October 2011 - Binghamton Review

Truth and Two Staples

October 2011

Binghamton Review The Nominee Bunch

Must See TV!

Inside: -Student Conduct Policy -Israeli Defense Force -Broken Government, Part I -Rational Tuition is Rational

Binghamton Review

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

editor@binghamtonreview.com

Founded 1987 • Volume XXV Number 2 • October 2011

Editor-in-Chief Aaron M. Ricks

Contents

Managing Editor Mark Soriano Copy Desk Chief Eric Larson

Watching the Game The Republican Nomination Process

Associate Editors Chris Formisano Ari Greenberg Nick Fondacaro William Obilisundar Editor Emeritus Rachel Gordon Contributors Will M. Griffin, John Ewing, Nick Valiando, Daniel Rudder, Venanzio Cortes, Michael Hickey, Steven Kwon, Bridgette Cook, Heather Sherman, Daniel Eglovitch, Chris Kleinstein

Page 12

6

Go To Work, Hippes by Bridgette Cook

8

Rational Tuition is Rational by Aaron Ricks, Daniel Rudder

10

Standards of Evidence by Aaron Ricks

Patriarchs of the Review Louis W. Leonini Adam Shamah

14

Defending the Israeli Defense Forces by Daniel Rudder

16

The Slums of Johnson by The Wolf

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

18

Broken Government, Part I by Mark Soriano

19

Obama Tax Plan? Not a Fan by Daniel Eglovitch

20

A Freshman Perspective... by Heather Sherman

21

Apocalypse Now... Or Later by Steven Kwon

22

Freedom of Speech vs. Obscenity by Chris Kleinstein

Secretary Marissa Beldock

Binghamton Review is printed by Our Press in Chenango Bridge, NY. We provide the truth; they provide the staples.

Departments 3 EDITORIAL 4 CAMPUS PRESSWATCH 5 what you missed 18 Broken Government

General Staff Meetings: Every Tuesday at 7pm in UUW-B05

EDITORIAL

From the Editor...

W

ell, Binghamton, it has happened again.

Only four weeks after I wrote my last editorial about the abuses of power by local and school officials, the Binghamton University Council announced its proposed revisions to the Student Code of Conduct. The proposed changes was a radical move by university officials that threaten to further weaken the delicate relationship between the administration and the Student Association. The dangerously low amount of evidence required to convict a student of any student conduct violation, known as “preponderance of evidence,” would have threatened the very nature of student conduct violations.

That being said, I would like to congratulate our Vice President of Academic Affairs, Kate Flatley, for negotiating with the Office of Student conduct on removing the preponderance of evidence from most student conduct violations. Although the fight is not over to protect students, we can be proud of the progress that has been made.

That being said, I feel it is necessary to address the protesters of the New York Students Rising. While Dan Rudder and I give an at-length criticism of the opponents to rational tuition in this issue, the way the protest was conducted also deserves critcism of its own.

I have never understood why protesters on college campuses believe it is necessary to be overtly rude and obnoxious to fellow students. Distrupting classes in the

lecture halls, annoying students in the library PODs area, and yelling at Student Association office receptionists is no way to gain students to your cause. Why would you alienate the people whose support you are trying so desperately to win?

Let me remind the hippies of that key piece of wisdom we should all remember when it comes to enacting political change provided by Saul Alinsky. True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on a suit and infiltrate the system from within. You are making the same mistakes that our once young-hippie parents made during the 1960s-70s. You are isolating the majority of those in the society you seek to reform. So please, go shave and take a shower because we could smell you from our office.

Now onto other things. Three weeks ago, on a crisp Monday morning, I woke up to the most unpleasant surprise of seeing the newest issue of the left-wing drivel known as Prospect in the Union on my way to class. I am absolutely flattered, albeit embarrassed that they decided to feature me in their editorial. In response to their kind words, I would commemorate one of their finest accomplishments.

I was astounded with the clarity and substance of the article found on page 11 of Prospect’s September issue. Hopefully we can have more pages like that in the future. To all of our readers, I encourage all of my readers to check out the article on page 11 of Prospect’s September 2011 issue. B

Tell us what you think!

Direct letters to editor@binghamtonreview.com.

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. www.binghamtonreview.com

3

CPampus resswatch

by The Editors

Pipe Dream September 6, 2011 “Infinite construction has left campus fractured and hideous” Jordan Rabinowitz shows how short sighted people can be, while proving that writing skills are not required to be an English major…

“Aestheically [sic] speaking, the nonstop construction on campus isn’t helping us. The gods of construction have crapped on us and forgot to wipe.”

Interesting strategy on the spelling of “Aesthetically,” although that says more about Pipe Dream’s copy editing staff.

Also, we didn’t realize that construction sites were supposed to be aesthetically pleasing.

“Binghamton University can spend all of its time banking on the future, and we’ll see how the investment pays off if these construction projects ever finish, but we are the current makeup of this school and we are suffering. “ Binghamton University “banking on the future” is what keeps our degrees valuable. Only by improving campus can the school hope to attract the right students and increase our endowment.

By Mr. Rabinowitz’s logic, construction and campus improvement should never happen, in order to protect the delicate sensibilities of the current student body.

4

Binghamton Review

Prospect September 11, 2011 “Hoo-Ra! An Unamerican Article” Haig Agdere’s superficial assesment of American patriotism betrays a systemic lack of quality in Prospect articles...

“The person best qualified to lead our country is he or she who can roar the loudest.”

That is how one gets elected in any democracy. Show us a candidate who does not tout the virtues and strengths of their electorate, and we’ll show you a candidate who loses an election.

“Apparently killing a terrorist makes a nation great.”

No, killing the mastermind behind nearly 3,000 American deaths brings a sense of closure to a nation going through a decade of malaise.

“America - the name for two continents reserved by one country that thinks it is the shit” The United States is not called America because it thinks it is the “shit,” it is called America because in the eighteenth century the British needed a term to differentiate North American colonists from people living in Britain. But by all means, Mr. Agdere, take a stand and refer to America only as “the United States of America” for now on.

Do it, you won’t.

Pipe Dream September 20, 2011 “How to Turn 21, the Only Way I Know” Jillian Kermani explains how, with proper forsight and planning, you can end up a drunken slob...

“Everyone has a 21st birthday...”

Except for people that die before then. We are fairly certain that a large segment of humanity does not live to see their 21st birthday, but go on Jillian, tell us more!

“It all starts with waking up. If you don’t wake up you’ll never make it to your birthday.”

Intrepid, groundbreaking reporting by the staff of Pipe Dream.

“The key is to act like it’s your birthday the day before and start partying early” “Oh sorry, I’m drunk already.” “Alcohol writes the rules from here.”

Ms. Kermani wasted her time writing, and a few people’s time reading, an article stating the obvious: some people get drunk on their birthday, especially their 21st birthday. Her ability to take something so clearly true and make it sound so stupid is truly remarkable.

october 2011

WHAT you missed Zombie Conclave

On September 17th, virgin-nerds across campus celebrated as members of the Zombie Student Union met in the Peace Quad, kicking off the start of the latest season of Humans vs. Zombies. NonZombies, or “normal people” as we are known, can look forward to weeks of mild inconvenience, as fellow students run through courtyards, hide in doorways, and lurk around dining hall entrances.

