays and lesbians should be banned from serving openly in our armed forces, a policy that the Pentagon is currently evaluating and Congress is considering repealing. Technically, under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, anyone, gay or straight, can serve in the military. The catch is that all officers and enlistees, prior to joining the service, must sign a contract certifying that they will refrain from any conduct that could be construed as homosexual. Essentially, you can be gay and serve in the military, but no one can ever find out; if a member of the military is found to be homosexual, he or she is swiftly discharged. While it is explicitly illegal for a homosexual to serve in the military, DADT creates a loophole, whereby the subject of sexual orientation is never broached. “We don’t ask you, and you don’t tell us.” The only way you can be found out is if you willingly disclose your sexual orientation, or you are caught engaging in “homosexual behavior.” Rendon must certainly have known this going into the recruiting office, which, to the outside observer (in this case, we here at BR), makes the whole thing—Rendon’s unprovoked disclosure of her sexual orientation and the subsequent protest rally held Friday, April 16th—

seem calculated and politically motivated. Whether or not this whole affair was all an elaborate plan of BU’s Right Side of History chapter, however, is irrelevant. Some sixteen years after President Clinton signed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” into law, and after 13,000+ discharges, it is now the sensible, pragmatic, and moral for Congress to repeal the law. In fact, key military figures have argued that Congress should repeal DADT. In 2007, a group of 28 retired admirals and generals wrote a letter urging members of Congress to repeal the act, claiming that there were, at that time, an estimated 65,000 active duty homosexuals and over one million veterans who had proudly served their country in the ranks of the US military.

Most recently, Admiral Michael G. Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking military officer in the United States, came out of his own selfimposed closet, saying in a Congressional testimony, “no matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens.” He would go on to say in more emphatically, “allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do,” making him the first JCS Chairman to explicitly come out against the ban on gays serving openly in the armed forces. Adm. Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates informed Congress that the Pentagon would research the effects of


lifting the ban, but that the final decision on DADT rests with Congress. President Obama, while opposed to the ban on gays serving in the armed forces, is at the behest of the Congressmen; it is ultimately their decision. However, the decision they should make is clear: repeal DADT. Simply put, when deciding whether an individual should be allowed to serve in the military, few things matter less than sexual orientation. Physical strength, mental fortitude, moral integrity, and tactical proficiency are the characteristics that ought to determine whether a man or woman is fit to serve. Whether a recruit has a taste for men or women, both, or neither, is no indication of his or her ability to fight, lead, and remain calm in the heat of battle. Through DADT, the US Military, a bastion of meritocracy, has, more than 13,000 times, decided that ability and competence are insufficient. Since 1993, thousands of military personnel who have shown bravery in battle, risking life and limb every day for

hundreds of millions of people they will never meet, have been forced to leave the armed forces not for a dereliction of duty, but because of a prejudice against a lifestyle that has no bearing on esprit de corps. It is this notion of esprit de corps that is always brought up by proponents of DADT, who have argued that allowing gays to serve openly would disrupt unit morale and cohesion. However, combat has a way of removing the veils of prejudice; when enemy fire is raining down on a unit, differences in religion, politics, race and yes, sexual orientation are forgotten in the duress of a foxhole, where the only thing that really matters about the people next to you is whether or not they can hit a moving target. Rivalries and disagreements become petty and unimportant when the soldiers in a platoon become dependent on each other for survival. Thus, those who argue against gays serving openly in the military show due concern for unit morale; it is the key

to success in battle. But in saying that homosexuals harm esprit de corps, they are accentuating the differences between people at the expense of the similarities. While there are clear cultural fissures between gays and straights, familiarity builds cooperation and debunks stereotypes; when gays and straights interact, particularly in battle, they realize that the supposed differences between them, which are said to make unit cooperation impossible, are totally false. The only thing about which a recruiter should be concerned is whether or not an individual would make a good fighter. Sexual orientation simply does not matter, and it should not preclude any individual, especially in a country that values equality and strives to reward people based on merit, from fighting for our security. In the end, straightness remains crucially important, but only on the shooting range. B Joseph is a junior and a US Marine Corps Officer Candidate.

Sorry, we’re from

BINGHAMTON REVIEW. We didn’t realize campus publications were supposed to suck. We’ll be back in the fall. Have a great summer! While you’re away, stay up to date on the issues that matter at or


Binghamton Review

May 2010

I Was Addicted to Liberalism “It started as a high school thing. Campaigning in ’08 for Obama. I heard the rumors about him, but I didn’t believe them. Soon I was supporting other Democrats. Before long, it became a habit.

A filthy habit. I got to college and it became worse I voted Matt Ryan for mayor and didn’t care that he hates students I wondered what was so wrong with multiculturalism and believed my professor when he said all white men are racist I told myself I could quit anytime

I was wrong. I thought coal was our biggest enemy. and that Asian Outlook was just an innocent culture rag. I protested military recruiters, but I didn’t know why. NYPIRG was slashed (again), and I felt bad.

I was headed for a crash. A




Then I picked up Review.”

BINGHAMTON REVIEW Defending the Truth Since 1987



The Enemies List See Who’s Been Condemned Kevin Broadus Former Basketball Head Coach

making payments on the Porsche you used to love bringing to campus.

Even Al Sharpton, scum of the social justice earth, spit out his morning coffee when he read about Broadus’ charges of racial discrimination.

Please... man up and step down. The entire university community is waiting to see you go.

