Bright Hall

Magazine Capitalizes on Obama's Pecs

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-22T16:30:00+00:00

The torture debate is getting exhausting, and it's only just begun. Did the United States torture? Was it wrong? Should people be prosecuted? Will Dick Cheney ever stop appearing on Fox News and just enjoy his retirement already?

Let's instead turn to a much lighter story. Washingtonian Magazine, which typically has such attention-grabbing cover stories as "Top 100 Dentists in the Washington Area" or "Top 30 Places to Visit on the Weekend," has put out a May cover that is getting way more attention than their April edition, "Inside 10 Great Homes."

The topic of this month's cover issue is "26 Reasons to Love Living Here." Reason No. 2 is: "Our new neighbor is hot."

To prove the point, the magazine put a picture of President Obama, clad only in a bathing suit and sunglasses, on the cover.

I know the print media industry is suffering right now, but really, Washingtonian Magazine? I didn't realize your editorial board consisted of the women from Desperate Housewives.
The best part of this story is that the magazine isn't even embarrassed that they have turned themselves into a checkout line gossip rag. At the top of their Web site, the magazine asks readers to weigh in with their thoughts on the May cover.

They call it "the cover heard 'round the world." I get the historical reference, but I believe the cover's been seen, not heard. Okay, now I'm just giving Washingtonian Magazine a hard time. Back to the task at hand.

The magazine says "Some of you love it; some of you hate it; some have questioned whether or not it's an 'appropriate' cover; and some just want to talk about the state of Obama's pecs."

The comments posted on the Web sites are mixed, but as one commenter posts, regardless of what one thinks about the photo, it works. People who have never heard of Washingtonian before are checking out the site.

The photo in question, CNN reported, was taken while Obama was in Hawaii on his Christmas vacation.

Garrett Graff, the editor-at-large for the magazine, told CNN that the picture was appropriate.

"The Obamas, through their involvement in Washington, are helping to showcase just how exciting it is in Washington right now," he told CNN. "We use the world 'hot' tongue in cheek with the photo."

He added: "He is a buff president that the paparazzi enjoy taking pictures of." Graff seems like a pretty interesting guy, and he's had a lot of good ideas in the past (he was founding editor of Fishbowl D.C.). I'll chalk this up to an act of desperation on the part of Washingtonian Magazine.

If The Economist starts running half-nude pictures of Barack Obama on its covers, then it's time for print magazines to pack it up and go home.

Photo: Washingtonian.com

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Debate over Interrogation Tactics Continues

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-21T08:43:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, News, Notre Dame

President Obama is making a mistake by not pursuing any prosecutions for those responsible for the harsh interrogation techniques that were used during the Bush administration.

Last week, I posted a blog piece about the legal memos released by the Justice Department that detailed the interrogation techniques used by the United States on people suspected of involvement in terrorist acts or planning. Obama reportedly agonized over the release of the memos, weighing whether their release was necessary for transparency of government or whether releasing the memos would compromise the security of the United States.

When he did release them, he announced that those who had carried out the torture, believing their actions were lawful, would not be subject to prosecution.

George Stephanopoulos, host of ABC's "This Week," asked White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel on Sunday whether the president also ruled out prosecution for the officials who devised the torture polices.

Emanuel responded: "He believes that people in good faith were operating with the guidance they were provided."

Stephanopoulos followed up with the same question.

"Yeah, but those who devised the policy, he believes that they were, should not be prosecuted either," Emanuel said.

Obama visited the Central Intelligence Agency Monday to thank agents for their service and to offer reassurance about the after effects of the release of the memos.

"Don't be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we've made some mistakes," Obama said. "That's how we learn. But the fact that we are willing to acknowledge them and then move forward, that is precisely why I am proud to be President of the United States, and that's why you should be proud to be members of the CIA."

If the policy in place before was a mistake, if it was wrong, if it was torture, how can we just "move forward" without anyone facing retribution for their actions, or for what they allowed to happen?

If there's no penalty for breaking the U.S. law against torture, the law will be hard to enforce in the future. News sources have reported that two captured al Qaeda operatives were subjected to waterboarding 266 times. If waterboarding is torture, then the law has been broken, and someone, or multiple people, must face the consequences.

A day after Emanuel's interview, The New York Times reported that White House aides did not rule out legal sanctions for the Bush-era lawyers who legally justified using the harsh interrogation techniques.

The change to U.S. interrogation policy is a good step forward, but if Obama allows those who developed the interrogation policy used under the Bush administration to go unpunished, then the United States' past mistakes will not be fully corrected, and our moral standing in the world will be questionable.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Susan Boyle Becomes Internet Sensation

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-20T15:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Notre Dame

It is improbable that a homely, 47-year-old woman from a small village in Scotland could captivate the world, but somehow that is exactly what has happened this week.

Last Wednesday, a friend sent me a link to a YouTube video showing Susan Boyle, a woman of admittedly plain looks, with short, curly gray hair, a plump figure and bushy eyebrows. Boyle appeared on Britain's Got Talent, a television show similar to American Idol, where the perpetually tan Simon Cowell and another man and woman judge as regular Brits showcase their performance skills.

The video starts with an interview with Susan Boyle, who says she lives alone with her cat Pebbles, and has never been married, or even kissed. When she walks out on stage, you can hear the laughter from the audience, and see the doubt in the faces of the judges. This woman, everyone thought, would just be another dud, someone who thought she sounded good in the shower, but really struggled to carry a tune.

But everyone gets their chance on the show, even though many in the audience were rolling their eyes. The music for "I Dreamed a Dream" from the musical Les Miserables began, and the audience went from mockery to amazement as they heard Susan Boyle start singing the very difficult song beautifully. The shock registered on the judges' faces, and the audience stood up to cheer, while Susan Boyle calmly continued singing the song she had come to sing.

The YouTube video has, by Monday afternoon, received more than 33 million views. Boyle is one of the top trending topics on Twitter and has been for days. She has over a million fans on Facebook.

And I, for one, cannot stop thinking about her.

In a culture obsessed with youth and beauty, Susan Boyle is an outsider. Someone I sent the video to could not believe it was really Boyle singing. He asked me if Britain's Got Talent had done the reverse of China in the Olympics, playing a beautiful voice with a less than beautiful image.

Other people I know, as they were watching the video, joked that they wished they were just listening to the audio. The video is so stunning, and I believe has been viewed so many times, purely because of the great dichotomy between what we are hearing and what we are seeing.