The Review is working around the clock to discover any possible links between the Zombies and homegrown terrorism. The results are thus far inconclusive. Why can’t you guys be more like LARP club?

Debating Republicans

Contenders for the Republican nomination for president continued to participate in debates. Clear front runners Rick Perry and Mitt Romney hardly hid their contempt for one another, while the other candidates seemed content just to be included. Although it remains contested who won each debate, it is clear that as long as Ron Paul is allowed to participate, everyone loses.

Presidential Downgrade

President Obama received a 43% approval rating in a mid-September New York Times/CBS poll. In a condemnation of the president’s actions, Republican senator Lindsey Graham claimed that “everything is worse” now than before Obama’s election.

While some of the editors at the Review agree with Senator Graham’s sentiment, we believe he was being a little unfair to the president. After all, Americans seem to have gotten better at coping with crushing disappointments from our elected officials.

Euro in Trouble

Concerns over the integrity of the European economy continued to brew as Greece stepped closer to bankruptcy www.binghamtonreview.com

and Italy faced an S&P credit rating downgrade. All eyes turned to Germany, the leading European economy, to forge a solution to salvage the common currency and protect the Eurozone from continued uncertainty. German Chancellor Angela Merkel responded by demanding that the Czech Republic and most of Poland must be ceded to Germany before any solution is created.

A Resounding “Nein!”

Compounding Chancellor Merkel’s economic concerns were state elections in northern Germany, where Merkel’s coalition partners faced bruising defeats, suggesting that the Chancellor’s government may be about to fall. In an ominous post-election declaration, Merkel announced that “a scapegoat will be found” for the Fatherland’s current problems.

Strauss-Kahn Aftermath

Former International Monetary Fund (IMF) head Dominique Strauss-Kahn returned to his native France after a New York court dropped charges of sexual assault against him. Strauss-Kahn had been charged with forcing a New York City hotel maid to engage in sexual relations with him, but after inconsistencies appeared in the maid’s story, the prosecution determined that the trial could not continue. In an interview, Strauss-Kahn reported that his actions with the maid represented “a moral fault” that prematurely ended his political career. He later announced the upcoming release of his tell-all book, If I Raped Her. Now if only Straus-Kahn had been accused of rape at Binghamton, he probably would have been found guilty (see page 10).

Triumph in Tripoli

In late August Libyan rebels entered Tripoli, and secured the city after days of fighting against the forces of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. The rebel-supported

National Transitional Council moved into Tripoli, and has since taken up Libya’s seat in the UN, as well as gaining official recognition from the United States, European Union, and African Union, among others. Colonel Gaddafi, who remains at large in southern Libya, has indicated that he will leave the country as long as a photo album filled with pictures of former US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is returned to him. The album, which Gaddafi left at his Tripoli stronghold during his flight from the capital, is described by Gaddafi loyalists as being of “extreme importance” to the former dictator.

Palestinian UN Bid

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas began an official campaign to gain full member rights in the United Nations for a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders. President Obama and the Israeli government came out in opposition to this move, demanding that direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine are a necessary prerequisite for any formal recognition of Palestinian statehood. Inspired by Palestine’s actions, dozens of quasi-states across the globe announced demands for seats in the UN, including Kashimir, Vatican City, and, in a confusing move, West Virginia.

Cyberattacking Japan

Mid-September cyberattacks on Japanese defense contractors prompted concerns over the safety of highly classified security information. The attacks, aimed at contractors which build many Americandesigned fighter jets for the Japanese defense forces, further undermine faith in the Japanese governments’ cybersecurity strategies. Insult was added to injury when it was discovered that the attacks were launched by a group of teenage South Korean hackers attempting to pirate JayZ’s Watch the Throne album.

5

PROTESTING

Get to Work, Hippies.

Why protest when you can accumulate capital?

by Bridgette Cook

B

inghamton University has been said to be one of “the Best Value Colleges” in the United States, however some students at Binghamton still feel the need to protest slight tuition increases. Being an out-of-state student, I have an unbiased view of the university and its tuition and I feel that the tuition at Binghamton is far more reasonable than other tuitions at similar institutions, including its out-of-state tuition.

In-state tuition for most state schools is about the same as out-ofstate for Binghamton; coming from New Hampshire this statement is no fabricated exaggeration.

So least to say, I was appalled when I saw a guy with a megaphone and a girl handing out flyers about how horrible the SUNY system was to raise the in-state tuition $435 a year for the next five years. This increase of $435 a year for the next five years more or less accounts for inflation. More recently was the state-wide “walkout” on October 5th from noon to 3pm in which activists distributed their plethora of handouts bearing the phrase “We can stop the cuts & tuition hikes.”

The state-wide walkout was more of the same, except on a slightly larger scale. If there are any students at Binghamton that have a “right” to complain about the tuition increase they are the out-of-state students; the SUNY system increased the in-state by 6.7% and the out-ofstate by 10% or $435 and $1,509 respectively.

After the protesting about how tuition should be less expensive, there were a few other expressions 6

Binghamton Review

© 2011 Michael Fischer

of opinion on campus for various issues. One man had the audacity to have a table set up in front of the Glen G. Bartle Library and hand out communist publications and state his opinion with various to-the-point signs, such as “FREE EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE…” This kind of expressing one’s opinion publicly is more socially accepted than the people with the megaphones shoving flyers in your face, because he was just there to answer questions, not to shout his opinions to the world and choke people with poorly descriptive flyers.

However, both kinds of expressing one’s opinion publicly are protected under the First Amendment and are therefore legal, the distinction between them is whether or not they are socially accepted as forms of publicly expressing one’s opinions.

The days of using a megaphone as an effective form of protest have since past, it was a thing of the college protests of the 1960s against the war in Vietnam. And needless to say, these protests were ineffective

as the war in Vietnam continued to prolong and those college students had only reinforced the notion that the citizens of the United States were not in favor of the war in the first place.

Has college protesting begun to become similar to that of the French or is it still about real issues and concerns? What ever happened to college students sleeping outside for a night to bring awareness to child soldiers in Africa? How can students at Binghamton protest about a tuition increase of $435, when last year Britain nearly tripled its tuition cap and most college students ended up paying twice as much for tuition as they had the year prior?

Nationwide college tuition is all out of whack and is far too high, but here at Binghamton we pay one of the lowest college tuitions in the nation for a “Top 100 University”.

The college students that should really be complaining about tuition costs are at Penn State, where instate students pay more than twice as much as in-state Binghamton students. B october 2011

TRuTh aNd TwO STaplES

NOVEMBER 2009

Binghamton Review

Help The Review Grow

Prohibition is back!

ScaNdal ENSuES afTER STudENTS dRiNk BEER

INSIDE: The Fed CLIMATe Week BeLLWeTher eLeCTIons sTudenT ACTIvITy Fee

October 2008

Binghamton Review

E Plus:

d E t c vi

!

For almost 25 years, Binghamton Review has been the voice of the campus right at Binghamton University.

Now, more than ever, the Review needs your help.

Please consider donating to our cause. Every penny counts towards advancing the conservative movement on Binghamton University’s liberal campus.

Donate now and get Binghamton Review delivered to your home free of charge.

BR Uncovers the Plot to Kick Students Out of the City

BR Interviews Walter Williams Open Borders Advocate Speaks on Campus, and Hinman RAs Try to Indoctrinate!