Seriously, coach? You really think your university car and charge card were taken away because you’re black? You’re being punished because you recruited thieves and crack dealers. You upended decades of our hard-earned reputability. You put the last bullet through Binghamton University’s already controversial shift to Division I. Do you really wish to imply that all black people are incompetent scumbags? Not even we at Review would do that, and we have a rich history of provacateurism. This is a textbook, almost self-satirizing example of blaming your own personal shortcomings on race: a black person seriously drops the ball, is reprimanded, and immediately cries discrimination. Your letter to the New York State Department of Human Rights is a transparent attempt to game our state’s oversight system, much in the same manner by which you successfully manipulated our university’s academic system to keep your recruits on the court. The SUNY Board of Trustees inquiry into the scandal mentions nothing about race. Our university’s Affirmative Action Office, Multicultural Resource Center, and Black Student Union have not said a word about discrimination. But the hilarity of your discrimination claim doesn’t end with the complete absence of supporting evidence. Marc Macon, your replacement, is… black! Julius Allen, Assistant Coach: also black. Don Anderson, Director of Basketball Operations; he’s black too. The players dismissed from the team were both black and white. At the end of the day, with a $215,000 salary and all of your newfound free time, you have all the resources necessary to buy back your precious Range Rover—or to simply continue 20

Binghamton Review

Adam Amit Student Association President Unfortunately, one of the better SA presidents of recent years failed to keep himself off our list with his final opus: using the resources of the Student Association to lie to the entire student body about the activity fee increase. Who knew a guy wearing argyle sweaters had such cajones? Normally, we’d applaud this type of shadiness, but not when it’s used to trick students into voting for a fee increase they may not have otherwise supported. The New York Times International Paper of Record Instead of continuously beating the dead horse that is the BU basketball scandal, how about giving some coverage to other issues facing the SUNY system, like the tuition cuts, for example? We understand the need to give this topic some coverage, but is it really necessary to perpetuate on a monthly basis trumped-up outrage? The Times’ obsession makes us think they care more about fanning the flames than accurately portraying the situation’s severity. On a separate note, their editorial board is full of antiSemitic, peacenik hippies. E.M.O. / S.A.C. Campus Hippie Bastillon If you are wondering where these guys have been this year, join the club; so are we. No protests. No rallies. No mass arrests. Just a joke of a tabloid. Come on guys, the militaryMay 2010

industrial complex is wrecking havoc on our democracy, trading blood for oil, and profiteering off the proletariat. Doesn’t that at least warrant a sit-in? Ricky DaCosta Vice President for Multicultural Affairs For not giving us anything to complain about. We actually love Ricky and think he is the best VPMA Binghamton has ever had. But it’s a time-honored tradition of the Review to criticize the VPMA, so why stop now? Speaking of which, current associate editor and VPMA-elect Edmund Mays is dead to us. Sarah Grace Campbell, Matt Ryan, Ken Kamlet, and the West Side Neighborhood Association If you’ve read Review at all over the past two years, you know why these guys made the list. Sieg heil! Beyond Coal and Campus Environmentalism With EMO taking the year off, someone had to come in and take their place in the pointless protest department. Amid annual budget cuts, why not ask the university to spend money it doesn’t have on “clean energy”? We get it, a “green” campus is a nice idea. But in the middle of the worst financial crisis SUNY has ever had, eliminating the school’s main source of cheap energy is nothing more than a pipe dream. You can whine and moan about coal as much as you’d like, but wouldn’t a better strategy be to offer practical solutions to the campus’ high energy usage? Then there are the University’s plans to “save the planet.” These include purchasing carbon offsets—indulgences from the Church of Environmentalism —with your tuition dollars. We can’t hire new professors, but we can splurge on carbon credits, right? Students are here to obtain an education, not to fund environmental initiatives. Laura Bronstein MSW Department Chair Two years. Two free-speech scandals in the Social Work department. Two letters to President DeFleur from a civil liberties group detailing the egregious constitutional violations in the department’s masters program. Zero response from the department’s chair, Laura Bronstein.

Bronstein has been not only complicit in trampling on her students’ free speech rights, she is practically leading the way. Last year she led the battle to expel Andre Massena for putting up posters criticizing her department. This year she expelled Michael Gutsell for using constitutionally protected speech. (Read to refresh your memory.) Both times, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has involved themselves on behalf of the students. Maybe the university works under a “three strikes” policy, but whatever the case, Bronstein needs to go. Her department has institutionalized policies that discourage free expression, the worst thing imaginable at a university that is supposed to be the marketplace of ideas. That won’t change while Bronstein’s running things. XCEL Center For their broad-ranging definition of leadership, which apparently includes remaking the world in some kind of Marxist vision, complete with total equality and a support state for historically-oppressed minority groups. If we wanted to be indoctrinated with multicultural marxist bullshit, we’d take a Sociology class. Stick to teaching about communication and strategy, not gender oppression and institutionalized racism. Pipe Dream “The Pinnacle of Bearcat Journalism” Pipe Dream makes the list for institutionalizing mediocrity. In keeping with Pipe Dream tradition, we won’t go into much depth on this one. Given the resources available to its staff and their ability to publish twice a week, you’d expect some good ole’ journalism from them; but, instead, every one of their articles has the same angle: that of the uninformed, disinterested Binghamton student. They refuse to challenge assumptions and print whatever is handed to them without question. It’s not a newspaper, it’s a collection of press releases. We’ve also found that their print edition makes an inexpensive and lightweight alternative to packing peanuts. Jared Kirschenbaum Student Association Executive Vice President His proposed point system was poorly conceived and executed. Penalizing groups who choose not to participate in SA or XCEL-sponsored workshops is a dangerous idea that luckily did not make it off the ground. He still hasn’t read the 21