Susan Boyle, according to an article in The Times of London, is a volunteer caring for elderly members of her local church and has spent much of her adult life caring for her mother. It wasn't until after her mother died that she finally decided to make a big try for a music career, and she did it as a tribute to her mother, who always told her she was a great singer.

Is the Susan Boyle video mesmerizing because we do not expect such a heavenly voice from someone who looks nothing like an angel? Or is it because Boyle reminds us that we too can rise up, even as others snicker at us and doubt our capabilities?

Or has the impossible truly happened?

Now that the 2008 election is over and the problems we knew existed before Nov. 4 loom even larger, in an economy whose bottom we may not yet have reached, with North Korea firing rockets and Iran imprisoning U.S. journalists, now that problems must actually be addressed, not just discussed in soaring rhetoric, have Americans found someone who embodies hope like Barack Obama did when he was a candidate?

Susan Boyle, if you really want to make it big, leave your little Scottish village and come to America, because here, hope sells.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

U.S. Realizes Cuba Policy Has Been a Failure

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-17T22:28:00+00:00

Filed under: News, Notre Dame

I guess you could call it the new "oops, our bad, guys" approach to foreign relations.

The same week that President Barack Obama decided to allow Cuban-Americans with relatives on the island nation to visit and send money without restrictions, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled to Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic to talk about America's relations with other countries in the Americas, including Cuba.

At a digital town hall, she took a question from "Juan" of Cuba, who asked her about the embargo with Cuba, which has been in place for nearly 50 years. Clinton said Obama views engagement as a useful way to achieve the United States' objectives with other countries.

"We are continuing to look for more productive ways forward in dealing with Cuba, because President Obama and I and the Administration view the present policy toward Cuba as having failed," Clinton said.

Good, it only took us half a century to realize that. Maybe in another 50 years we'll be able to figure a way to get out of Iraq without leaving it a mess.
Obama is in Trinidad and Tobago now for the Summit of the Americas, which Cuba was not invited to, though he also made some overtures toward Cuba, saying the United States "seeks a new beginning with Cuba," according to a CNN report.

"I'm prepared to have my administration engage with the Cuban government on a wide range of issues -- from human rights, free speech and democratic reform to drugs, migration and economic issues," Obama said when he spoke Friday to representatives of 34 countries at the Summit of the Americas.

Obama did not list any specifics as to how he would like to see the U.S. relationship with Cuba develop. But he said he rejected the "stale debates" that have marked the past five decades of the U.S.-Cuba relationship.

"I didn't come here to debate the past -- I came here to deal with the future," he said, according to the CNN report. "As neighbors, we have a responsibility to each other and to our citizens. And by working together, we can take important steps forward to advance prosperity, security and liberty."

It will be interesting to see what changes to Cuba policy, if any, occur during the rest of the Summit of the Americas. Will the "oops, we've screwed up for the past several decades and we just realized it" approach work?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Interrogation Memos Reveal Rough Treatment of Detainees

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-16T21:00:00+00:00

Filed under: News, Media, Notre Dame

The U.S. Department of Justice on Thursday released four Office of Legal Counsel opinions that describe interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency during the Bush administration.

Politico reported that White House senior adviser David Axelrod said President Barack Obama spent a month trying to decide whether to release the memos about the techniques.

In a letter to the officers of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), posted on the agency's Web site, Obama thanked them for their service to the country. He said he made the decision the night before to allow the Justice Department to release the memos.

"I did not make this decision lightly," he wrote in the letter. "As you may know, the release is part of an ongoing court case. I have fought for the principle that the United States must carry out covert activities and hold information that is classified for the purpose of national security and will do so again in the future. But the release of these memos is required by our commitment to the rule of law."

Obama said that while he has prohibited use of the interrogation techniques described in the memo since he took office, he and Attorney General Eric Holder would "protect all who acted reasonably and relied upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that their actions were lawful." Holder affirmed this in a Thursday news release from the Department of Justice.

The individuals in the CIA who carried out the harsh interrogation actions will not be prosecuted, or so Obama says. Will anyone?
Although most of the information described in the memos was already known in general terms by the public, reading the details about interrogation methods is chilling.

One of the memos is signed by Jay S. Bybee, a Justice Department official at the time, and addressed to CIA attorney John A. Rizzo, dated Aug. 1, 2002. The memo states that the proposed interrogation techniques described in the memo would not violate U.S. law prohibiting torture.

The prisoner being discussed is Abu Zubaydah, believed to be a high ranking member of al Qaeda. "The interrogation team is certain that he has additional information that he refuses to divulge," the memo says. In order to obtain this information, the CIA desired to move the interrogations to the "increased pressure phase."

The interrogators wished to use 10 techniques, the memo says, including cramped confinement, placing insects in a confinement box, facial slapping and and escalation to waterboarding. I think everyone knows what waterboarding is by now. "Walling" is a new one I haven't heard of, but it involves a flexible false wall and the interrogator pulling the prisoner forward, then quickly pushing him back toward the wall, which will make a loud noise to shock the individual, thereby creating a sensation which seems like it would be akin to being in a car crash.

The memo concluded that walling was okay, and that this technique, like the nine others listed in the memo, did not qualify as torture: "You have informed us that the sound of hitting the wall will actually be far worse than any possible injury to the individual. ... While it may hurt to be pushed against the wall, any pain experienced is not of the intensity associated with serious physical injury."

CIA Director Leon E. Panetta sent a letter to CIA employees Thursday reaffirming that he would oppose any efforts to punish those members of the CIA who followed the guidance of the Justice Department.

"Although this Administration has now put into place new policies that CIA is implementing, the fact remains that CIA's detention and interrogation effort was authorized and approved by our government," Panetta wrote.

This is true, but at some point, shouldn't someone have stood up to say, this is the United States? This isn't right?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Tea Parties Planned for Tax Day

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-15T08:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Breaking News, News, Media, Notre Dame

The Internet has been buzzing lately all about parties happening on Tax Day. Tea Parties, to be exact.

I never got an invitation, but I'm more of a coffee drinker. It'd be a bit of a pain to purchase tea bags just to dump them in a body of water.

Like the great pre-Revolutionary War colonists who came before them, American taxpayers are up in arms and want to protest "higher taxes and out-of-control government spending," according to a column in the Wall Street Journal Tuesday. It's hard to tell who exactly started this movement, but the columnist asserted that this is not the work of a "right-wing conspiracy," but rather, average Americans who are using the expanding power of the Internet to organize an imitation of an event that took place in 1773.

According to the Wall Street Journal column, the protests began in mid-February with bloggers in Seattle, Wash., then grew when CNBC commentator Rick Santelli delivered his now famous rant against President Obama's policies, advocating that people organize a tea party in Chicago on July 4.