It’s all here, in Binghamton Review, the voice of students!

Fill out this form and return to:

Truth and two staples Binghamton Review, April 2005

April 2009

Binghamton Review P.O. Box 6000 Binghamton, NY 13902-6000 Include a check made out to Binghamton Review Your Mailing Address:

Truth and two staples Binghamton Review, April 2005

April 2008

The Latin American Student What Keeps This Campus Union is a Disgrace to Latin Apart? Multiculturalism Culture-Campos and the VPMA-Powell

B inghamton R eview Thirsty?

BR Investigates the Killer Coke Campaign and Reports On What Really Happened In Colombia

Plus an Exclusive Interview With UPD! Binghamton Review, April 2005

Truth and two staples

www.binghamtonreview.com

7

RATIONAL TUITION

Rational Tuition is Rational As Opposed to the Irrational State-Wide Walkout

by Aaron Ricks and Daniel Rudder

P

olitical science 101: people love getting things from the government, but no one likes paying for goods and services they enjoy. This is especially true for graduate students attempting to pay for their six-year PhD program in Sociology.

On Wednesday October 5, “New York Students Rising” held a state-wide “walkout” to protest budget cuts to SUNY schools and a wide-variety of other leftist issues including privatization of school services, cutting insignificant and inefficient educational programs, hyrdrofracking, taxes on millionaires, and taxes stock trading.

Before we discuss the absurdity of the protesters’ arguments and their lack of a coherent grievance, let us first present a list of some of the demands we found:

1.) Freeze and lower tuition.

2.) More labs, better equipment, other resources including paper, staplers, etc.

3.) More frequent buses, reorganization of bus lines.

4.) More parking or decrease enrollment if you cannot accommodate students, lower parking fee and/or more buses to alleviate need for parking.

8

Binghamton Review

“If you want the quick version of the protesters beliefs, here it is: anything privately owned is bad, anything publicly owned is good.”

Where do we begin? Freeze and lower tuition? Is SUNY expected to never raise tuition ever again, even to account for inflation? More labs and better equipment? And how will we pay for that without students paying more for the services they enjoy? And how will you pay for this when you decrease enrollment (thereby reducing the University’s revenue) in order to make parking more accessible?

And what you call “luxury student housing” is just a 21st century dormitory. If you really want to live in the same dorms your parents did, Dickinson has plenty of spots open for you. Then again, maybe having all students camping out in the nature preserve is what you had in mind.

If you want the quick version of the protesters beliefs, here it is: anything privately owned is bad, anything publicly owned is good. Basically, anyone planning on working for a privatelyowned company, corporation, restaurants, pet store, hospitals, or anything not owned by the

government, please stop being a fascist and work for the government or an environmental non-profit group. Seriously, the stupidity of the protesters is just astounding.

Does anyone want to pay more for school? Of course not, but thank you for protesting in support of the overtly obvious!

Let us just look at the facts here: public schools, especially Binghamton University provide a good education at a more reasonable price than private competitors.

SUNY students have the privilege of paying approximately $20,000 per year for college, while their companions in private schools often pay more than twice that amount. All around the state, SUNY campuses are receiving much needed improvements to outdated classrooms, dorms, etc. As enrollment continues to increase, the state needs to hire more professors and staff and update campus facilities appropriately in order to accommodate more students.

Of course the state is going to have to raise costs in order to keep schools running. We are in, for lack of better terms, an economic quagmire.

Everyone everywhere is feeling the pinch, and everyone with a shred of common sense is keeping a closer eye on their expenses and looking to increase or secure their income.

Government-funded institutions are not immune to economic woes; it is only appropriate for them to plan for their futures as anything october 2011

RATIONAL TUITION

less would be irresponsible.

The walkout protest was sophomoric and short minded.

SUNY’s plan is economically necessary to ensure a bright, thriving future for New York’s public education system. There is no use encouraging students to skip out on valuable class time to demonstrate against a plan designed to breathe life into a withering but vital establishment.

The tuition hikes proposed only cover about half of the state budget cuts to education!

The rational tuition is the most responsible course for SUNY to take to account for increasing costs of education. For example, tuition was set at $3,400 in 199596 and stayed at that level until 2003-2004 when it jumped to $4,350 that year. That is a tuition increase of 28% in one year! The www.binghamtonreview.com

rational tuition plan calls for a 25% increase in tuition over five years, as opposed to forcing the state legislature to arbitrarily and radically increase the tuition at one time. The previous practice of increasing tuition all at once over the past 20 years is effectively equal to an average of 6.7% per year.

On top of that, protesters argue that these incremental increases in tuition will disproportionally affect low-income students. But they never bother to point out that the SUNY 2020 plan includes additional assistance for these low-income students. Students, who are eligible for the Tuition Assistance Plan (TAP) would not be subject to the tuition increases, and any university center that opts for the 8% per year tuition increase would have to provide additional

financial aid plans for students. And on top of that, the SUNY Board of Trustees is also required to set up a revolving loan plan to offer low interest loans to students.

So this brings us back the original argument: this protest was NOT about tuition hikes. This is about disgruntled leftists using the irrational anger over rational tuition to promote their own unrelated causes: higher taxes for the rich, banning hydraulic fracturing, anti-incorporation of the Student Association, construction on campus, and vegan meal choices.

You may pretend to speak for the 99% of the population, but you are certainly not fooling us. B Special thanks to Nicholas Fondacaro for enduring the smell of hippies in the pursuit of quality journalism.

9

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE

Standards of Evidence

How the Office of Student Conduct Tried to Fool Us

by Aaron Ricks

I

t is official. The administration at Binghamton University will use any avenue available to them to stomp on the rights of students living on campus. On September 9th, the Binghamton University Council and Brian Rose, Vice President of Student Affairs, announced their proposed changes to the Student Conduct Policy. The revision to the policy in question is this: “Determinations of responsibility will be made on the basis of whether there is a preponderance of the evidence that the student charged violated the Code of Student Conduct.”

For those not accustomed to legal jargon, this means that university officials would no longer need practically any evidence to find students guilty of any student conduct violations. Effectively, the Office of Student Conduct could find a student guilty of any conduct violation, no matter the severity, with only 50.01% certainty that the student actually committed any violation. They would use our country’s lowest standard of proof, which is only used for certain “civil crimes”, as opposed to the standard of “clear and convincing evidence” used for policy violations since 2007.

The rationale behind the changes was clearly stated in the policy revisions sent to the public: “Recent Guidance from the Office of Civil Rights regarding Title IX

10

Binghamton Review

Requirements (OCR Dear Colleague Letter: Sexual Violence, issued April 4, 2011) specifies that school’s grievance procedures must use the preponderance of evidence standard to resolve complaints of sex discrimination including all forms of sexual violence. It is our belief that the best practice is to use the same standard for deciding all cases of alleged misconduct. Deciding cases on a different standard based on the nature of the behavior would add unnecessary confusion to the process and is ill advised.”

The problem with the excuse behind this complete policy reversal of student conduct policy provided

by Brian Rose and the Office of Student Conduct is that it is totally devoid of logic and rationality, not to mention an extremely dishonest and illiberal way to increase the power of school officials.