SA Constitution or Bylaws, and his time spent as interimVPF was a complete joke. This isn’t to imply that Jared’s tenure as EVP was a complete failure. He was in the office once in a while and he did help make semi-formal a much more inclusive and wellattended campus event. Nevertheless, he didn’t fix the known and long-standing issues with his office in a year of comprehensive Student Association reform. Student Group Council is still a confusing and muddled mess and the LEAD program, mandated for all student group leaders, continues to be an outlet for useless team-building exercises. We get it. He’s a nice cute Jewish boy, but as presidentelect, the phrase “in over his head” has never been more appropriate. Sam Sussman Martin Luther King IV Sensational Sam’s insistence on making mountains out of molehills lands him right on our list. It’s not often you can look at a person’s facebook page and observe as their profile pictures slowly turn into their own self-contained slide-show of rabble-rousing and political grandstanding, but somehow Sam has accomplished that feat. There’s nothing wrong with a straight guy fighting for gay rights, but it says something about Sam that RPU wants nothing to do with him. Student Assembly Representatives This year’s Student Assembly has been exponentially better than it has been in previous years, but there are still many reasons to put assembly reps on this list: asinine debate, saber-rattling, and all of the other bullshit we see in politics on the national stage. But all of that can be forgiven: student government is known for its brutality and democratic politics in general lead to showmanship. Assembly representatives are on this list for one reason only: their handling of the Student Association budget. In their annual budget review, which is supposed to be used to correct injustices in financial allocations, representatives almost consistently moved to increase budgets for their 22

Binghamton Review

own student groups. Guilty parties include the Rainbow Pride Union, Speech & Debate, the Harpeggios, the Asian Student Union, Society of Women Engineers and College Democrats. Even the College Republicans had a hand in this pork-fest. SA Judicial Board You know you’ve got problems when sacrificing a chicken and praying to the ghost of John Marshall will likely yield better results than the Magic 8-Ball that is the SA Judicial Board. This year’s decisions were characterized not only by constitutional baselessness and inconsistency, but also unanimity. They aren’t ruling on Brown v. the Board of Education; there’s no historical importance in SA “jurisprudence.” Consensus isn’t necessary; dissenting views might actually shape the quality of their opinions.

ON NOTICE Better Watch Yo’Self Phil Calderon Off-Campus College Council President-elect We have high hopes for Phil's desire to turn around the chronically corrupt Off Campus College Council: his ideas to use OC3's $130,000 to serve off-campus students is—strangely—groundbreaking. Nevertheless, considering his involvement in nearly every SA controversy during the past two years, we can't help but think that he's up to something. Brian Rose BU Vice President for Student Affairs After making the top of our list in 2009, Vice President Rose took a step back this year. He has far from admonished himself, and may still be a danger to students. Hence, we've put him on our watch list. While the changes he has made to the Office of Student Conduct (formally Judicial Affairs) are commendable, they are offset by Residential Life's all-out pursuit of any student caught May 2010

breaking their rules. We are glad Rose made the student "court" system fairer (and big props for eliminating Failure to Cooperate III), but that's mitigated by Residential Life's aim to charge as many students as possible, to the greatest extent possible, for crimes as harmless as tanning on the roof of a building. Campus Potheads Stop leaving marijuana and drug paraphernalia conspicuously laying around your room when the police come knocking. Smoking weed impairs your judgement, but it shouldn't make you retarded. University Police officers dislike filing paperwork just as much as you would dislike a trip to jail. Grab your shit and put it in a drawer, dumbasses.

Jenna Goldin Executive Vice President Elect The Student Association Executive Vice President-elect ran for office on a whim, and now seems terrified at actually having to do the job. Next year could be a big one for the EVP. Jared Kirschanbaum coasted through his year in office without tackling any of the major issues facing student groups. With help from an executive board packed with your favorite magazine’s editorial staff, Jenna will have no obstacles implementing the SA’s much-needed pro-student group reform. We seriously hope Jenna will pull it together, and Review will definitely be watching. GIRL POWER! B

JUMP Nation This year's award for most self-entitled student group goes to....JUMP Nation! The majority of groups on campus work hard to ensure the viability of their organizations. Most strive to make themselves at least partially financially independent of the SA. Not JUMP. They've grown used to relying solely on the funds they receive from the activity fee, so when the Student Assembly even thought of redirecting some of those funds to more campus-focused causes, out came the circus. No group is entitled to other students' share of the activity fee. When a group's only purpose is to hold events that do not directly benefit the campus, and fund those events on the backs of students, the SA is entirely in its right to cut that group. It isn't racist. It isn't unrepresentative. It's responsible. Jeremy Goldstein Assembly Representative His fake outrage is almost as bad as Sam Sussman’s. Jeremy’s childish crusades against The Man and All Things Bad For Constituents reminds us of a certain local mayor, but we do appreciate his energy. If Jeremy focuses his attention on real issues instead of windmill chasing, he may actually be able to make our campus a better place. Resigning from College Democrats won’t hurt his chances of getting off this list, either, but we’ll take what we can get.