From that rant, a movement was born. Now these flash mob protests are apparently planned across the country on Tax Day. The Tea Party movement is one of the top trending topics on Twitter, and on Facebook a group called Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party has more than 35,000 members.

I'm always up for a party. And those are big numbers. I'd love to fly home to watch protesters dump a million tea bags in Lafayette Square in Washington D.C, as the protest organizers say they will, according to a Washington Post story.

Imagine if we took that tea and, provided it was caffeinated, gave it to American workers. Think of the productivity we'd see on Tax Day!

On second thought, the people organizing the Tax Day Tea Party probably don't need any more caffeine. This grass-roots movement has grown surprisingly quickly. A lot of people are comparing it to Obama's use of the Internet in 2008 to increase enthusiasm for his campaign. Except, with Obama, there were a lot fewer teabags. And fewer unfortunate inappropriate jokes. (I'm not explaining it. Look it up.)

A Web site called Tax Day Tea Party purports to be the online headquarters for the tea partiers. A "revolution is brewing at a city near you" they say. Besides being clever at wordplay, the site's creators have also done a good job of listing Tea Party events occurring in every state.

Over on her Web site, conservative columnist Michelle Malkin has a playlist of songs for the Tea Parties. I recommend the reader-suggested rendition of "American Pie."

If you cannot make it out to a local Tea Party, the Republican National Committee has a way for you to participate. Go to their Web site and you can mail a postcard to President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Harry Reid or Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Best of all, you can choose one of four varieties of tea bags to send along with your postcard.

At the White House briefing Tuesday, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he is not sure if Obama knows about the planned parties, but Gibbs said he personally is not monitoring them.

If the Tea Parties don't work, perhaps some other famous event in American History can be re-staged? A flash mob to cry that the British are coming or a re-enactment of Washington crossing the Delaware?

If nothing else, all this flash-mobbing will improve our collective knowledge of this country's history.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Supreme Court Justice Opines on Rights and Dishwashers

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-14T02:30:00+00:00

Filed under: News, Notre Dame

I'm not sure what's more unsettling, that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas thinks there is a "proliferation of rights" or that he is fascinated by dishwashers.

It's a close call.

Justice Thomas revealed these insights and more March 31 when he spoke to winners of a high school essay contest in Washington, D.C. at a dinner sponsored by the Bill of Rights Institute. The New York Times published some great quotes Monday from the talk, which was supposed to address the topic of the Bill of Rights.

Thomas has served on the Supreme Court since 1991, when he was nominated by President George H. W. Bush. In his article, New York Times writer Adam Liptak pointed out that Justice Clarence Thomas has not asked a question from the bench since Feb. 22, 2006.

Thomas spoke at an event in 2007 at Hillsdale College in Michigan, and according to an article in U.S. News and World Report, he criticized those judges that asked questions and debated cases out loud during oral arguments.

"My colleagues should shut up," he said then. Thomas, the article reported, has often been criticized for his silent approach to Supreme Court cases.

Judging from some of his bizarre statements recently, maybe silence is a good policy.
Liptak wrote that Justice Thomas, when talking about the Bill of Rights, proposed some alternatives.

"There is too much focus on our rights," he said, according to the New York Times. "Indeed, I think there is a proliferation of rights."

Oh no. This man is on the Supreme Court.

He continues.

"I am often surprised by the virtual nobility that seems to be accorded those with grievances," he said. "Shouldn't there at least be equal time for our Bill of Obligations and our Bill of Responsibilities?"

He went on to talk about how many people seem to think they are owed a certain standard of living, like nice cars, phones and televisions. And that's how he got onto the topic of dishwashers.

"I have to admit that I'm one of those people that still thinks the dishwasher is a miracle. What a device! And I have to admit that because I think that way, I like to load it. I like to look in and see how the dishes were magically cleaned," he said, according to the Times.

I'm going to give him this one. I spent a few months without a dishwasher in my apartment, and when I moved back to a dishwasher-outfitted residence, I too was amazed at how much easier it was to do dishes.

So it's the proliferation of rights comment that bothers me. I like my Supreme Court justices to be big fans of the Bill of Rights.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Pirate Jokes Becoming Less Funny

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-11T17:08:00+00:00

Filed under: News, Notre Dame

Remember when pirates were entertaining? When Johnny Depp was Captain Jack Sparrow? When the only hint of danger at Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean ride was when they told you to keep your hands inside the boat at all times?

There's even an International Talk Like a Pirate Day, on Sept. 19 each year. If you visit the event organizers' Web site, you can collect some pick-up lines for your next night out. The No. 1 pick-up line, according to the site: Prepare to be boarded.

But "prepare to be boarded" is not a joke, nor is it a cheesy attempt at seduction, for people on ships sailing near the coast of Somalia in Africa. On Wednesday, pirates took control of the Maersk Alabama, a ship flying the U.S. flag, and took 20 American sailors hostage, the New York Times reported. The crew retook the ship in a matter of hours, but the pirates are still holding the ship's captain in an enclosed lifeboat, and they are demanding a ransom.
The Alabama was heading to Mombasa to deliver its cargo of food aid when it was attacked. With a security escort, the Alabama arrived at the Port of Mombasa in Kenya safely, except for the captain. The captain is believed to be unharmed, but pirates are demanding $2 million for the captain's release, as well as a guarantee of their safety, Reuters reported.

The Alabama was the first American vessel to be hijacked off the Horn of Africa, but piracy is a growing problem. The New York Times reported that more than 150 ships were attacked off the coast of Somalia and in the Gulf of Aden last year, and currently 16 ships are being held for ransom by seagoing pirate gangs.

Vanity Fair writer William Langewiesche had a great piece on Somali pirates, in which he talked about the experience of the crew of a French luxury cruise ship that was captured by a band of pirates last spring in the Gulf of Aden.

As U.S. ships converged near the Horn of Africa, Somali pirates hijacked another boat, this time an Italian-flagged tugboat in the Gulf of Aden, the Associated Press reported.

Why are all these pirate attacks happening? And now that we see how malicious they can be, why on earth did Disney make rather positive films about them? Although, I guess this is the same company that romanticized the mistreatment of Native Americans (see: Pocahontas).

Piracy is becoming an actual business in Somalia, which hasn't had a functioning central government since 1991. The New York Times reported that pirates took $80 million in ransom last year. It's going to be hard for the United States, and the international community, to defeat such a rogue, decentralized band of sea-roving pirates, especially in an area where there are few patrolling police forces. Add this to President Obama's to do list.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement on the pirate situation, and I think she was trying to remind people we aren't dealing with any Jack Sparrows here; this is serious.