First, the letter released by the US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights on April 4, 2011 vaguely specifies the various obligations colleges and universities bear under Title IX with regard to responding to allegations of sexual harassment or sexual violence. To put it simply, any school receiving federal funding must abide by the OCR’s mandate that any student accused of sexual harassment or sexual violence can be found guilty with only half-certainty that he/she actually committed the crime. Nowhere in the “Dear

Colleague” letter did the OCR say that all incidents of student conduct violations. It specifically states that under Title IX, all schools must enforce policies on sexual crimes using the lower standard of evidence. Thus, using the OCR mandate as an excuse to lower the amount of evidence to find a student guilty of any conduct violation is just a lie.

Second, the rationale provided in the Student Conduct Policy amendments uses the excuse that “deciding cases on a different standard based on the nature of the behavior would add unnecessary confusion to the process and is ill advised.” What is this even supposed to mean? Different standards of evidence already exist for different accusations of legal wrongdoing. In the United States, jury deliberations over criminal action typically use our nation’s highest standard, “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Proclaiming that using two standards of evidence for different cases is confusing and unnecessary is simply contrary to the entire American legal system, not to mention a complete mockery of justice.

Third, it is important to remember who comprises the members of the Binghamton University Council, which votes on changes to policy, and who drafts the proposed amendments. The BU Council is a 10-member committee of outside

october 2011

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE lawyers, local industry leaders, and one student member representing both the undergraduate and graduate students. In order for any proposed amendments to become policy, the Office of Student Conduct must convince these members to vote in favor of the proposed amendments. But what they must have conveniently forgotten is that there is no student representative currently on the council! No one looking at this situation should believe that the Office of Student Conduct did not know that there was no student representative that would be present during voting, it was a deliberate attempt by members of the school administration to take advantage of the students while the Student Association e-board members were overwhelmed by their new responsibilities after school had just begun.

But why would the administration

www.binghamtonreview.com

choose now to introduce such a sweeping reversal to student conduct policy? It was only four years ago that our esteemed Student Association Vice-President for Academic Affairs (VPAA) at the time, Peter Spaet, successfully negotiated with the Office of Student Conduct and the Binghamton University Council to have all Student Conduct violations judged by clear and convincing evidence as opposed to the preponderance of evidence that was used before the 2008-2009 school year. The current VPAA, Kate Flatley, put it best: “The University administration always has one huge advantage up its sleeve: time. SA [Student Association] leaders who are charged with protecting the interests of students usually graduate after only four years in Binghamton, and the experience those students obtain with dealing with the administration is lost from the SA once they graduate. The

administration, on the other hand, they can always wait us out. That is why it’s so important for the SA to stay on its toes.”

While Ms. Flatley’s successful negotiation with the Office of Student Conduct is commendable, the fight is not over. Preponderance of evidence is still used in deciding cases of “harassment and sexual violence.”

The exact definition of “harassment” by the Office of Student Conduct is yet to be seen. While most news surrounding examples of injustice in our legal system happen to 15-minute celebrities on national television, the most likely scenario to actually affect students at Binghamton will be here on our own campus. And it is up to us to protect those rights from those that would take advantage of student apathy. But still, God forbid that in the pursuit of justice, effort is expended. B

11

REPUBLICAN NOMINATION

Watching the Game Advice for Your Fantasy Picks

by Venanzio Cortese, Michael Hickey, and the Editors

W

e assume that you have not been paying attention to the minutia of Republican party politics, so we did it for you. Here is the rundown of candidates for the Republican nomination for president. Someone from this list will be taking on President Obama in the 2012 election.

Herman Cain

Ever hear of the 9-9-9 Plan?

No, it is not the latest offering from Dominos, it’s the tax plan that pizza-mogul Herman Cain, former President of the National Restaurant Association has been hocking on the campaign trail the past few months. Cain - also the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza turned presidential candidate has become a Tea Party sensation since announcing his candidacy at the beginning of 2011. However, critics say that he lacks the command of policy details that would put icing on the cake…or perhaps the toppings on the pizza.

However, Rick Perry’s recent debacle regarding an incredibly racist hunting-ground has helped Cain poll towards the top of the GOP in several polls.

spoil the fun. That kid grew up to become Rick Santorum. The former Pennsylvania Senator known for his uber-conservative stance on social issues and lost his bid for reelection in 2006 is back from the political bone yard for some more politiking. And for this season’s crop of Republican primary voters, Mr. Santorum’s ramblings about being the most viable candidate against an incumbent Democrat must be falling on deaf ears seeing as he now hovers around 4 percent in most primary polls. Also, listen for when he refers to himself in the third person.

12

Binghamton Review

Jon Huntsman

This former Governor of Utah and more recently U.S. Ambassador to China has a long record of fiscal conservatism and competence.

As governor, Huntsman was able to cut taxes by over $400 million while preserving a budget surplus. Huntsman’s moderate social and foreign policy views place him in strong contrast with many of the better known 2012 candidates, and could be a benefit during the general election.

However, it is clear that there is only room for one Mormon millionaire in this race, as Huntsman has been consistently outshined by the better known Mitt Romney.

Michelle Bachmann

Rick Santorum

Remember the slightly annoying kid who wanted to hang out with your group of friends in high school?

And even after you told him to get lost, he would still hang around and

playing Cowboys and Indians. Perry certainly does not have to convince Americans that he is the real deal; stories abound about his coyote-killing escapades. Even still, his conservative credentials have come under constant fire ever since he kicked off his highly anticipated campaign early this fall.

His past as a Democrat and the Texas chairman for Al Gore’s 1988 presidential campaign and for his executive order compelling the use of the anti-HPV vaccine on young women, has certainly drawn the ire of most of the other candidates.

But one doesn’t become the longest serving governor of Texas by being a liberal pansie. Regardless, it remains to be seen whether the nation is ready for yet another Texan in the White House.

Rick Perry

Yippie Kai Yay mother f*@#$%!

This Governor of Texas makes George W. look like a boy from Connecticut who never stopped

Well known for her controversial statements and often erroneous historical facts, Michele Bachmann remains a viable candidate in the race for the Republican nomination.

While her views on gay marriage and

october 2011

REPUBLICAN NOMINATION her strong religious beliefs alienate some within the party, they serve her very well in places like Iowa with high evangelical populations. Her victory in the Iowa Ames Straw Poll puts her in a top position in the race, behind Romney and Perry. Whether she can win the Iowa Caucus against the other two frontrunners remains to be seen, but if she can she would be in a prime position to stay in the race and maybe even win the nomination. Well, that is if she can get her husband to stop trying to turn gay men straight through prayer.

Mitt Romney

The early frontrunner in the Republican nomination, Mitt Romney has fought a tough campaign since the entry of Rick Perry in the race, in what at times appears to be a two-man race.

Despite losing the nomination to John McCain in 2008 , Romney continues to do very well in polls, as many believe his business background and experience will serve him in getting America back on the right economic track as president. Despite his qualifications, he lacks the brute charisma and strong character of his major rival Rick Perry, which may hinder his chance of securing. However, Romney’s impressive debate performances toward the end of September showcase not only his electability, but demonstrate to many that Rick Perry’s 15-minutes of fame may be at an end. Convincing Republicans and primary voters that his Mormon faith is not an issue may be the last hurdle Romney faces in gaining the nomination.

campaign since the start. Gingrich announced his campaign through Twitter, which was seen by many as an attempt by Gingrich to appeal to a younger, more technology-savvy demographic. Several early missteps in his campaign, including his comments on Meet the Press about the Republican’s Medicare reform plan and his alleged $500,000 debt to Tiffany & Co., were met with backlash from that press and within his own party. The Gingrich campaign was also plagued with major staff resignations in June, further adding to his campaign woes.