Lois Defleur Binghamton University President President DeFleur’s involvement in and handling of the basketball scandal tainted the last few months of a great tenure as president. DeFleur’s previous 19 years in office have contained bits of controversy, and we have taken issue with many of her actions, but we can’t even begin to describe all of the good DeFleur has done for our university. A long-view retrospective of her presidency keeps Lois off of our enemy’s list, but surely lands her at the top of her own. Review sincerely wishes DeFleur the best of luck in her future endeavors. B



Review Sits Down With David Hagerbaumer

B.U.’s Director of Campus Life Discusses University History, Beer, and Politics Interview by Elahd Bar-Shai, Adam Shamah, and Randal Meyer Transcribed by Rachel Gordon

Q: For how long have you been at Binghamton? A: Since 1979. Q: How many Student Assembly meetings have you been to? A: Do the math; it is hundreds, literally thousands. I was trying to think, you know, could I name all the SA Presidents from my time here? I couldn’t do it. It’s either because of time or age.

Q: You said some of the criticisms of the SA are unavoidable… A: The SA is invisible to the regular student on the street, that is my gut feeling. If the Student Association came out of its offices and engaged in student life, I think that the more that happened, the more the complaints would go down. The SA taking on the issue with the Mountainview path—that’s a real issue for students. We got the Connect cars. That is just fantastic for our students. Those are some

Q: Do you think any of the criticisms of the SA are legitimate or are any unfounded? A: Yes, they are legitimate. I think this year was very different. I want to make the point that the SA has been in and out of touch with the student body over the years. When I first came here, it was very much in touch with the student body. It took a leadership role in terms of social issues, student life issues and that kind of thing. That lasted a while, then it became more about politics. We spent several years talking about nothing but the bylaws. I mean, we always talked about them to some extent, but never as much as we did in the last 10-12 years. But this year I think we’ve seen a return to focusing on the external issues. Q: Have you seen any anomalies in campus politics, in terms of things coming out of nowhere in the SA? A: No. I don’t really think that any of the change—and there has been a lot of it—was all that sudden. Certainly we have moved away from an Assembly that was really passionate about social justice issues and things like that. But that was because that was the time. Now I think we are actually quite a more conservative student government. But that is only reflective of who our students are. And that is all it could ever be. It is a reflection of the larger society, who is coming [to Binghamton University], and what the social issues of the day are. 24

Binghamton Review

Newing College prepares a hot air balloon for Oktoberfest in 1985.

May 2010

great examples of the students going out and actually getting engaged, and really having an impact. This year was like that, and I really hope we can sustain that. The E-Board infighting, that was a really low point over the last few years and hopefully we kind of bottomed out. Q: There have been criticisms from the SA that the Administration doesn’t want to work with us. Do you think they are as standoffish as some students think they are? A: I don’t believe they are standoffish. I don’t think anyone in the administration wakes up in the morning and wants to screw over students. I mean, these people have dedicated their careers to making the University the best place it can be. One of the biggest challenges was the change in the add-drop deadline. It happened a few years ago. Where [was the Student Association] at the committee meetings when that was being discussed? It was only after the university had talked to everyone else and it was passed and accepted that the SA got mad because the deadline was changed. An opportunity was missed. Are you going to like every decision the administration makes? No. And is the administration going to like every decision the SA makes? No. But that is okay. We should be talking and having open communication so it is not an adversarial relationship, but a partnership. Q: Has the relationship between the two parties always been that way?

the attitudes of students towards campus life and events on campus over the years? A: Yeah, it has been very interesting to have the opportunity to watch. The university itself is really nothing more than a reflection of what is going on outside the university. A long time ago, there were moment-by-moment protests. At any time of any day there could be a protest about something. I think the last really big protest [on campus] was probably about the diversity requirement. We should continue to have open dialog and confrontation about any issue in the world. We need to be challenging each other’s thinking, and that is something that has subdued over the years. We still have issues with civil rights and the First Amendment, but we are dealing with them differently. The SA has changed. I remember that the SA used to have resolution after resolution to stop things like oppression and the war in Vietnam. The day the SA changed was the day an issue came to the floor and the debate was not on the issue itself, but rather on whether the SA had the right to take a stand on an [external] issue. That is the day I knew things had changed, because the students were wondering if it was really okay to discuss social issues [through student government]. They were really struggling to take a stance on issue. They didn’t want to offend any other student, but at the same time they were also thinking that was not what they were there for. The fact that they would even question that was mind-boggling to me.

A: We see change all the time because the Assembly changes every year. If you elect representatives that come assuming an antagonistic relationship with the administration, that is probably what is going to happen. [The Student Association is] in the driver’s seat. But it’s not just the SA; students feel an obligation to not like the administration. It is like something you have to do as a student or you are not really a student. And that really goes back into what happened with the students in the late sixties and early seventies. There were huge social issues that were at the center of our lives. Vietnam, the Civil Rights Movement, or apartheid. Those were just really big issues with which university students were engaged. Now this university is really engaged in environmental issues and things like that, at this point. I mean, it kinda makes me smile…but students do have some obligation to dislike the administration.

Q: When was this?