"These people are nothing more than criminals," she said. "And we are bringing to bear a number of our assets, including naval and FBI work in order to resolve the hostage situation and bring the pirates to justice. Piracy may be a centuries-old crime, but we are working to bring an appropriate 21st century response."

But FoxNation.com showed Clinton laughing while talking about pirates. You have to take FOX's editing with a grain of salt, but this video is pretty strange.

I'm going to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt that the current pirate hostage situation is not in fact something she finds hilarious. I bet she was thinking about a pirate joke, possibly this one.

What kind of women do pirates prefer?

CougARRRS!

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

U.S. Tackles Diplomacy 101 with Iran

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-09T01:18:00+00:00

Filed under: News, Notre Dame

After eight years of President Bush's "You're either with us or you're against us" foreign policy, I'd almost forgotten the United States did diplomacy.

Diplomacy was so United Nations, so Neville Chamberlain, but now the United States is flexing its diplomatic muscles (or are we putting on our diplomatic beret?) Some members of Congress are urging the United States to improve its relations with Cuba, with which it has had a trade embargo for nearly 50 years.

The United States is even trying to talk to (gasp!) Iran, a country Bush labeled in 2002 as a member of the axis of evil. The State Department announced Wednesday that the United States will join the talks between the United Nations and European countries with Iran over Tehran's nuclear program.

In a statement Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would be a full participant along with Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China in future negotiations with Iran. This is a departure from Bush policy, save for the one exception last July, when the former president allowed a senior U.S. diplomat to attend a meeting at which an Iranian representative was present. But The Washington Post reported that the Bush administration believed Iran was not serious in that meeting and said the effort would not be repeated.

The Post quoted a senior administration official who said "it was kind of silly that we had to walk out of the room" when the Iranians were present.

That does sound a bit silly. Talking to countries with whom you have a disagreement seems like a crazy idea, but it's so crazy it just might work...
However, diplomacy is not going that well for the United States so far. Iran has not yet accepted the offer, but the State Department has its fingers crossed.

"If Iran accepts, we hope this will be an occasion to seriously engage Iran of how to break the logjam of recent years and work in a cooperative manner to resolve the outstanding international concerns about its nuclear program," State Department spokesman Robert Wood said, according to CNN.

The United States is currently trying to get Iran to cooperate in resolving the case of Roxana Saberi, an American freelance journalist detained in Iran since January and charged with spying, as well as two other Americans believed to be missing or detained in Iran.

The United States cut off its diplomatic relations with Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and hostage situation involving Americans at the U.S. embassy in Tehran. After going so long without speaking diplomatically, things are bound to be awkward at first.

Will Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president, say yes to President Obama's requests that the two countries begin dialogue? He said in a televised speech in Iran that his country "welcomes a hand extended to it should it really and truly be based on honesty, justice and respect," the AP reported.

The stakes are pretty high in Diplomacy 101. Let's hope the United States doesn't flunk this one.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Aaron Schock Adds Sex Appeal to Republican Party

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-07T22:19:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Featured Stories, News, Media, Notre Dame

The Republican Party keeps getting sexier.

They've had an uphill battle. In the fall, John McCain had to compete with the sex appeal of Barack Obama (those abs!) and Joe Biden (those teeth!), but McCain proved he had more sexy in reserve than America has oil in reserve offshore when he introduced Sarah Palin (those legs!) as his running mate.

But Americans voted "Yes, we can" instead of "Drill, baby, drill," and Palin retreated back to Alaska, so the Republicans were left with a sexy deficit (except for when Palin family scandals pop up in the news once a week).

That deficit has been filled. Aaron Schock is in the House.

Of Representatives, that is. Schock represents Illinois' 18th District, and at 27, he is the youngest Member of Congress and the first to be born in the 1980s. He's not just a pretty face, hair and body. Not surprisingly, Schock is your typical over-achiever. He graduated from Bradley University in Peoria, Ill. with a B.S. in Finance, a four-year degree, in two years.

In his early teens, he began working after-school jobs and invested the money he made, making his first real estate purchase at age 18, according to his official House Web site. He entered public service by serving on the Peoria School board starting when he was 18 years old.

When he was 23, he was elected to the Illinois House, where he shared the 2007 award with then-Senator Barack Obama from the Illinois Committee for Honest Government for his "Outstanding Legislative and Constituent Service." He spoke at the 2008 National Republican Convention, and now that he is in Congress, he is sitting on three committees: the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the Small Business Committee and the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He's also been named Deputy Republican Whip.

And, perhaps most notably, he's been named "hottest freshman in Congress" by the readers of the liberal blog site Huffington Post.

Schock has been getting a lot more attention in the media than the average freshman Member of Congress, due to his good looks and young age. Meghan McCain wrote a blog post for The Daily Beast about "The GOP's House Hottie." I opened the Chicago Tribune yesterday to find an article about Schock, asking "Has GOP found its rock star?"

TMZ has been following Schock as he walks between his office building and the Capitol, and a few weeks ago posted a picture of Schock in his bathing suit (Schock gives shirtless Obama a run for his money).

Schock appeared on CNN's Reliable Sources with Howard Kurtz, also of the Washington Post, who asked him about his appearances on TMZ. In a weird moment, Kurtz asks Schock if he wants to take off his jacket and roll up his sleeves to give TMZ more footage. Luckily, Schock had the common sense not to disrobe for a Sunday morning show. Save it for the late night shows.

Schock has a Doogie Howser meets Brad Pitt thing going on. He should own it. In the Chicago Tribune Monday, he told reporter James Oliphant he's using the media coverage to keep communication channels open.

"First, you've got to get their attention," he said. "Step one in getting anyone's vote is getting their attention."

First Barack Obama. Now Aaron Schock. Illinois' prime export is quickly becoming hot, young, driven politicians.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

North Korea Launches Rocket, Prompts Famous 3 a.m. Phone Call

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-06T00:06:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Breaking News, News, Media, Notre Dame

Hillary Clinton saw this coming.

President Barack Obama got his 3 a.m. phone call, albeit at 4:30 a.m. Sunday morning in Prague, Czech Republic, when North Korea launched a long-range rocket. That's a sudden way to remind someone that being president isn't all about the economy.

Last year, when Obama and Clinton were still vying for the Democratic nomination, Clinton put out an ad saying she was the best one to answer the theoretical 3 a.m. phone call because she had the experience. Obama replied to her political advertisement with a nearly identical one that said he should answer the theoretical 3 a.m. phone call because he had better judgment.