There is no doubt that Gingrich is an experienced candidate and has great knowledge of the issues facing this country. The success of his presidential bid will more likely

reflect his ability to manage and run his campaign. Despite his poor poll numbers to date, it is likely Gingrich is in this race for the long haul.

Ron Paul

Yeah, we get it, the media ignores him. He won the California Straw Poll last week. You know how many people voted? 834. The worst part about Paul is his hordes of internet supporters. Regardless, he consistently polls well among Tea Party supporters, although his extreme libertarian values will likely undermine his appeal to the Republican electorate. B

Newt Gingrich

One of the first Republican nominees to declare his 2012 presidential run, Newt Gingrich has run a rocky

www.binghamtonreview.com

© 2011 Gage Skidmore

13

ISRAEL

Defending the Israeli Defense Force Because somone has to.

by Daniel Rudder

I

n recognition of recent actions which may cast a dark shadow on the United States’ strongest and most crucial Middle Eastern ally, it is imperative for Americans to remember who our nation’s real friends are. Israel is the only Middle Eastern state that shares virtually all of our values and common enemies.

In the words of an impassioned Glenn Beck, “they have immeasurably more freedom than any other Middle Eastern nation.” Beck points out that Israel “tolerates more provocations” than any other state in the land, and while the international community is quick to accuse the country of misdeeds, “tens of millions of Arabs are still suffering brutal [and sometimes deadly] atrocities at the hands of their own countries.”

Granted, Beck may not be the most esteemed political commentator, but love him or hate him; in regards to

14

Binghamton Review

Israel, he speaks the truth.

The small nation has always strived to act fairly and justly in all official military operations, and it almost always does. However, a continuous stream of allegations from the Palestinian and, to a slightly lesser extent, the international community accuses the country of excessive violence. As of late, perhaps one of the chief controversies feeding this misinformed notion is the deadly Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound “aid” flotilla. The flotilla in question illegally attempted to breach Israel’s vital, protective naval blockade back in late May 2010. The flotilla participants, regardless of their true intentions, acted imprudently. There are several legitimate channels for humanitarian aid to be delivered via checkpoints maintained along the Gaza border, rendering their claims of bringing “aid” unlikely. This was

likely a media stunt designed to undermine Israel and to cast the nation in a darker light as they have time and time again. Practically speaking, the flotilla could not have really expected to earn passage to the Gaza coast.

The real story goes like this: six ships, collectively known as the ‘Gaza Freedom Flotilla,’ attempted to illegally pass through the UN Sanctioned Israeli maritime blockade off the Gaza coast, which the Israeli’s have had sealed since June 2007. IDF naval forces repeatedly warned the flotilla to turn around and subsequently intercepted the vessels when they refused. Israeli Commandos boarded the vessels with nonlethal weapons. On the ship MV Mavi Marmara, resistance was encountered. According to a member of the boarding party quoted in the online MSNBC article “Bloody Israeli raid on flotilla sparks crisis,” the commandos were attacked by individuals wielding a variety of weapons, ranging from switchblades, clubs, and metal bats to pepper spray and firearms. Two Israelis suffered gunshot wounds.

Conditions were so harsh that some commandos dived into the sea to escape the violence.

The Israeli troops had to defend themselves and resorted to the use of lethal force. Ten Israelis and 54 flotilla workers were wounded and nine flotilla workers were killed in the fiasco. According to the United Nations’ Secretary-General’s panel

october 2011

ISRAEL

report on the May 31st 2010 Gaza Flotilla Incident, Israel concluded “the violence against the soldiers was carried out in an organized manner,” and “suggestions that the passengers were acting in legitimate self-defense were not supported by the evidence.” Despite the international community’s senseless and biased condemnation of Israel’s actions there remained “serious questions about the conduct, true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, particularly IHH,” according to report. The IHH humanitarian relief foundation is an Islamic-Turkish Non-governmental organization (NGO) to which the MV Mavi Marmara was registered to.

For one to truly understand Israel’s actions, he/she must understand the context in which they took place. Since 2001, Israel has been under near-constant attack from Palestinian militant groups engaging in the practice of—among other violent actions—firing rockets and mortars at Israeli settlements and military installations, mercilessly and indiscriminately murdering civilians and soldiers. In response to these terrorist acts Israel, in keeping with the legal definition of an international armed conflict, has defended itself and when needed employed the use of military force.

As quoted in the aforementioned UN report, the IDF “determined that a naval blockade provided the most efficient and comprehensive legal tool to confront the prevailing security threat” of a vulnerable Gaza coast waiting to be trespassed

by Palestinian terrorists intent on attacking Israel from Gaza-a radical www.binghamtonreview.com

Islamist safe haven.

This past July, individuals again acting under the false pretense of a humanitarian group attempted to try once more and breach the maritime blockade. Most of the original 10 ships and approximately 1,000 people (a group composed of 22 different non-government organizations {NGOs}) never made it near the Israeli coast. While the flotilla was assembling in the Mediterranean, Greek authorities instituted a travel ban which forbid Gaza-bound vessels from leaving its ports.

The flotilla acted unilaterally and without the blessing of the international community. In fact, to the contrary, many nations made their collective and unified opposition quite clear. This includes the U.S., United Kingdom, Canada, France, the EU., Russia, and interestingly, even the UN and

Turkey the latter of which is generally rather supportive of Palestinians, the former of which viciously condemned Israel’s previous flotilla interception after it turned deadly. IDF naval forces intercepted the lone ship, a French yacht christened Dignité Al Karama, which escaped Greece by lying about its destination, that had made the journey and the incident was resolved without bloodshed; the misguided Palestinian sympathizers were deported back to their home country.

It is unfortunate that there are those among us who would deny Israel, which finds itself in a very hostile environment—as a nation literally surrounded by entities whom repeatedly call for its demise and iniquitously dispute its very right to exist—it’s right to protect itself.

Is self-defense not among the most sacred and basic of human rights? B

Binghamton Problems, Binghamton Solutions

Problem: Ceiling Leak

Solution: Bucket ‘n Cone Solving our problems and taking two months get it done 15

JOHNSON HALL

The Slums of Johnson Hall How Reslife Turned Dorms into Prisons

by The Wolf

T

he Dickinson Community has always been known/ stereotyped for being the low-income tenement housing and slums of campus. Having the oldest, most dilapidated dorm buildings on campus will give you that sort of reputation. But following the events of the “Floodpocalypse” of September 2011, the university administration and Residential Life (Reslife) have essentially turned Dickinson’s reputation from playful joking on the campus’ original student community into a serious problem.

Not long after the flood had begun to take its toll on the city, the University Administration was suddenly faced with the lofty responsibility of housing the residents of the greater Binghamton community at the Event Center and West Gym, essentially turning Binghamton University into a refugee camp for affected Binghamton residents. But on top of that, hundreds of students were forced to evacuate their downtown apartments and houses. Meanwhile, hundreds of emergency workers were preparing to come from Washington and Albany to assist in flood control and aid work.