Q: We’ve seen your ear to ear smile when talking about events that took place on campus back in the day. What is your take on the evolution of the campus community and

Everything was different. The drinking age was 18, and we drank beer during picnics at freshman orientation. I remember having a meeting where we decided to allow only

A: Late 80’s, probably. Maybe later, maybe early 90’s. Q: Tell us about Lake Empire, what was campus life like before the closing of the campus pub, and how the change of the drinking age affected University programming? A: Lake Empire was a great place. I think it was a little bit past Owego, and it was owned by the Binghamton University Foundation. It was a big place with a big lake, a beach, and an open playing field. There was a nude beach, and when you went there for senior picnic you would have a lot of naked people just running around. Nobody warned me before I went out there for the first time in the late 70’s.


three parties on any given night in the dining halls. We put a limit on beer to 25-30 kegs because that’s all the dining hall coolers could hold. We had to leave room for food, of course. There was this one party in Dickinson dining hall that had 100 kegs of beer. It started on a Friday night and just went straight through until they finished 100 kegs. The pub was cool. When I went to my first SA meeting, people were just sitting around drinking beer. [The Graduate Student Organization] always had a keg at their meetings, it was just a way of life. One of the great myths of the campus pub is that it was closed because of drinking, but that is not the case. It was a purely financial decision. But once the drinking age changed, nobody went there. People went at lunchtime, the food was really good there. You had a lot of faculty and staff going there, that kind of thing held it together. But ultimately, it was just finances that closed it. On the weekends, it started to get changed over to a coffee house. There was a Pub Activities Board, and Sodexho gave them money to program. But it just could not be sustained. The issue then was that students would drink on campus and drive to their homes off campus. At that point in time more than half the students lived off campus. It was rare that any student stayed on campus after sophomore year. The question used to be how to get the students off campus safely, but of course that was before all that don’t drink and drive stuff. One of the most interesting things was that we didn’t have fraternities and sororities back then, so all of this was happening at once. Then all of the sudden greek life became very big, and that influence came with the drinking age change. This forced all the parties off campus. Q: Can you tell us of any campus events that have been lost over time? A: There was SUNY Frisbee day, it was the forerunner of Spring Fling...There were tons of people there. There was food, beer, and the throwing of the Golden Frisbee. [The SA President] would drive the Golden Frisbee around the Peace Quad, then would bring it into the administration building and President Clark would throw it onto the quad. At the same time, other staff would throw Frisbees out of their windows. Wave after wave of Frisbees. It was really a lot of fun. The person that caught the Golden Frisbee got a prize, it was really a great event. It was something of a music festival outdoors, and there were lots of live bands. That is one thing that really changed. Every event, every party had a live band instead of [recorded] music playing. If you see the Battle of the Bands that Late Nite does, you will see really 26

Binghamton Review

how many bands there are on this campus. There are tons of them out there, and it is still a great competition. That is one reason the Undergrounds is not open on weeknights, because so many bands need that practice space. There are always the carnivals, which are interesting because they were always held in the union. They were sponsored by Fly By Night, the forerunner of the SA Programming Board. They were the big programming organization on campus. We closed down the Union a day in advance for decorating, and then opened it up for carnival. Everybody in the world came, the different residence halls had games and things like that. One of the biggest things was the auction held in the Mandela Room. The whole year they collected things to auction off: books, autographed pictures of authors, records, neon beer signs, oh my gosh..there were all kinds of things. You name it, it was really a national search for things to auction off, and there was thousands donated to charity. There was a casino night kind of thing connected to it. Now CIW does it, but it was previously held by Fly By Night. There wasn’t a homecoming at Binghamton when I came here...there was Fall Fest. That lasted a couple of years and then we moved to start doing Homecoming. Homecoming was here for like 4-5 years, and then it went away for a couple of years, and then it emerged again. Stepping on the coat has been here longer than I have. That is probably our oldest and longest running tradition. Hopefully we can hold on to that one. We have some traditions here that come and go, but the standing traditions seem to be tied to the colleigete areas. Newing Navy was a huge tradition. You know Newing Navy was basically a king of the hill type game. In Lake Leiberman, there was a game to knock people out of their boats into the lake. There was a Lake Leiberman monster competition where each residence hall built a monster. At the end of the competition, they were all torched in a bonfire. That was a good tradition for quite a few years and then it faded a little. The fires got to be a little dangerous. It changed with society. You know: everyone is suing everyone, and risk and liability became the buzzwords. Q: How was the relationship between the students and the community in the past? Has it always been tense? A: When the college first opened its doors out in Endicott, our students actually lived in homes and learning houses. In the first 2-3 years of the institution, our students were out on the streets of Endicott handing out fliers. The community members started thinking all of the students were communists. There are very few universities where the locals are not concerned, but I think one of our biggest problems May 2010


is that the university is separate from the community as an institution. We are way over here on what used to be a dairy farm, and our students are living in the city of Binghamton. Student life is not condusive to having students live next to a family. The folks at OCC have worked really hard with meetings and things like that. You know, if you are having a gathering of students, you need to tell your neighbors. What is happening most recently now, though, is different. Society has changed. We have the zoning issues…I mean people worry about property values, and you have landlords that are not keeping up. If you put students in a three bedroom home, and don’t keep it up, you are going to have a problem. You have 15 cars on the street and when people can’t park, that’s a problem. And who’s at fault? But it is not really about assigning blame. We have a lot of sketchy landlords, and we have a lot of property. We have an economy where property values are going down. Those are the sort of issues that are going on, and we have a culture where it seems that things are more violent than in previous years. We are definitely more aware of incidents that are more violent between students and non-students. Now some of these are the ‘wrong place at the wrong time’ type thing, and some certainly have to do with the broader social issues that are out there. Although, some have to do with students coming to Binghamton and not realizing they are still in a city. You need to be aware of your surroundings, and shouldn’t be walking around alone at 2 or 3 a.m. extremely intoxicated through neighborhoods. If somebody goes by and yells, then they could get mobbed. People have to realize that the campus is a very safe place. I think that Binghamton is also a very safe place, but in general, the world is more dangerous. B