The scenario became reality Sunday when North Korea launched the rocket they'd been threatening to launch for several weeks. The North Korean government said they had conducted a successful, peaceful launch of a satellite into orbit, CNN reported. But the United States and South Korea characterized the launch as a "provocative act" and said the rocket's payload failed to enter orbit, instead falling into the Pacific Ocean near Japan.

CNN quoted a State Department spokesman as saying the launch was in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution on North Korea's weapons program, which prohibits the country from conducting ballistic missile-related activities.White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he personally woke Obama to tell him the launch had been confirmed, and that Obama then consulted with his top aides, including Clinton, who was in Prague with Obama to participate in the European Union summit.

Obama responded strongly to the North Korean actions, which weren't much of a surprise since the North Koreans had been talking about the launch for weeks. His statements focused on the need for an international response to North Korea's rogue behavior.

"North Korea must know that the path to security and respect will never come through threats and illegal weapons," Obama said, according to a CNN report. "All nations much come together to build a stronger global regime. That's why we must stand shoulder to shoulder to pressure the North Koreans to change course."

A few days before the launch, FOX News's Greta Van Susteren asked former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich what he would do about North Korea if he was president. Gingrich criticized Obama for his foreign policy approach towards North Korea, which he said entailed "being courteous to them and communicating with them."

If he were president, he told Van Susteren, he would have used "whatever methods were necessary for the missile never to be launched." That could mean using the military if necessary, he said.

"If I can't find a way to bribe somebody to blow it up, I'd find a way to have either a small team go in, or a way to deliver a laser or another kind of device," he said on FOX. "That is a missile that is sitting there on that launch pad, and I think you could take it out with very, very minimal risk to anybody."

There's been some speculation that Gingrich will run for president in 2012. If he does, I propose he runs an ad showing Obama taking 4:30 a.m. phone calls while Gingrich is fast asleep--because he already took care of the problem with lasers.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Iowa Clears Way for Gay Marriage (Really? Iowa?)

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-03T22:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Breaking News, Local, Notre Dame

The Iowa Supreme Court unanimously ruled Friday that a 1998 law which limited marriage to a man and a woman was unconstitutional, stating that same-sex marriages may begin in Iowa in as soon as three weeks.

Tonight I happened to attend a dinner with a professor from the University of Iowa. He told me that when he heard about the decision on CNN, he was more surprised that his state was making national news than to hear that gay marriages would soon be legalized.

A lot of people, he said, misjudge Iowa. So it's not a rural state with a lot of corn, wondered one of my dinner mates. Yes, it is, he said. But it's also the state that helped propel Barack Obama to the presidency. In January 2008, Obama won Iowa's Democratic caucus, and many political commentators saw his win in Iowa as a sign he could win the country. Obama won the state of Iowa 10 months later in the general election.

In this context, it's not as surprising that this state smack dab in the middle of the Midwest will become only the third state in the country, following Massachusetts and Connecticut, to permit gay marriage. (Of course, California's decision to allow gay marriage was overturned in November.) The full text of the Supreme Court's decision can be read here.

Lambda Legal, an organization that works to gain civil rights for lesbians, gay men and people with HIV/AIDS, filed a lawsuit in 2005 with Iowa's Polk County Court on behalf of six same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses in Iowa, with the argument that denying marriage to same-sex couples violates liberty and equality guarantees in the state's constitution.The Iowa Supreme Court opinion states that the legislature enacted a law that excluded gay and lesbian people from marriage, the executive branch of the state enforced the law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and the judicial branch had the responsibility to determine if the law violates the Iowa Constitution. The Court decided that it did.

"A statute inconsistent with the Iowa Constitution must be declared void, even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated beliefs and popular opinion," the court's opinion read.

A poll taken in February 2008 showed that 62 percent of Iowans believed marriage should only be between a man and a woman, while 32 percent said they believed same-sex marriage should be allowed, the Des Moines Register reported. Six percent were unsure.

Once gay marriages are allowed, 21 days following the Supreme Court's April 3 decision, it seems likely that gay marriage will remain a right in Iowa for several years, since a constitutional amendment banning it would require the state legislature to approve the ban during two consecutive sessions, and then the voters would be asked to weigh in, the New York Times reported. A CNN report stated that the earliest the issue could get on a ballot would be 2012.

Iowa has no residency requirement for getting a marriage license, so people from other parts of the country might be making their way to the Hawkeye State to get hitched.

In other Midwestern news this week, the University of Notre Dame rejected students' petition to add sexual orientation to the school's nondiscrimination clause.

Who knew there was so much diversity in the Heartland?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Congress Begins Talk of Ending Cuba Embargo

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-03T01:41:00+00:00

Filed under: US Elections, Politics, News, Notre Dame

Sen. Richard Lugar, a Republican from Indiana, is trying to urge changes to the nearly 50-year-old economic embargo against Cuba.

Lugar, in a March 30 letter to President Obama, said the embargo against Cuba, which has been in place since 1962 to protest the government set up by Fidel Castro, "undermines our broader security and political interests in the Western Hemisphere."

Lugar asked Obama to appoint a special envoy to start direct talks with Cuba's communist government and end opposition to Cuba's membership in the Organization of American States, The Washington Post reported. Lugar pointed to the April 17-19 Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago as a good place to make changes in U.S. foreign policy toward Cuba.

Lugar is also the co-sponsor of a bipartisan bill that would end restrictions on travel to Cuba except for in cases of war or direct threats to health and safety. As it stands now, Cuban Americans with relatives on the island are allowed to visit once a year. Travel to Cuba by all U.S. citizens has been prohibited in varying degrees since 1963, the Post said. The State Department lists who exactly is allowed to travel there. It's a hard list to make, which is a shame, because the forecast for the next week is in the 80s.

The Post said neither Lugar nor the legislation he is co-sponsoring proposes lifting all the sanctions right away or resuming diplomatic relations immediately, but Lugar said the appointment of an envoy and the start of direct talks would "serve vital U.S. security interests ... and would ultimately create the conditions for meaningful discussion of more contentious subjects."

Last year, during the U.S. presidential campaign, Fidel Castro, who has handed control of the government over to his brother Raul, gave his opinion of the Democratic candidate after Obama gave a speech to the Cuban American National Foundation in Miami in which he pledged to maintain the trade sanctions against Cuba as a means to press for democratic change. But Obama also said he wanted to ease restrictions on travel to Cuba and sending money there for relatives.