Our campus was suddenly faced with a crisis: where do we house the students’ whose off campus housing was flooded, in addition to

16

Binghamton Review

the emergency personnel working around the flood affected area for week-long shifts.

Then along comes an idea from Reslife. An emergency meeting was called to assess whether or not Johnson Hall in Dickinson Community could be temporarily re-opened to house students of the University. Johnson and O’Connor halls had been closed at the end of the last school year in order to start the transition of converting the older Dickinson community buildings into office buildings and begin construction on “New Dickinson.”

O’Connor had already begun its transformation and currently houses the ResLife, Student Conduct and the LeChase offices. Johnson on the other hand, was empty. A decision was made to re-open Johnson Hall and offer temporary housing to students who had been forced to evacuate.

Another emergency meeting was called on Friday September 9th at 7:45pm, but this time it was the RAs of Dickinson who were called to the meeting. There they were informed of the decisions made that had been made over the past couple of days, and were told that, on top of their weekly 8pm –12am duty in their own respective buildings, they would be required to take shifts in Johnson Hall from 8AM to midnight for the next few days to provide

support and enforce Reslife policy while the affected students were in Johnson. When RAs inquired exactly how long they would have to babysit the building, they were told that “only until Monday afternoon (September 12th)” would there be flood-affected students in Johnson.

By Sunday, a notice was distributed to all of the evacuees living in Johnson that they had to leave the building by Monday… October 3rd.

The way ResLife deceived its own RAs was most disheartening and despicable. They of course played it off by saying they did not expect so many to take the offer to live in Johnson, and they were forced to extend the deadline through October. Although the extent of damage caused by the flood was apparent a day into the flood, ResLife still maintains it did not expect so many students to be affected and in need of month-long housing on campus.

Johnson’s new refugees soon found themselves at the mercy of Grace Hoefner and ResLife, the subjects of a system that quickly sounded a lot more like a prison than a sanctuary for those who had just lost their homes for the time.

Those who chose to take the offer to live temporarily in the barren building were forced to sign a contract stating that they would

october 2011

JOHNSON HALL

be held to the ResLife Housing License and a few other “minor” regulations. They were not to, at any point in time, have any guests/visitors in the building.

They must clean the public bathrooms themselves (which people rarely abided by) because regular maintenance would not be provided. After signing the contract, students were instructed to go to the Dickinson RA on duty in Johnson. There they were given a key to their new room, and told “not to lock yourself out because there is no master key to the building.” Next, they were informed that they could get a roommate at any time without warning. The RA then proceeded to give them two cards; an access card to the building (which actually allowed access to all buildings in Dickinson… but RAs were instructed to keep that quiet) and a forty dollar Sodexo meal card… which was to last

www.binghamtonreview.com

them their entire stay in Johnson.

And should a student check out early, they would have to give the meal card back if there was money left on it. They were then given one extraordinarily uncomfortable pillow that feels like it’s filled with styrofoam, two fecal colored unbearably itchy blankets, two (already) damp towels (that ResLife failed to clearly distinguish between used and not used), one small bar of soap, and a one ounce package of shampoo. When refugees asked where they could do laundry, RAs were instructed to tell them that there were no washers or dryers in the building for the foreseeable future and that they would not be allowed into other residence halls to do laundry. The RAs of Dickinson were even instructed to be on the lookout for Johnson residents and to keep them from entering other residence halls. Johnson refugees were told they had to go off campus to their laundry.

If anyone dared to break any of the rules of Warden Hoefner, they faced immediate expulsion from Johnson. But no one in the building would defy these policies anyway knowing that the entire 3rd floor was housing police officers, FEMA workers and federal marshals.

But as the weeks passed, things began to look up to many of the inmates of Johnson. Many residents became complacent living in the slums of Johnson. They became satisfied with their Sodexo rations, fecal blankets, and lonesome rooms.

The displaced students and RAs had become victims not only of the tragic flood, but also to Residential Life’s poor preparation. With their lack of coherent policy on the possibility of flooding of offcampus housing and throwing away all common sense in regarding the lack of laundry facilities available to the inmates in Johnson.B

17

Broken Government Part I: A Look at Gerrymandering.

by Mark Soriano

In the first part of a new series, Mark Soriano examines the effects of gerrymandering on the American political system.

C

omplaints about America’s “broken” government pervade political discourse, especially during moments of national hardship. Blaming the system is an easy excuse for politicians; casting away responsibility to some undefined “other” is always more appealing than accepting blame yourself. When asked why the system is broken, politicians are quick to lambast over the sins of partisanship, which, of course, is the fault of the opposing party. To a degree, the politicians are correct, partisanship is a major contributing factor to our government’s inability to act, but it is not necessarily the fault of political parties. Instead, the intensification of partisan politics over the past decades is caused more by the way congressional seats are created.

Elections for the House of Representatives are held nationwide every two years. Every ten years, following the Federal Census, the states embark on a yearlong process of congressional redistricting.

Population changes are taken into account, forcing states to shift district

18

Binghamton Review

borders as areas become more or less populated. Sometimes, states must accommodate the loss or gain of an entire congressional seat, if their population changed enough. Ideally, politics are cast aside during the redistricting process, and population alone dictates district size, location, and demographics.

In reality, most states leave the redistricting process in the hands of their state legislatures, meaning that the political party in the majority controls how congressional seats are established. Known as gerrymandering, after Elbridge Gerry, a famous 19th century practitioner of this strategy, this type of redistricting is used by legislatures controlled by either party, in an understandable and logical act of self-preservation.

However, the problem remains that gerrymandering damages the integrity of our government. The constitution was not designed to accommodate politically motivated congressional districting, transforming Congress from the purest and most representative branch of America’s government

into the den of career politicians and extremists.

Gerrymandering results in what are called “safe districts,” congressional districts where demography is so favorable to the party in control that the seat is all but guaranteed to be won by the party’s candidate. A result of this is that between 1964 and 2008, at least 87% of congressional candidates seeking re-election won, according to The Economist. In other words, only 56 seats in the House, out of 435, are ever really up for grabs. The other 379 are always held by the incumbent.

The important questions are: how does this relate to partisanship, and why is it bad? Gerrymandering contributes to partisanship because when the make-up of a district is so overwhelmingly in support of one party, the actual election does not matter. Rather, the party primary enters center stage. Candidates for the party nomination famously pander to the extreme of their party’s values, in order to secure the votes of the party base,

october 2011

OBAMA TAX PLAN resulting in immoderate nominees.

To oversimplify, the House of Representatives becomes full of extremist congressmen, forced to abandon moderation in order to win the nomination. This is bad because Congress because becomes more divided along party lines, as fewer members are able to embrace moderate views or compromise and retain their seats in the next election. An immoderate congress finds reaches compromise much more difficult to achieve, so that larger issues are rarely ever dealt with appropriately.

Another outcome of gerrymandering is that voters who live in “safe districts” who are of the opposite party from their congressman are essentially excluded from the democratic process. They can only sit by and watch as a party primary, which they cannot participate in, select an extreme candidate who will go on to win the general election.

Gerrymandering is in effect a voterigging strategy by statehouses, preventing large portions of the populace from engaging in representative democracy.