Common Sense

Term Limits on the Federal Government and the 28th Amendment Movement by Nicholas Fondacaro


ver the two-hundred-plus years of our country’s existence, Congress has developed into a ruling class with rights and privileges above those of the people they are supposed to serve. I am not calling for a radical overthrow and replacement of government. I want to be a ‘Monopoly Buster’ and break the hold the two-party system has on us. The (R) and the (D) at the end of congressmen’s names plays little roll in this issue. Both parties have granted themselves rights, privileges, and immunities not afforded to the average citizen. The way to abolish this new aristocracy is to get new blood into office. The best way to do that is to institute term limits on our congressmen. Some people may be unaware of why term limits are needed, just like people before FDR didn’t feel the need to put term limits on the presidency, but light needs to be shed into the dark corners of our political system, where only people like Jack Murtha and Arlen Specter dare tread. We have a congress that passes legislation about how businesses should be run, with pro-union tendencies, with mandatory requirements that put businesses in the hole, and with measures that force companies to fire workers just to stay afloat. They pass legislation regulating “evil businesses” when they themselves don’t need to follow them. They promote unions in the work place while their own staff remains unable to form a union by law. They make their constituents buy into a healthcare system that is run by the same people that brought us the US Postal Service, the IRS, Amtrak, and the Social Security system – and they themselves are not required to buy into it as well! Who

needs to when you have congressional health insurance, paid for by the United States taxpayers? When it comes to energy use, Congress keeps preaching to us about how “we all need to do our put to help stop climate change,” yet our own energy department fails its own internal audits for energy use. Because of Congress’ ”do as I say not as I do,” aristocratic attitude, a grassroots movement is popping up around the country calling for a 28th Amendment to the Constitution. All have slightly different variation of the text of the amendment but in general it goes like this, “Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives and all other branches of the Government; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and Representatives and all other branches of the Government that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States.” Some proposals include language making the law retroactive so that any current law that does not meet these standards is unconstitutional. This is a great example of people calling for tough restrictions on the privileges to which Congress thinks it is entitled. The solution to the American Political Aristocracy is to get new blood into congressional office. But how is that to be done? The simple answer is to vote them out. It sounds all well and good, but there is one major flaw. Congress has manipulated and warped the system so that incumbents have the advantage and both parties have made it near impossible for independent and third party candidates to run for office. The parties have gone as far as to manipulate 27

their states’ voting districts so that they could cement voting blocs for their party. The way in which our leaders are able to cement a vote in the states for their party is through a sleazy tactic known as gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is attempting to use the process of redrawing district boundaries to benefit a political party, protecting incumbents, or change the proportion of minority voters in a district. Even if a challenger was able to acquire the obscene amount of signatures needed need to be on the ballot in most districts, the odds are still against them. When it comes to campaign finances, incumbents have a serious advantage. When it comes to independent challengers, it is worse. Since the person an independent candidate is running against is in a political party, the independent’s opponent will get millions of dollars from his party’s national committee. Thus, the odds of getting elected become even slimmer. As reaction to incumbency advantage, grassroots movements to limit terms started in 1990 and reached a fever pitch in 1992, as voters in ten states passed term limits for state legislators. Currently, seventeen states limit terms for state legislators. According to, term limits have been placed on 15 state legislatures, eight of the ten largest cities in America adopted term limits for their city councils and/or mayor, and 37 states place term limits on their constitutional officers. During this very productive time, the Supreme Court ruled that term limits on congress are only possible through a constitutional amendment. Thus this creates a pretty sizable paradox, why would a congress drunk on power vote to limit it? And how would a people crying out for reform get a challenger in when the odds are greatly stacked against them? And how could the people unify against this in a system that thrives on dividing the people and pitting them against each other? The answer is a simple one, vote. A voter must forget about the (R) or (D) at the end of a politician’s name. But, even this is hard for a people that have been so entrenched in political battles to overcome. People tend to argue that instituting term limits when there are good congressmen on the hill is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. If we lose a few good congressmen, then so be it. The harm done by the many overshadows the good deeds of the few. From their special rights and privileges, to the manipulations of the system and their ability to form royal political families like those of the Kennedys, Bushes, and Clintons, Congress has shown us that they are out of control and that term limits are increasingly needed. The Declaration of Independence states “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.” I am not calling for a radical reconstruction of the system. I’m calling for an slight alteration for the good, life, and the future of the Republic. B 28

Binghamton Review

10 Things That Have More Money Than NYPIRG 1. Greece 2. The Anime Club 3. The State of California 4. David Paterson’s Campaign Fund 5. Nicholas Cage 6. New Orleans Fishermen 7. Recent HDEV Grads 8. Madoff’s Investors 9. JUMP Nation’s Proteges 10. This guy:

May 2010


The Importance of Capital by Rod Alzmann


hy are you here? I am saying this not to the local, but to the student. Why do you come here, oh student? Have you come to Binghamton seeking a valuable education? Drunken festivities? Friendship? Marriage? Whatever your reasons, potentially unbeknownst to you, you are acquiring capital. Capital you say? From making friends? Yes. This article is to open students’ eyes to the enormous wealth of capital that is waiting to be acquired at both Binghamton and everywhere else they look. I start with what most of us here believe that we are paying for. A diploma. You spend 3, 4 or 5. But what is a diploma? A diploma is a piece of paper that embodies the human capital that you’ve acquired at college. A diploma says that you have earned roughly the equivalent of enough knowledge at Binghamton to begin work in your profession. But what does human capital mean? It is the investment in your ability to think. We acquire more and more human capital in order to maximize our competitive abilities. Unlike random facts, human capital is, according to Wikipedia, “[E]xpandable and self-generating with use” as well as “transportable and shareable.” The gist of it boils down to the fact that we come to college not to read book after book and memorize facts, but to learn how to effectively THINK. I say think because it is such a subjective word. One cannot think in measurable values solely based on the inputs; the outputs must be looked at. In order to have a benefit, thought must yield an output. By thinking

about where to go for food, I have yielded an output. In my opinion, expanding human capital means to make the use of our brains, aka thinking, worth more. Enough ranting about the value of human capital, because, honestly, it’s not all that you’re going to get at Binghamton, or at any university. Another form exists that you acquire at school, and down the road for the rest of your life – social capital. Social capital? What is that? How much my friends are worth if I sell them off into slavery? (Just kidding.) No. According to Robert Putnam, social capital “refers to the collective value of all ‘social networks’ and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other.” By maintaining a Facebook, Twitter, or even better, LinkedIn account, you are in effect potentially expanding your social capital. The relationships and interactions that you have within your own social network (the people and peers that you are surrounded by) can prove to be beneficial even years after the fact. If you agree with this concept, then hopefully you are not the person that sits in their house/ apartment/dorm all week long, only venturing out to attend class and camp out in the library. I am arguing that the social networks and relationships that we build at college can hold as much value as the human capital investments that we put into ourselves. After you graduate, do you want a job? Of course you do. (Unless you’re a member of EMO and you want to fight “the man” forever.) Anyway, the

point is that you want a job and you came to college to help yourself get a good one. Sweet. So if that’s your goal, listen to my advice, and invest in your human AND social capital while you’re here at Binghamton. This holds true for everyone reading this. Even if you’re a senior, you still have the chance to squeeze some more human capital into those rapidly diminishing brain cells of yours. As for freshmen, please, build up some social networks. I don’t mean friend all of Binghamton on Facebook. No, I mean gain some value from the people that you know and form priceless relationships. And non-students, well, seriously read some books or the news. You can never know too much. If anyone tells you so, then either: A) They are God, and therefore all-knowing, and you should quickly suck up to them as much as possible and pray that they throw you a bone/ticket to heaven, or B) They’re members of a secret government organization that is trying to keep the citizenry stoopid (yes, stoopid.), or C) They’re a jackass. So, basically, those of you who made it this far in the article, first off, congratulations, and second off, go now and acquire human and social capital, bitches! As my time at Binghamton rapidly draws to a close, I want to take a moment to thank everyone who took the time to read my articles over the years. Hearing any feedback is always appreciated, and knowing that what I have had to say impacted my peers in a positive way is always a great thing. I wish the best to my fellow graduating seniors, and good luck. To those of you remaining at Binghamton I say this: excelsior. B 29


Lois, You Hardly Know Us

Review Was Denied An Exit Interview, So We Just Made One Up Binghamton Review - You have a doctorate in sociology, studied juvenile delinquency in Latin America, and have done extensive work in the fields of deviant behavior and occupational socialization. Looking back on the fallout from the basketball team, do you think its fair to say your education was completely meaningless? Lois Defleur - I wouldn’t say my education was meaningless. Sometimes your degree can’t prepare you as well as you think it will. BR - Broadus is still on paid leave. Does the university plan on firing him, keeping him on paid leave, or “making him disappear”?

BR - A lot of jokes are made about the academic rigor faced by SOM students. Are you at least concerned? LD - Not really. I mean its a business school. All you need to know is where to hide the money, how to steal ideas and other people’s work, how much to pay the fall guy, and who the fall guy should be. Obviously, Broadus didn’t go to business school. BR - One of the long-running jokes students have is how they never see you on campus. Would you care to comment as to why you’re rarely seen at student events? LD - I have a life.

LD - Whichever option continues to waste as much student money as possible is the one we’ll most likely go with.

BR - We’ve been dying to know. What do you think of our little publication?

BR - A couple of weeks ago Broadus accused the school of racial discrimination. Do you think there’s any validity to this claim?

LD - It’s offensive, poorly written, and to call it “reporting” would be an insult to journalism.

LD - I was really surprised by Kevin’s accusations. We have always had a very good working relationship. He never once indicated that he felt the administration was treating him unfairly because of his race. This comes as a complete shock, especially after I sent him that nice gift basket of KFC and watermelon.

BR - Ouch, that was kind of harsh.

BR - Although BU Council will be responsible for finding your replacement, if you could choose your successor, who would it be and why? LD - I know it’s a controversial decision, but Kevin Broadus.

LD - Sorry, I thought you were from Prospect. BR - The Spine was recently named the “Lois B. DeFleur Walkway.” We are wondering how you feel about having such a busy part of campus named after you? LD - I think it will be nice to let the students walk all over me for once.


BR- Do you think the East Campus Housing Project is a worthwhile development for this school?