At that time Castro called Obama "the most progressive candidate to the U.S. presidency," the New York Times reported, while also scolding him for saying he would continue the trade embargo.

Castro may need to look toward Lugar, rather than Obama, to start the momentum to change the embargo.

Obama can end the travel limits for Cuban Americans at any time by executive order, the Post reported, but lifting all restrictions, and the trade embargo, requires legislation. Vice President Joe Biden said recently that the United States is not planning to lift its trade embargo on Cuba.

Americans still seem pretty evenly split on the issue. An Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted in early 2007 showed that 48 percent of respondents believed the United States should continue the embargo, while 40 percent believed the United States should end it. Twelve percent were unsure.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus will travel to Cuba this weekend, to demonstrate to Cubans that Americans are looking to build a new relationship with them, Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., told the Associated Press.

Lee, the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said she did not think improving economic relations with Cuba would bolster the government at the expense of the citizens.

"It's a country that we've had an embargo against for what, 40 years, but it hasn't worked," she told the Associated Press. "American citizens should have a right to travel to determine their own points of view."

Maybe Fidel will give Rep. Lee some Cuban cigars for her efforts.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Who's Leading the Republican Party?

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-02T00:03:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Media, Notre Dame

I'm rooting for Michael Steele.

Partly because the chairman of the Republican National Committee is the former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, my home state. And because one time I saw him campaigning at my local grocery store, and he handed me a flyer, so I feel some sort of connection to him.

But mostly because the Republican Party needs a strong leader now that the Democrats are running the show in Washington. Let's bring back the two-party system.

Steele hasn't had a strong start. I was impressed when he tried to put conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh in his place, but Steele quickly backed down and praised the bombastic radio personality instead. He made another mistake when he contradicted the Republican stance on abortion a few weeks later.

But let's take a look at the other options for the Republican Party.

CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider wrote a story Wednesday looking at the Republican hopefuls for the 2012 race. The Party should choose a leader before then, but the options don't look great, according to Schneider's article.

Schneider picked former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who won the straw poll taken at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) recently, former vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin, former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.

Romney admitted to CNN's Larry King that the GOP doesn't have "one spokesman" right now, reported Schneider.

"That's just one of the features of not having either house in Congress or having the White House," Romney said. "You don't have an official place to be heard."

Politico reported a few weeks ago that a recent report from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed that few people were able to name who they consider to be the leader of the GOP. Seventy-three percent of Americans responded that either the GOP has no leader, or, if they do, they don't know who it would be.

Of those who could name a GOP leader, 11 percent named Sen. John McCain and 5 percent named Rush Limbaugh. Gingrich and Steele both got 2 percent of the vote.

Clearly, the GOP has a leadership gap that needs to be filled. The Baltimore Sun reported Wednesday that Steele spoke at a fundraiser Tuesday, urging members of the party to stop infighting and be more like him, meaning "unconventional, unpredictable ... to do from time to time the unexpected."

President Obama and the Democrats are running the country, and the conversation. Someone give Chairman Steele some media training so he stops sticking his foot in his mouth, then let's see him present a strong, yet productive, counterpoint to Obama.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

FOX News Launches FOX Nation

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-01T01:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, National News, Media, Notre Dame

Conservative commentators on FOX News may have argued against the election of Barack Obama during the campaign, but they can't deny that four -- or eight -- years of an Obama administration will be good for their business.

FOX News Channel, which has long been the No. 1 cable news operation, extended its lead over CNN and MSNBC in recent months, the New York Times reported. Bill O'Reilly's show, The O'Reilly Factor, reached a milestone in March of 100 consecutive months as the most popular program on cable news.

FOX recently launched a new Web site, The FOX Nation, which the AP described as a "Huffington Post-style" site, a reference to Arianna Huffington's left-leaning blog site.

Though FOX is a leader on television, it falls behind on the Internet, the AP said, with 16 million unique visitors in February compared with MSNBC.com's 41 million viewers and CNN.com's 36 million.

The new Web site features one of the most grandiose introductory letters ever posted on a Web site. The letter lauds America as the "city on a hill," and says FOX Nation is dedicated to the people of America who have made it great.

And I thought FOX Nation was just a way to boost traffic to their online product at a time when the government, particularly Obama and Democrats in Congress, are doing a lot of things to irk conservatives.

Of course, these are hard times, FOX Nation says, but Americans have always risen up to face challenges and will again.

"How, exactly, should we assure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" the letter says. "How do we perfect our union? How can we make certain that children of all races are fairly judged, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character?"

The answer to FOX Nation's questions is, of course, FOX Nation.

"FOX Nation will be a forum for Americans to speak out on important and controversial issues, and to act out their beliefs and values -- while always upholding the traditional American ideals of free speech, fair play and tolerance," the letter says.

The site is a more user-friendly version of FOX News' actual Web site. It features content from O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck, and the AP reported that FOX Nation will be adding social networking components and encouraging visitors to post their opinions in response to the stories.

FOX Nation is also one of the few news organizations where Joe the Plumber remains a top news story. So now you know where to go to get your daily Joe.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama Commencement Coverage Focuses on Protesters

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-03-26T02:01:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Religion, News, Local, Media, Notre Dame

Kaitlynn Riely, a student at the University of Notre Dame, is delivering the latest news and opinions on the growing Obama Commencement controversy from South Bend. See her coverage on the progression of this media event here, here and here.

I'm starting to feel like I'm living in an abortion debate-themed production of West Side Story.

Ever since Notre Dame announced that President Barack Obama would deliver the May 17 Commencement address, those against hosting Obama because of his pro-choice beliefs and actions have been rumbling, mostly on the Internet and in print, with those who want him to speak here.

I can almost hear the snapping.

The argument is taking place in the opinion pages of Notre Dame's student newspaper, The Observer. The national media has picked up the story. Catholic and pro-life blogs and Web sites are condemning the University for asking a pro-choice politician to speak at Notre Dame and deciding to give him an honorary doctor of laws degree.

But for all the Obama drama, I've only spoken to a few students who are against him speaking here in May. And back in October, Notre Dame's student government conducted a mock election and the results were 52.6 percent for Obama, 41.1 percent for McCain.

The reason it seems, from media coverage, like popular Notre Dame community sentiment is against having Obama speak is because the people opposed to Obama speaking are doing a very good job of organizing and getting their opinion out.

Case in point: Today, a coalition of Notre Dame student groups launched a Web site and issued a press release denouncing the University's choice of Obama as Commencement speaker, an objection, they said, that was not based on "political partisanship" but due to Obama's "hostility to the Catholic Church's teachings on the sanctity of human life at its earliest stages."