Luckily, there is a solution. A small number of states have legislated against gerrymandering, requiring congressional redistricting to be taken out of the hands of legislatures and given to independent commissions. These commissions ignore political calculations and instead focus on population and demography. The resulting districts should be composed of a more even distribution of political values than districts resulting from gerrymandering, making the seat more competitive for both parties. B

Obama Tax Plan? Not a Fan.

by Daniel Eglovitch

S

adly, President Obama has seen his better days - at least in the eyes American public.

His approval rating has dropped to a new low, a meager 38%. In an effort to restore faith, or quite possibly make an “election statement”, Obama unleashes a new beast. It will become parasitic on our success moving forward. What could possibly be so horrifying? Obama’s new tax plan that is. In yet another timetable, he plans on cutting the federal deficit by $3 trillion in 10 years. This plan calls for a $1.5 trillion tax increase in which the individuals in the top 10% of the income bracket accounts for over 70% of the tax increases under the plan.

This taxing process is now coined the “Buffett Rule” in which the wealthy will pay their “fair share” of income tax as any other American. Obama is clearly clinging onto his motto of “Hope” since now all of America is going to “hope” our dwindling industries will remain stateside rather than move overseas. In an era where the unemployment rate is sky high, the last thing our countrymen need is more outsourcing. Top

entrepreneurs and businesses will again search for cheaper alternatives in other countries because of a large tax burden placed on them in the US. Not only are we divided as a government, we are now divided as Americans. The economy is the issue Americans hold dearest to their heart, and the new tax plan evidently shows who is now responsible for getting the country out of our economic mess. In accordance to the Obama tax plan, we are not dealing with our deficit situation as a whole. Obama has decided to scapegoat a single group of people, such as the wealthy, to deal with all of our economic problems. Instead, all 300 million people in this country are responsible for this debt crisis.

Simple solution: tax everyone the same percentage. That way, everyone gets the same percentage of their income taken away. No one gets the better end of the deal; it is true equality. The burden of our budget is placed on the hands of every American, and one by one, we will help one another get out of our current financial crisis. B

19

FRESHMEN

A Freshman Perspective...

Lies the Tour Guide Told Me

by Heather Sherman

W

hen I was a high school student, I toured various universities, in hopes of finding the “perfect fit” for my needs.

I knew several alumni who all told me how wonderful Binghamton was, and how I should definitely visit and apply.

With their words in mind I visited with high expectations. The information session completely turned me off. The only thing the obnoxious admissions officers spoke about were the titles Binghamton University has from numerous magazines and newspapers.

Not once did they speak about what Binghamton University has to offer me; they only spoke about the name.

Let us remember, Binghamton barely makes the top 100 on the U.S. News &

World Report college rankings. In addition, the initial tour itself was average, nothing special leaving much to be desired. I ultimately decided to apply because my parents made me.

Once I applied, I was accepted within two weeks. Even though I did not like Binghamton I had to weigh all of my options, like every other student here.

The second time I visited Binghamton for freshman orientation was very different from my first visit. I felt welcomed and I knew this was the place that I belonged.

Well now I am established and it is quite different from what I had imagined and had been promised.

First off, when I asked about the current construction, the admissions

love us? hate us? Tell us.

Send comments to editor@binghamtonreview.com.

20

Binghamton Review

staff stated that the construction would be mostly complete and would not impede a student’s daily activities.

That is not the case whatsoever. If I want to get to one of the science buildings, I have to either walk through other buildings or around the construction detours. Another major disappointment was when I found that I could not understand some of my professors/TAs because of their heavy accents. During one of my information sessions here, we were told that all of the professors/TAs could speak English at a proficient level and were quite understandable. Completely wrong!

One of my TAs cannot understand anything I say and I have to say the same sentence at least four different ways before he can grasp at what I am saying. How is this supposed to be productive learning? For such a “prestigious university” this is quite disappointing. Not to mention I was promised that Binghamton University offers quality food. Guess what? The food is barely edible. Binghamton University promises much, but does it really deliver? Horrid construction, learning from professors who can barely speak English, and crappy food—sounds wonderful, doesn’t it?

Binghamton University is not all bad; there are a couple areas where you can walk by and not smell sawdust and sweaty construction workers, and there are a couple professors who can speak English. This still doesn’t change the fact that there is NO good food on campus. Maybe next year Binghamton University can rank a little bit higher if they actually work on these things. B

october 2011

THE RAPTURE

Apocalypse Now... Or Later?

by Steven Kwon

M

ost people do not really remember what happened on May 21, 2011. But everyone knows one thing that didn’t happen, the rapture predicted by the infamous Harold Camping. Instead of take defeat in stride, Mr. Camping has reassigned judgment day to October 21st. What will we do? God save us all!

Seriously, does anyone still give a damn about this old, possibly senile radio broadcaster and his (apparently, mathematically-proven) rapture date? The answer should be no. But disappointingly, there are still a few out there who see reason behind his calculations. Actually, a few is only an understatement, considering that the donations made to Harold Camping and his broadcasting station have reached over eighty million dollars from 2005 to 2009. Has America really become this gullible?

Perhaps there is the slightest chance that Camping is right and that the world will actually end this coming October. After all, there was the 5.8 earthquake in Virginia that may have knocked over a lawn chair. After that there was Hurricane Irene, the result of which was rain. And who could forget Binghamton’s own Floodpocalypse 2011? The rest of the country REALLY seems to care about what happened here! Camping already predicted the end would come two times before: one in September 6th, 1994 and one this past May. Who knows? Third time’s the charm, right?

Maybe Camping is actually going senile! It would not be surprising to most people, and is one of the most logical explanations for all his Bible

www.binghamtonreview.com

jargon. He’s eighty-nine, for Christ’s sake. One would think that with eighty million dollars placed right under his ass, he would use some of it for a proper doctor’s appointment. A single diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease could end his stream of premonitions and everyone could just denounce the rapture as some crazy rant from a stubborn old fool.

While Camping is preoccupied with getting ready for the real rapture day to come, some of his supporters are struggling to recuperate from the terrible sacrifices they made on May 21st, including selling their pets to the thoughtful atheists of America. Some of these atheists have been known to buy the pets from these dim-witted Christians for as much as $135. Such unexpected generosity from these atheist groups almost makes it seem like they are the good guys and Harold Camping and his supporters are the bad guys. However, it is too bad that these pet-loving atheists were not generous enough to give their pets back once people realized that the rapture never happened. And will these events repeat itself this coming October? Post-rapture pet-care 2.0 anyone? Atheists get their pets, and un-raptured Christians get $135 to jump start their life again. It seems like a win-win situation.

Of course, Camping’s supporters aren’t the only people he disappointed. In fact, he disappointed the entire Christian community. Although these pet-loving atheists have shown their kindness and somewhat rare altruistic character, they are secretly smirking at the stupidity of these Camping supporters. And it is not just atheists who are doing this.

People from other religions have the

opportunity to fully exploit this chance to roast the Christian community.

Mr. Camping had essentially opened Christianity to a wide variety of criticisms, serious as well as satirical: “Look at me, I’m Harold Camping.

I’m going to multiply 1000 by 7 and that will magically reveal the exact day of when the world will end! And I’m sure there are lots of other very smart Christians out there who will support my Family Radio Station and donate more than eighty million dollars for the cause! Go Christians! We’re pretty much better than everyone else!” The Christian community received a hash dose of ridicule from this false prophecy, and it seems unlikely that Camping will redeem himself on October 21st.