LD - Well, by keeping his mouth shut he’s proven himself to be loyal. He’ll do anything it takes to win. And he’s already on the payroll so it just makes sense from an accounting perspective.

LD- What do you mean, East Campus Housing Project? Like Newing? I just figured out last week we had a new community called ‘Mountainpeak’ , or something like that.

BR - You still feel this way even after his formal complaint of racial discrimination?

BR- Juanita Diaz recently called out the University for not emphasizing diversity and having enough students from multicultural background. What is your opinion of this?

LD - Why not? Plus the school will look good for having a minority hire for President. 30

Binghamton Review

LD- Is she up for tenure? May 2010

BR- Umm...she is in charge of the LACAS program... LD- Such a shame...budget never know who is next.

BR- Binghamton is one of the cloudiest cities in America. Do you think that this has held this school back at all? Would the school have been better off if it was in a different, sunnier location?

BR - But wouldn’t you say there is some truth to that? Van Voorst, Swain, Craner, Sonnenfeld, Rose, and you are all white. That isn’t exactly a diverse set of administrators.

LD - You don’t appreciate what you kids got nowadays. You have no idea what unbearable weather is! Why I remember back in ‘Nam...

LD - We had a black guy as interim Dean of Harpur but we switched him for Nieman real quick. At least we had a black head coach for basketball.

BR - You were in Vietnam?

BR - One of the major issues facing any college campus is assuring the safety and security of its faculty and students. Do you think this University has done everything it can to make this campus as safe as possible? LD - Absolutely. I mean think about it. There hasn’t been a terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11. BR - That does make sense....wait what? LD - You don’t think the cutbacks on EOP and the Arabic Department were “necessary,” do you? BR - Do you think the value of a Binghamton University Diploma has changed since last year? LD - Well paper costs have gone up and printing has...oh wait, I see what you’re getting at. No. BR- You have stated several times that your favorite part of being President is speaking at University Commencement. Why is that? What makes it so special? LD - I like to speak to every student at least once before they graduate. I often take criticism for never being seen on campus or knowing any students, but that is completely false. I shake every students’ hand and say at least two words to them before handing over their diploma. There are so many students and only one of me. This is the most efficient way to meet every student, plus its important to give them that personal touch so they donate later. And it’s really easy to forget their names until they are rich enough to be on my radar.

LD - I graduated from the US Naval Academy in ‘58, and became a naval aviator over there. I remember it like it was yesterday.. in October of ‘67, my boys and I were on a bombing mission over Hanoi. We all got shot down, and then a couple of us got captured by some gooks and couldn’t get out until ‘73. BR - You were stuck in the jungles of Vietnam for 6 years? LD - First of all, it’s not’s ‘NAM! You have no idea how many of us died. I am lucky to be alive; I lost some of my friends back there. To this day, I can’t look one of those....those... tunnel rats without remembering what they did to my brothers. I always said ol’ napalm and agent orange were the best things God ever invented. Well that and the Marine Corps. BR - Are the racial slurs and obsene language necessary? LD - Have you ever seen your best friends face blown off while he’s taking a dump in the jungle? I DIDN’T THINK SO! (Lois starts to daze off...her eyes go back in her head...we are losing her..) BR: Lois...LOIS..are you okay? LD: Yeah, sorry...war is just hell. Did you know I was a model before the war? Now look at me. BR - Well Lois, we really appreciate you taking the time to sit down and talk with us. Do you have any final words of wisdom? LD - “In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women.” B 31

Complicating student life, one app at a time. OCCT


$1.5 mil. • Download routes, schedules, and fire escape procedures. Undergraduates only.

$900,000 • Create your own scores, scandals, and botched coverups. Pretend to be a real D-1 school!


Lois Locator

Free • It’s cloudy, get over it. Stop bitching and buy an umbrella. Updates available twice yearly.

$375,000 • Get notified when she leaves the ivory tower. Not available on campus.

Tuition Tracker

Harpur Advising

$16,500+ • Watch the only reason you chose S.U.N.Y. slowly slip away. Be glad you’re graduating soon.

Pipe Dream Worthless • Last week’s headlines, today! See if you made Weekend Warrior or Police Watch.

4 hours of your time • Got questions? We don’t have the answers. Transfer into S.O.M. OCCT


Tuition Tracker

Pipe Dream


Lois Locator

Hippie Helper


Campus Food

Safe Ride


Student Government

Safe Ride $3 • Sketchy cab driver? Check the sex-offender registry and terrorist watch list before you get in.

Whatever you feel like paying • Got angst? Need a cause? Find a protest worth holding with this random issue generator.

Student Government

Campus Food $1,500+ • Had it with diarrhea for the semester? Find out what’s open offcampus so you don’t have to eat in the dining halls.

Hippie Helper

Your social life • Follow in the footsteps of our state senators. Accomplish nothing while destroying your public image.

S.O.M. Safari




Free with housing • Surf the web at super-slow speeds. YouTube not included.

10 yrs. too late • Ignore emails from Grace Hoffner, Brian Perry, Eileen Head, and Adam Amit.



4.99 GPA • Greed is good, and so are lax standards, grade inflation, and “collaborating” on exams.



Your dignity • Find out what you did downtown last night and where that nasty bruise came from.

$300,000 per song • Caught downloading? Stand by as IT Services throws you under the bus.

The best mobile device becomes useless on the nation’s most hassle-filled campus. College going too well? There’s an app for that.


May 2010 - Binghamton Review  

We Won! Now, here's our shitlist.

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you