The coalition, made up of 11 Notre Dame student groups, asked that only members of the Notre Dame community lead protests against the University's decision.

"Over the next several weeks, in response to this scandal, our organizations will host various academic and religious events to engage the University community," the statement said. It was signed by the 11 student clubs, which include the Notre Dame chapters of Right to Life and the College Republicans.

A Notre Dame alum started an online petition for people who support having Obama on campus, but that petition has gotten little notice. Scan the Internet, and it would seem most Notre Dame people oppose Obama speaking and receiving an honorary degree. It is true that there are many, many people who are against him speaking, and their position has merit. But the media is ignoring the large numbers who are thrilled to have Obama speak at Commencement.

The White House responded to the controversy late Tuesday, reported ABC's Political Punch blog. Deputy White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Obama was "honored" to address the graduation class, but said he understands there are students, parents and alums who don't want him there.

"While he is honored to have the support of millions of people of all faiths, including Catholics with their rich tradition of recognizing the dignity of people, he does not govern with the expectation that everyone sees eye to eye with him on every position and the spirit of debate and healthy disagreement on important issues is part of what he loves about this country," Psaki said.

But the negative reaction has been so loud, and so widely covered, that there's been less coverage of the "healthy disagreement" and more coverage of the outrage by some about the choice. I cannot foresee Obama deciding not to come, or Notre Dame rescinding his invitation. When May 17 has passed, will the story of this controversy be that most Notre Dame people were against his coming? Or will it be clear that many students supported Obama speaking at graduation?

As I did yesterday, I'll end again with my favorite Obama Drama moment of the day. Two Notre Dame students were interviewed on Fox's Greta Van Susteren Wednesday night about their opposition to Obama. At the end of the interview, Van Susteren congratulated the girls on their upcoming graduation.

Her congrats came about a year too early. Both girls are juniors, so they cannot go to Commencement anyway. Greta ended the segment before they could make the correction.

Everyone has the right to have an opinion on Obama speaking at Commencement, but let's see the media seek the opinions of Notre Dame seniors, for whom this decision primarily affects.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Bishop to Boycott Obama Commencement Speech at Notre Dame

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-03-25T00:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Small Campus, Big Story, Culture, Religion, News, Local, Media, Notre Dame

Bishop John M. D'Arcy, who presides over Indiana's Fort Wayne-South Bend Diocese, which includes Notre Dame, announced Tuesday he will not be attending Notre Dame's May 17 Commencement, since President Barack Obama will be speaking.

"Can I have the Bishop's ticket?" my friend posted on the Web site Twitter.com.

D'Arcy has clashed with Notre Dame in the past, most significantly when University President Fr. John Jenkins issued a statement in 2006 allowing The Vagina Monologues to be performed on campus. Now it's Obama's pro-choice stances and decisions, rather than vaginas, that have gotten D'Arcy's Irish up.

Notre Dame and the White House announced Friday that Obama would be speaking at Notre Dame's May 17 Commencement ceremony, with Jenkins following up Monday clarifying that asking Obama to speak, and awarding him with an honorary doctor of laws degree, does not signify support of his policies. Most students, from my observations on campus, seem to be supportive of and excited about hearing Obama speak. But a vocal student minority, as well as alumni and unaffiliated pro-life groups, have protested the decision vehemently.

In his statement Tuesday, D'Arcy said Jenkins informed him of Obama's acceptance shortly before the announcement was made. D'Arcy said it was the first time he'd been told about the invitation. This May is the 25th Notre Dame graduation since D'Arcy became bishop, and for the first time, he said, he will not attend.

"After much prayer, I have decided not to attend the graduation," he said. "I wish no disrespect to our president, I pray for him and wish him well. I have always revered the Office of the Presidency. But a bishop must teach the Catholic faith 'in season and out of season,' and he teaches not only by his words -- but by his actions."

He added: "My decision is not an attack on anyone, but is in defense of the truth about human life."

I understand that D'Arcy has major disagreements with Obama over abortion and stem cell issues. But isn't he giving up a unique opportunity to pull the president aside for a moment and voice his concerns? It may not make a difference in Obama's stances, but when else will D'Arcy have the ear of the president?

I'm unimpressed with D'Arcy's leadership. The pro-life movement's sign-carrying, march-making approach hasn't worked so far, and I doubt the Bishop's boycott will make any difference in abortion policy in the United States. It just distances the Catholic Church from the decision-making process.

Too bad. I wish D'Arcy had been a bit braver and seen the opportunity, rather than ask whether Notre Dame has "chosen prestige over truth."

D'Arcy's ticket won't go to waste. Notre Dame seniors, who are only guaranteed 3 tickets each for graduation, have been posting on Facebook asking those who don't want Obama to speak at Notre Dame to give away their tickets.

Security itself on graduation day promises to be intense. But already, with two months to go, life in the Notre Dame bubble is becoming surreal. Leaving the gym this afternoon, I stopped by a television because a woman from a local television station was delivering a report from my campus.

When I got back to my room, a friend told me Notre Dame was on CNN.

Does this controversy have the momentum to last two months? Pro-life groups will certainly try their best. Everyone here has a viewpoint on the Obama drama.

My favorite opinion of the day came in a letter to the editor published in Notre Dame's student newspaper, The Observer. The author of the letter is a student at Saint Mary's, the all-women college across the street from Notre Dame, who asked whether the Notre Dame "administration considered the impact such an important political figurehead will have on the travel plans of the other schools graduating that weekend."

I imagine potential traffic congestion is the last thing Jenkins is thinking about this week.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Volcano Monitoring Proves Useful One Month After Jindal's Speech

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-03-24T08:18:00+00:00

Filed under: Science, Odd News, Notre Dame

A volcano in southern Alaska erupted Sunday and Monday, spewing ash columns some 60,000 feet in the air and causing ash to fall in several communities west of Anchorage, CNN reported Monday.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal so did not see this coming back in February, when he mocked the part of the stimulus plan that allocated funding for volcanic activity monitoring.

In the GOP response to President Barack Obama's address to a joint session of Congress, Jindal criticized the Democrats for passing a bill "larded with wasteful spending," including "$140 million for something called 'volcano monitoring.'" [Correction: I wrote billion originally. $140 billion would probably be excessive.]

"Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington, D.C.," Jindal said.

That line's a zinger...until a volcano actually erupts.

The Anchorage Daily News reported that Mount Redoubt erupted for a sixth time Monday evening. The aviation industry was affected by the eruptions, since the ash clouds prevent air traffic in the vicinity of the volcano. U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told reporters that approximately 20,000 passengers fly through the area each day, CNN reported.