At this point, that day will just be another excuse for other religious and nonreligious communities to humiliate not just Harold Camping and his supporters, but other Christians who took no part in the preparation of the rapture.

If anything good can be seen from what happened on various rapture days in 1994 and this past May, it is that a few people have learned the valuable lesson of not believing insane rapture predictions. Hopefully, on October 21st, more Camping followers will realize their mistake and think twice before throwing away their life savings again. But on the off chance that this rapture actually does happen, the situation doesn’t seem so bad anyway.

Animal-loving atheists get new pets, and there will be A LOT of free clothes lying about everywhere. Who doesn’t want free clothes? B

21

FREE SPEECH

Freedom of Speech vs. Obscenity Make Sure You Practice Safe Speech

by Chris Kleinstein

E

ven before the recent changes to the BU Code of Student Conduct, there has existed an alarming section of the code in the form of a reminder that the First Amendment actually does not guarantee you the full right to the freedom of speech. It states, “…members of our University community are expected to continue the tradition of exercising First Amendment rights, keeping in mind that while encouraged and protected, the expectation is that one’s rights are practiced with respect and responsibility. Abusing the rights of any one person or group ultimately endangers the rights of all. Obscene speech or conduct — which appeals to prurient interests, is patently offensive, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value — is not protected by the First Amendment.”

They are legally correct as obscene speech is in fact not constitutionally protected and this “definition” of obscenity is an abridged version of the Miller test, which was developed during the Supreme Court ruling of Miller v. California, a 1973 case that concerned the sending of unsolicited pornographic images in the mail. Additionally, the test uses “contemporary community standards” to determine if the speech is obscene, which has allowed lawmakers and courts to find the depiction of “excretory functions” and violence to be obscene as well.

In 2005, a California law banned 22

Binghamton Review

the selling of M-rated video games to those under the age of 18 by claiming that “violent video games” are obscene. It was only declared unconstitutional six years later in June 2011 by the U.S. Supreme Court. The majority opinion wrote that this “was not the first time we have encountered and rejected a State’s attempt to shoehorn speech about violence into obscenity” and that it represents an “expansive view of governmental power to abridge the freedom of speech based on interest-balancing”.

By now you might be asking, what do sex, excrement, and violent video games have to do with me? Even though these cases concern obscene images, the rulings refer to all speech, including when you speak in class, write an article, or put up a poster.

The administration’s decision to mention that your free speech rights must be practiced “respectably” and that you do not have a right to obscene speech is tantamount to them saying “you better watch what you say” and provides an insurance policy in case they ever need to take disciplinary action against an ignorant person who crosses an arbitrary line, as already has happened before.

A recap for those new to the Review, earlier this year the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) included Binghamton on their list of the “12 Worst Schools for Free Speech,” for permitting the Department of Social Work to expel two graduate students because they disagreed with their on-campus

speech. In 2008, Andre Massena was suspended for putting up posters that criticized a faculty member that he believed was responsible for unjustly evicting a family from their home. In 2009, Michael Gutsell was expelled after students complained about his in-class speech. Additionally, FIRE has given Binghamton a “yellow light” rating due to three ambiguous speech policies that “too easily encourages administrative abuse” and made recommendations for fixes that our school has consistently ignored. We might even get a “red light” rating after the addition of the new harassment and lowest standard of evidence policies. Fortunately for us, we go to a public institution, so by law the administration cannot limit our freedom of speech by creating a harsh speech code, even though they clearly want to.

The biggest problem with an “obscenity line” is that it is arbitrary.

This is not the fault of our school, but of the U.S. Supreme Court, and our administrators are more than happy to take advantage of it.

Obscene speech is both regulated and subjectively defined, which allows those in power to use an “I know it when I see it” obscenity policy that has practically existed since the 1964 Jacobellis v. Ohio Supreme Court ruling. Due to this arbitrariness, television networks have to build staffs of attorneys and executives that work in Standards and Practices in order to walk the october 2011

FREE SPEECH

© 2011 Alan Wilfahrt

fine line of the capricious FCC and their multi-million dollar fines. An expletive too far and networds may find themselves in a pile of -bleep-.

However, it seems that one could beat the obscenity police by claiming that their speech has “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value”. Protestors have used severe scatological and sexual metaphors to mock politicians and policies such as those whom raise awareness of sexual violence by wearing provactive clothing in public. If this type of protest happened on campus, would University administrators allow it

because it has “political value” or would they suppress the protesters because the political message is not “serious” by the Supreme Court’s definition? If you believe the latter, then you must accept that those in political authority will be the ones deciding whether or not the content is of “serious political value,” a perfect mix for conflict of interest.

Can we remove the signs from the protesters and accept obscenity for obscenity’s sake? Scatological humor has been used by ancient Greek playwrights like Aristophanes, by 18th-century satirists like Jonathan Swift, and modern television shows

like Beavis and Butthead, South Park, and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

In fact, the BBC reported in 2008 that researchers discovered that the world’s oldest recorded joke is a circa 1900 BC Sumerian proverb that translates to “Something which has never occurred since time immemorial; a young woman did not fart in her husband’s lap.” Clearly, there is a market and significance for this type of artistic expression, so why do we allow the government to regulate it through threatening policies and laws? In the end, as long as these laws exist, be careful and practice safe speech. B

Binghamton Review is a monthly, independent journal of news, analysis, commentary, and controversy. Students at Binghamton University receive one copy of the Review free of charge (non-transferable). Additional copies cost $1 each. Letters to the Editor are welcome; they must be accompanied by the author’s current address and phone number. All submission become property of the Review. The Review reserves the right to edit and print any submission. Copyright © 1987-2011 Binghamton Review. All rights reserved. Binghamton Review is distributed on campus under the authority of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Binghamton Review is a member of the Collegiate Network and is a Student Association-chartered organization. Binghamton University is not responsible for the content of the Review; the Review is not responsible for the content of Binghamton University. Binghamton Review thanks the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.

Past Editors of Binghamton Review: John Guardiano, Yan Rusanovsky, Kethryn Doherty, Ephriam Bernstein, Michael Malloy, Paul Schnier, Adam Bromberg, Bernadette Malone, Michael Darcy, Nathan Wurtzel, Amy Gardner, John Carney, Paul Torres, Jason Kovacs, Robert Zoch, Matthew Pecorino, Michael O’Connell, Louis W. Leonini, Joseph Carlone, Christopher Powell, Nathaniel Sugarman, Robert E. Menje, Adam Shamah, Rachel Gordon, Mike Lombardi www.binghamtonreview.com

23

THE SOCIAL JUSTICE KIT Everything a spoiled, hippy college student needs for a day at the protest...

Che Guevara T-Shirts

Mass produced and sold at the Gap, thanks to capitalism.

Bachelor’s Degree in Sociology It has to be good for something.

Lack of Hygine

Showering is way too oppressive.

Completely Unreasonable Demands “End Capitalism!” - Sent from my iPhone

No Shoes

Let ‘em breathe, so no one else can.

Pony Tails “Look at me, I’m a grad student.” - Bart Simpson

Fair Trade Coffee Stickers Wasting my parents’ money with every sip...

Weed (and other psychadelics) My dealer is the only capitalist I like!

Community Organizer

You could be President some day!

Ironic Hipster Glasses

Formerly known as “rapist glasses”