A U.S. Geological Survey geophysicist told CNN that the eruptions could disrupt air travel to south central Alaska and Alaska as a whole for weeks to months. The Anchorage Daily News reported that Alaska Airlines canceled 19 flights in and out of Anchorage because of the ash.

In towns near the volcano, residents are wearing masks to go outside, since the ash is dangerous to breath. But luckily, experts have been warning of an eruption for some time, CNN said.

Thank goodness for volcano monitoring, right Gov. Jindal?The Daily Beast reported in their story about the Jindal goof-up that geologists say the area around Mt. Redoubt is likely to receive stimulus funds that will help its residents to prepare for future volcanic disasters.

Mount Redoubt, a 10,917-foot stratovolcano 100 miles south of Anchorage, last erupted during a four-month period in 1989-1990, the Anchorage Daily News said. The most recent period of volcanic unrest began Jan.25 and scientists reported heightened seismicity at Mount Redoubt for two hours prior to the eruption, so warned that there could be a quick escalation to eruptive activity.

What are the odds, Jiindal must be wondering. I have no idea. He should probably ask someone whose job description is "something called 'volcano monitoring.'"

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Debate Over Obama Notre Dame Commencement Address Heats Up

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-03-24T01:03:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Small Campus, Big Story, Culture, Religion, Breaking News, News, Local, Notre Dame

The White House and Notre Dame announced last Friday that President Barack Obama would be the main speaker at the May 17 Commencement ceremony and would be awarded an honorary doctor of laws degree, a decision that has caused controversy among many in the Catholic community.

Though many students and alums of the University are pleased to have the president speak at Commencement, those opposed to the decision have been far more vocal, as students, alumni and people not affiliated with Notre Dame voiced their protestations loudly throughout the Internet and in Notre Dame's student newspaper.

Fr. John Jenkins, the president of Notre Dame, gave an interview to The Observer, the student newspaper, Sunday in which he responded to the criticism and said he did not "foresee" circumstances in which Notre Dame would rescind the invitation to the president. (Full disclosure: I work for The Observer.)

"We have invited the president and he's honored us by accepting," he told The Observer.

There's been an uproar about the decision, judging by letters to the editor, blog posts and petitions, due to Obama's pro-abortion stances. Jenkins defended his choice, saying the invitation to Obama does not signify an endorsement.

"The invitation of President Obama to be our Commencement speaker should in no way be taken as condoning or endorsing his positions on specific issues regarding the protection of life, such as abortion and embryonic stem cell research," Jenkins told The Observer.

The protestations against the choice of Obama have been very loud, especially in the opinion section of The Observer, but it should be noted that in a mock election held by Notre Dame's student government last October, Obama won 52.6 percent of the vote compared to McCain's 41.1 percent.

Not everyone is protesting Obama coming to campus; many are thrilled. A Facebook group titled "We Will Be Honored To Have President Obama at Notre Dame" has 1,389 members. Several Facebook groups, however, have been created to protest Obama as Commencement speaker.

All I wanted was a nice, quiet, peaceful graduation day, a time to celebrate with my family and friends, without posters of aborted fetuses. Such a simple request. But it won't be so.

Already, pro-life activists are making plans to come to South Bend to protest.

A Web site called notredamescandal.com has set up an online petition to ask Jenkins to rescind the invitation, saying it is in violation of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' 2004 document called "Catholics in Political Life," which states that "those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles" "should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions" by Catholic institutions.

The Web site, launched by the Cardinal Newman Society, claims it has nearly 48,000 signatures. The Cardinal Newman Society, established in 1993, is "dedicated to renewing and strengthening Catholic identity at America's 224 Catholic colleges and universities," according to its Web site.

National Review Online, the Web site of the conservative magazine, asked various commentators to give their views on Notre Dame's speaker choice.

It's become popular in American discourse to invoke Hitler when making a point about something one views as egregious. On National Review's Web site, Fr. George W. Rutler, a Catholic priest in New York, skipped that tiresome cliche and brought back an oldie:

"If a Midwestern school seeks attention by granting Obama an honorary doctorate in law, the next logical step would be to grant Judas Iscariot posthumously an honorary doctorate in business administration," he wrote.

This is only day three of the Great Obama Debate; there is no end in sight. Outside the Notre Dame bubble, I'm sure, no one is talking about the Obama Commencement speaker choice. But it's hard to see reality beyond the bubble while on campus. Here, it is the primary topic of conversation.

Anecdotally, I'd say most seniors I've talked to are excited about Obama coming to speak at graduation. But those who are against Obama speaking are making a lot more noise in the student paper and on the Internet.

My advice to Fr. Jenkins is to fire Charlie Weis and re-hire Ty Willingham. There's nothing like breaking football news to change the topic of conversation at Notre Dame.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama To Give Commencement Address at Three Colleges

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-03-20T17:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Small Campus, Big Story, National News, News, Local, Notre Dame

I thought the biggest thing that was going to happen at Notre Dame this week was St. Patrick's Day. I was wrong.

According to an Associated Press report, President Barack Obama will deliver the commencement address at Notre Dame's graduation May 17. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs made the announcement Friday that Obama will speak at my school, as well as at the Arizona State University and the U.S. Naval Academy graduation ceremonies. Notre Dame's media office issued a news release saying Obama will also be the recipient of an honorary doctor of laws degree.

The Facebook statuses of many Notre Dame students were all about the news Friday afternoon. There hasn't been this much buzz since freshmen year when rumors swirled that U2 was coming in for the ND-USC game.

I think Obama's gotten bigger than Bono.

Many people seem excited, but undoubtedly, there will be protests, especially by those who see Obama's stance on abortion as contrary to Catholic teachings. This is Notre Dame. We protest for weeks on end when students put on productions of The Vagina Monologues.

Obama will be the ninth U.S. president to be awarded an honorary degree by Notre Dame and the sixth to be Commencement speaker, according to the news release.

And don't forget, Notre Dame also graduated the nation's best fake president, West Wing's Josiah Bartlett.

President George W. Bush delivered his first presidential commencement address at Notre Dame in 2001, four years before I was a student here.

It's not a bad way to graduate, with the president stopping by to send us out into the collapsing job market with some soaring rhetoric. I'm guessing that he'll tell us "we are the ones we've been waiting for," that "hope is the bedrock" of our future, and that "yes, we can."

While we have him on campus, the University administration should convince Obama to swing by South Bend in the fall to give some pep talks to our football team.

We'll have the teleprompters ready and waiting in the locker room.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments