Bright Hall

Gates Announces Eventual End to Stop-Loss Policy

Megan Baker — 2009-03-18T21:13:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College

Secretary of State Robert Gates announced today that an unpopular program in the Army known as "stop-loss" will be phased out by 2011. As of January, there were 13,217 soldiers affected by the program, which prevents soldiers from leaving military service on time if they were scheduled to deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan.

This program was used during Operation Desert Storm and was reinstated after 9/11. Since 9/11, it has interfered with the lives of 120,000 soldiers. Oftentimes known as the "backdoor draft," the purpose of the stop-loss policy is to "maintain continuity in leadership and cohesion within units that trained for and then were deploying to war."

"I felt, particularly in these numbers, that it was breaking faith" to keep soldiers in the service after their end date comes up, Gates said at a Pentagon press conference. "To hold them against their will is just not the right thing to do."

According to Gates, the goal is to reduce the number (13,217) by 50 percent by June 2010 and to bring it down to scores or less by March 2011. Soldiers who have been affected by the stop-loss policy since October of 2008 will be compensated $500 per month of duty.

Gates explained that there were two reasons why the Army is now able to slowly stop using the policy.

First, he said, "We will be drawing down in Iraq, over the next 18 or 19 months, significantly more than we are building up in Afghanistan, in terms of the Army."

Also, recruitment and enlistment went up faster than expected. The service reached its goal of 547,000 already, a goal they weren't expecting to reach until 2012.

Naturally, families and veterans alike are happy about this change in policy.

"The stop-loss policy is one that has been expanded and abused for too long," said Jon Soltz, an Iraq war veteran and chairman of VoteVets.org. "And it is a significant and positive sign that the president plans to largely end it."

In addition to this, the Army will pay for families to travel to Dover to be there when their fallen family member's remains arrive in the states. This new policy will now allow the media to record the return of fallen troops, something the Pentagon has prevented the media from doing since 1989.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

John Edwards: Back At It

Megan Baker — 2009-03-12T11:17:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Featured Stories, St. John Fisher College

After sitting back and letting his affair and possible love child blow over the public for seven months, John Edwards has stepped back into the limelight; only this time as a passionate advocate for those suffering from poverty.

In his second public appearance since September, Edwards spoke at Brown University where he discussed what he has been doing since the election and what his new aspirations are. Obviously the topic of his affair was on a lot of the audiences' minds, and he did address it...sort of.

In response to a question raised by a student who claimed to be a campus organizer for his campaign about whether or not it was "just or fair" for politicians to be held to a "higher moral standard," Edwards responded:

"It is not for a candidate to decide what is appropriate and what's not appropriate. That's something every single American has a right to decide for themselves. We live in a free country where people have a right to voice their views and have a right to form their views without limitation...

"It is not for me to impose on anybody what they can observe and can't observe. I have my own view, which I will keep to myself. But I believe it is enormously important to have the best thinkers and the best visionary people to lead our country where it needs to go."

Spoken like a true politician...er, advocate.

So now that we all know that Edwards plans to step away from politics and dedicate his life to a cause close to his heart (Al Gore anyone?), it's fair to ask: Is it too soon? In my opinion, its not.

Do Americans really expect John Edwards to sit in the shadows for the rest of his life because he cheated on his wife? If you haven't noticed, infidelity in Washington happens quite often.

According to Gary Pearce, a Democratic political consultant who ran Edwards' 1998 Senate campaign, Edwards has two choices; wait for the scandal to blow over or "subject himself to a public cross-examination." Pearce's recommendation? Speak up.

"Long-term, that's what he has to do. He has to tell the truth and hope that time heals all wounds if he wants to return to the public stage."

Brown University political scientist Wendy Schiller also feels that now is the time for Edwards to regain some credibility.

"When you can voice a message the way John Edwards can, I think you can still remain relevant," Schiller said. "He should get on the trail, give speeches on populism, and make the case that even though he's got personal problems, he's still willing to advocate on behalf of those who can't help themselves."

So America, Edwards made his choice, now we have to make ours. Do we scrutinize him for the rest of his life for making a mistake or do we allow him to try to help the poor both here and around the world?

Your call.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Meghan McCain: Not a Fan of Ann Coulter

Megan Baker — 2009-03-10T21:21:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College

Apparently Meghan McCain is quite the blogger, as she has her own site, McCainBlogette.com, and also writes for The Daily Beast. She already raised eyebrows with her "Looking for Mr. Far Right" post and now her name is back in the headlines - only this time, it's not about her less than desirable love life.

Yesterday, Meghan took to her blog to take down one of the most hated (and celebrated) conservative pundits, Ann Coulter.

In her post, Meghan apologized for the lack of "hipness" of the Republican party and placed some of the blame on "certain individuals continue to perpetuate negative stereotypes about Republicans." Namely, Coulter.

"Who do I feel is the biggest culprit? Ann Coulter. I straight up don't understand this woman or her popularity. I find her offensive, radical, insulting, and confusing all at the same time....And if figureheads like Ann Coulter are turning me off, then they are definitely turning off other members of my generation as well."

I don't know much about Meghan McCain, but after reading that post, I have a new-found respect for her. Her father should have set her loose a little bit more while on the campaign trail, she would have picked up way more votes than Sarah Palin ever did. The Republicans should pay a but more attention to her, she may be the key to the resurgence of the Republican party.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

2009 College Graduates are F*�!�$

Megan Baker — 2009-03-03T18:45:00+00:00

Filed under: St. John Fisher College, Recession on Campus, Microtrends on Campus

I'm not going to sugar coat this for you college seniors out there, this is not a great time for us to be graduating. The U.S. economy is steadily getting worse and the job market seems to be shrinking along with it. But we can't sit around feeling sorry for ourselves; it's time to get proactive. We didn't go to college to go back home to our crappy summer jobs, now did we?

To get myself pointed in the right direction, I headed to the one place I should have gone to a long time ago...my college career center. I met with the Director of Career Services, Betsy McDermott to get some advice on what we as college seniors should be doing to crack into a seemingly impossible job market.

The only problem is, a lot of us still don't know what we want to do (or can do) with our majors.

"You'd be amazed at how many seniors still don't know what they want to do at this point," McDermott said. "I definitely think students should sit down and have a talk with a career counselor to figure out what it is you want to do. It helps put the focus somewhere."

Here are some of the highlights of the discussion I had with Betsy:

Q: How can students start the job search process?

A: It is a three step process:

1. Identify what skills and interests you have

2. Narrow down your interests, and start to do research on fields and specific organizations you are interested in working for.

3. Target your audience and start sending out resumes.

Q: Is it okay to apply to a company that isn't hiring?

A: It really only works when you desperately want to work for one particular organization. In your cover letter you can say 'I know you're not hiring right now, but I really love your organization and would like to ask you to keep my name on file in case something pops up in the future.' Maybe when there is a job opening, they will be curious about finding out more about you and will give you a call. Everyone likes to hear that they are someone's first choice."

Q: How early should graduates start applying?

A: If you are looking for a job as a teacher, you should start sending out cover letters and resumes now. If you are looking to work in marketing, accounting or sales, you don't need to send out resumes until a couple months before graduation. If someone is interested in you but you are not able to start working until after graduation, offer to work part time or even intern, whatever it takes to keep them excited about hiring you.

Q: How many resumes should graduates plan on sending out?

A: It used to be common for people to send out 5,000 resumes and they would only hear back from about three places. The success rate is really low for cold targeting, and it's not really worth the time and effort unless you are trying to get a job you absolutely love.

While the job search process is daunting, McDermott made me feel a little bit better.

"Why are we so upset? The process is the same. Companies are always looking for people with initiative, strong people skills and professionals. There is movement out there in the word world, you just need to communicate to a company out there who needs your skills."

According to McDermott, it takes about three months to get a full time job, so seniors, get started! Some of the more common job search engines are Monster, Career Builder, Yahoo! HotJobs and Craig's List. These sites should give you a general idea of what is out there and what is expected of you as a potential employee.

Need resume advice? Check out this website or do what I did, meet with a career counselor at your college's Career Services Office.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Why the Drinking Age Should be Lowered to 18

Megan Baker — 2009-02-20T16:15:00+00:00

Filed under: St. John Fisher College, News, Advise & Dissent

Animated disagreement between coworkers is a venerable tradition often denied to Bright Hall's far-flung, break room-less staff. Advise & Dissent is an attempt to fix that. Click here for past debates.

The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 changed the drinking age from 18 to the now legal age of 21. Over the past couple of years, there have been debates as to whether this makes sense anymore (see my colleague Joshua Sharp's take here). This will also be the topic of discussion on 60 Minutes on Sunday, Feb. 22, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

One of the major subjects will be Gordie Bailey, a young man who unfortunately died of alcohol poisoning during a fraternity initiation in 2004 at The University of Colorado at Boulder.

Despite tragedies like this, there has been a notable push to change the drinking age back to 18.

One of the most well known (and most recent) movements is the Amethyst Initiative, which is made up of chancellors and presidents of universities and colleges across the United States. The Amethyst Initiative (which is aptly named as the word "amethyst" ii derived from a word in Ancient Greek meaning "not intoxicated") aims to educate youth on responsible drinking rather than pretend that underage drinking is a non-issue.

The initiative is actually being supported by a large number of college presidents and chancellors including President Richard Brodhead of Duke University, President James E. Wright of Dartmouth College and most notably President Emeritus John M. McCardell Jr. of Middlebury College.

In 2004, President Emeritus McCardell submitted an op-ed piece to the New York Times that brought this debate back to the forefront. In the piece he said that college students are drinking regardless of age and regardless of the law, and anybody who ignores this fact is making a huge mistake.

"To lawmakers: the 21-year-old drinking age is bad social policy and terrible law. It is astonishing that college students have thus far acquiesced in so egregious an abridgment of the age of majority. Unfortunately, this acquiescence has taken the form of binge drinking. Campuses have become, depending on the enthusiasm of local law enforcement, either arms of the law or havens from the law," McCardell said.

Since writing this piece, McCardell has been a big advocate of Choose Responsibility, a non-profit organization that is working to educate the public on the realities of underage drinking and the sensibility of lowering the drinking age to 18.As a college student, I can only agree with lowering the drinking age.

Ask any college student out there - binge drinking goes on no matter how old you are, no matter what laws exist, and heck, no matter what day of the week it is. To be completely honest with you, I easily got a fake ID when I got to college at the age of 18 and used it to get into bars until I turned 21 my junior year. While I never went to a store and purchased alcohol with it, I was never once turned down from a bar in Rochester, NY. I went out just about every weekend.

I knew that I could get a ticket for getting caught with someone else's license, but it didn't matter to me. Several of my friends have been ticketed for using a fake ID, but all it did was inconvenience them for a few days until they were able to find another one and get right back out to the bars. Saying that the drinking age is effective on curbing drinking on college campuses is like Bristol Palin telling us abstinence is the best way to avoid teen pregnancy.

Joelle Joseph, a former student at The University of Colorado at Boulder (where Gordie Bailey passed away) admitted that while the story of Bailey remains pervasive at the college, it has not curbed drinking.

"Since that incident, the school has been stricter about sororities and fraternities. They are not allowed to have rush events involving alcohol, but a lot of the fraternities still do," Joseph said.

Joseph explained that while the sorority system is under the branch of the school, the fraternity system is not so alcohol is still very much a part of rushing despite past incidents.

"Binge drinking is still a huge part of college life there. If you are going to visit there, be ready to party because any reason they can find to drink, they take it."

But beyond the fact that underage drinking goes on anyways, let's think about all of the other things 18-year-olds are allowed to do. Once you turn 18, you can vote in elections. You can go overseas and die for your country. You are also allowed to serve on a jury. There are also plenty of Americans out there under the age of 21 who are married and have children.

So, let's re-cap. As an 18-year-old, you are mature enough to partake in some of the most important tasks as an American citizen and have another life in your hands, but you are not mature enough to have a beer. Doesn't make much sense now, does it?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Parenting Advice from Bristol Palin

Megan Baker — 2009-02-17T19:53:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College

In her first interview since giving birth to son Tripp, Bristol Palin admits that abstinence is "unrealistic" and that sex among teens has become more and more acceptable.

While she doesn't regret having her son, she wishes it would have happened "ten years from now" so she would have been able to get an education and a stable job before she became a mother.

She described what it felt like to tell her parents that she was pregnant as being "worse than labor." She told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren about the experience.

"Well, we were sitting on the couch, my best friend and Levi, and we had my parents come and sit on the couch, too. And we had my sisters go upstairs. And we just sat them down, and I just -- I couldn't even say it. I was just sick to my stomach.

"And so finally, my best friend just, like, blurted it out. And it was just, like -- I don't even remember it because it was just, like, something I don't want to remember."

Don't worry though, she's experienced because she has had a life filled with babysitting. The really hard part is "living for someone else" and having her priorities change..."it's not glamorous."

But now that she's in this situation, she wants to strive to be an advocate for preventing teen pregnancy. Sarah Palin must be ecstatic.

She needs to work on her advocacy because she knows that abstinence doesn't work, but she won't talk about contraceptives. Her advice? "Watch stories about people like me and then wait ten years, it's just easier."

As for Sarah? She's just makin' the best of things, gosh darnit! She came on the screen with baby Tripp and gave her two cents.

"Get beyond the ideal of abstinence. Hey. Life happens. It's not the most ideal situation. Certainly you make the most of it. I don't know how other families do it if they assume that the young parent will make it on their own, or if they assume that the government is going to take care of the young parent and that child. That's not government's role."

Why not use her daughter's predicament for some publicity? She really loves the spotlight doesn't she?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

MySpace Kicks Out Sex Offenders; They Head to Facebook

Megan Baker — 2009-02-04T12:33:00+00:00

Filed under: Featured Stories, St. John Fisher College, Media

MySpace had been under a lot of scrutiny for not doing enough to protect children from sexual predators, so they finally decided to do something about it. The site, known as "a place for friends," has made the decision to de-friend 90,000 registered sex offenders.

According to Hemanshu Nigam, Chief Security Officer for MySpace, MySpace had spent the last two years deleting accounts of people that were seen to cause problems on the site.

"The reality is there are 700,000-plus sex offenders living in the streets of America," Mr. Nigam said. "What we did was build cutting-edge technology to figure out where they might be living on the Internet and remove them from our site."

The company also reported that while the MySpace community grows 10 percent each year, there has been a 36 percent drop in the number of registered sex offenders creating profiles.

This is not the first time MySpace has "purged" such users. Back in 2007, the company found and removed 29,000 profiles of registered sex offenders using Sentinel SAFE, a database that matches user profiles to data on convicted sex offenders.

Techcrunch.com did some investigating with the help of John Cardillo, former New York City police officer and the CEO of Sentine, to see if these sex offenders went to Facebook. And it looks like they have.

Cardillo took the 90,000 sex offenders who were removed from MySpace and started looking for them on Facebook. According to Cardillo, "We found over 8,000 offenders on their site without much effort. My professional opinion is that the real number is 15 to 20 times that."

Cardiollo said that it would cost Facebook under $1 million to use Sentinal SAFE. It may, however, be even cheaper for Facebook to create its own screening software. This has been proposed in the past, but in light of Cardillo's findings, Facebook may not have anything worthwhile in place...yet.

Facebook claims this has not been an issue for users of the site. "We are glad to be able to report that we have not yet had to handle a case of a registered sex offender meeting a minor through Facebook. We are working hard to make sure it never happens," Facebook spokesperson Barry Schnitt.

He even went so far as calling Sentinel "irresponsible" for doing this stuff in a private manner.

"For a company that has a mission to keep kids safe, we find it irresponsible that they wouldn't share this with us. Or if not with us, how about law enforcement? This could have been an announcement that Sentinel and Facebook removed 8,000 potential sex offenders. We still don't have the information on who they are. If you are willing to share that with us, we will investigate immediately."

So in the meantime kids, make your profiles private and don't accept a friend request from anyone you don't know.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Fat Jokes Resonate in Tough Times

Megan Baker — 2009-01-29T10:59:00+00:00

Filed under: St. John Fisher College, Media

The New York Post published quite the unflattering cartoon image of Jessica Simpson yesterday:

To make matters worse for the singer, the New York Post also has an entire picture slide show of Jessica Simpson where you can see her physique change from 2005 until now. Real nice.

The star has been taking some flack since her recent concert at the Radio 99.9 Kiss Country's annual Chili Cook-off in Florida. Who was the one to break the news? Why, fair and balanced Fox News.

So, how did Jessica gain this weight? Fox News has some conspiracies going.

"Is Jess preggers? Did she gain sympathy weight for sis Ashlee (who just had a baby with hubby Pete Wentz)? Is it all a ploy to get her on the cover of a magazine? Or is it, more likely, that the star has been eating the same diet that her Dallas Cowboys quarterback boyfriend Tony Romo does?"

I won't lie, when I saw the cartoon I laughed. It's pretty funny, but it's also really mean. It is baffling that the media (not to mention consumers of the media) cares so much about what celebrities have gained and lost weight. It's not like we have a failing economy to worry about or anything...

But Oprah Winfrey is the queen of keeping weight loss in the forefront. She went public with her battle to lose weight and keep it off, going so far as appearing on the cover of her magazine with her former svelte self.

It's nice to see that she is going public in hopes of helping out her viewers, but let's be real here. Oprah is one of the wealthiest people in the nation, if not the world, so she has some extensive access to personal trainers, private chefs and let's face it, healthier food in general. And while God may smite me for speaking ill of Queen Oprah, for her to try to tell people how they can lose weight beyond the emotional aspects is pretty laughable.

So fine, let's all laugh at someone's expense (like I said, it is pretty funny) but in the end, we should leave her alone. If we as an American culture care more about how much weight a celebrity has put on rather than other pressing issues, then we are in some serious trouble to say the least.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Candy Cigarettes Taking a Hit. Root Beer Next?

Megan Baker — 2009-01-28T14:29:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College, Odd News

It's no secret that Barack Obama is a smoker, whether he wants us to know or not. And thanks to a rule instated by former First Lady and current Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, he is going to have to quit if he wants to live in the White House. (Fun fact: the last known president to have a smoking problem was Gerald Ford.)

If Obama was able to motivate a nation to get him into the White House, he should help smokers everywhere join him in his battle to quit smoking once and for all.

While Obama admitted that he had not quite quit smoking while on the campaign trail, he's working on it.

His advice on how to quit?

"Eliminate certain key connections - that first cigarette in the morning, or after a meal, or with a drink, If you can eliminate those triggers, that should help."

It probably won't be so easy for him to quit as he does have what is probably the most stressful job known to man. (At least they are letting him keep the Blackberry to sooth his nerves.)

There is all the basic advice people can follow to quit like chewing gum, avoiding places where there is bound to be other smokers, etc. But Democrats in Nassau are doing their best to keep candy (yes, candy) cigarettes out of plain view in hopes that it will deter children from becoming smokers in the future.

Roger Corbin (D-Westbury) proposed the bill because he claims that children in schools had told him that they felt that candy cigarette use would lead to actual cigarette use in the future. (I'm glad our politicians are getting legislation ideas from children). Corbin also claims that there is a study that supports this "fact."

According to the study, which was reported in the July issue of Preventive Medicine, 22% of regular smokers had regularly consumed candy cigarettes as a child, compared to 14% of non-smokers.

I can see the point people are getting at with this study (which is more of a survey than anything). Candy cigarettes desensitize children to the idea of smoking, making it seem more socially acceptable than what it is.

But if they are going to start here, are they going to make IBC Root Beer stop bottling their product because it looks like a beer bottle? It even has the word "beer" in the title.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Inauguration Day: Connecting America in More Ways than One

Megan Baker — 2009-01-21T13:42:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College, Media

Yesterday I arrived at the National Mall at 4:30 a.m. to attend one of the most greatly anticipated events in American history. It was dark (not to mention absolutely freezing) when I arrived but the crowd was in high spirits despite the seven and a half hour wait ahead of them. What did I and hundreds of thousands of people do to pass the time? Blogged.

CNN dubbed yesterday a "blogger's inauguration" and they couldn't be closer to the truth. At it's peak, Twitter had five times more tweets per second than it normally has while Facebook averaged more than 4,000 status updates every hour Tuesday morning- a figure that jumped to 8,500 updates per minute during President Obama's inaugural speech.

From complaining about the cold to commenting on the porta-potties (trust me-you don't want to hear a thing about those) to just expressing feelings about the momentous occassion, millions had something to say and they were able to say it through these venues. Even the White House got in on the action, as the clock struck 12:01 p.m. (which if my memory serves me right, Obama had not taken the oath by this time) the Obama administration took over the White House website where they wrote simply, "Change has come to America."

Since I could only say so much through Twitter yesterday, I thought I would take to my blog give you a more in-depth look into my inaugural experience. 6:30 p.m.: I rolled out of Rochester with a group of three filled buses with the group Rochester for Obama. Everyone is really excited to go. I won't bore you with the details about the long bus ride, so how about we skip to the arrival in D.C.

3:00 a.m.: We arrived in D.C. and are trying to figure out how to get into RFK stadium, which is where (from what I heard) 1,750 chartered buses were going to park. There was a shuttle service from the stadium lot to a few blocks away from the National Mall, so I joined the masses and hopped on a shuttle.

4:00 a.m.: Security is not letting anyone into the National Mall, but I (with a couple of my friends and their family) notice that people are getting in somehow. We walk down the street a ways and found a way in. Victory is ours.

4:30 a.m. We secure a spot in the National Mall, about 100 feet away from the fence that separated us normal folks from the people who have tickets. We meet some very nice (and slightly inebriated) college students from Georgetown University. They convice my friends and I to sit down with them. This was an interesting struggle because it was incredibly crowded. While we ended up not sitting for very long because people kept wanting to come in and out, it was nice to rest for a bit. It was a lot warmer down there too.

5:30 a.m.: The crowd is getting bored, so people start breaking out in song. We had a large group singing "Lean on Me" complete with swaying. People then decided to turn their attention to President Bush singing, "Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, BYE BUSH!!"

6:00 a.m.: To pass the time, I decided to interview one of the Georgetown students to see how they were feeling about being here and what the Obama presidency meant to them and Josh Guzman, a junior cultural studies major, obliged.

"It would be lame if I turned on the TV and knew that this was going on right down the street. It's a major reason why I chose to go to school down here, D.C. has a lot to offer," he said on why he came down to the National Mall.

When asked what he hoped to see Obama do now that he was in office, Guzman said that Obama has already done a lot for the country.

"He's about something bigger. Asking what I hope to see him do is almost laughable because he has already mobilized, inspired, and gave people hope for the first time in history which is more than any president has been able to do in all four years let alone the first 100 hours."

6:30 - 10:30 a.m.: My friends and I have accepted the fact that we cannot stand in this spot for another 6 hours, so with promises to add the Georgetown kids on Facebook, we move to a more open spot in the Mall.

I cannot even describe to you how frigid cold it was. I come from Rochester, and I know what cold is, but this was unbearable. There were no heaters, no open buildings, no way to get out of the cold. If you wanted to warm up with a hot coffee, the line was at least an hour and a half long, probably longer. In my opinion, it was terribly planned. It's not like the planners had short notice on when the event was happening, it's written in the Constitution for crying out loud.

People were hoping to get into the Smithsonian, which was scheduled to open up at 10 a.m. The Secret Service advised against opening it as it could become a security risk, so after standing on the steps for an hour waiting to get in then being told it wasn't happening, I wasn't too thrilled. They ended up opening it about an hour later, but by that time things were starting up and I didn't stand out there since 4:30 a.m. to sit in a museum.

10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.: Finally things get started. They had been playing the concert from the other night on the big screens, and the crowd was dancing to keep warm. It was amusing to see a crowd of thousands dancing to "Make me Wanna Shout," as they waved their flags around and jumped all over in hopes of getting warm.

By this point, I'm absolutely freezing and pretty fatigued, so if things seem muddled here, sorry about that. The rest of the crowd feels the same, but once footage of Obama's caravan was shown on the big screens, the crowd went nuts. The legislators all make their way in, some drawing applause, others boos. (I'm sure you could figure out which was which.)

I kid you not, when Obama finally appeared on the big screen with Bush for the first time, the clouds separated and warm sunshine filled the Mall. The crowd was enamored at the sight of the president-elect. Flags were waving, people were cheering and tears were shed.

Aretha sang and the crowd fell silent. Whether it was because they were baffled about what she was wearing on her head or because it was just such a moving moment, I will never be sure.

Biden was sworn in, and besides him talking extremely loud, it went fine. Obama struggled a bit with his swearing in, but I'm sure you all know about that. It drew some laughs in the crowd when it happened, but people were very forgiving. Murmurs of "he must be so nervous" rippled throughout where I was. I was a little annoyed seeing how I had stood out in the cold for hours to see this and he messed up, but hey, what are you going to do?

Then came the speech. He didn't give the big hopeful speech that a lot of Americans were looking for, but I appreciated his honesty. He told us what he hopes to do (and he definitely has a lot on his plate) and let us know that the journey will be difficult. I didn't walk away reassured that everything was going to be ok, but I did walk away feeling that our country is in better hands.

2:00 p.m.: There was no way I was staying for the parade. I high-tailed it back to the bus and slept for a good four hours. When I woke up at 6:00, one of the men on the bus was popping champagne and offering it to the weary, yet high-spirited travelers. I heard some of the older people on the bus were not able to withstand the cold to actually witness the inauguration, which made me pretty sad. They travled all this way and didn't get to be there for it. While disappointed, just knowing that Obama was sworn in was enough for them.

I am going to remember this experience as one of the most miserable but memorable moments of my life. When my children and grandchildren learn about this in the history books, I will be able to tell them that I was there. I will leave out all of the gory details about the cold and all of the annoyances along the way; instead I will tell them that it was the moment when Americans came together in hopes of fixing what was broken.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

My Plan for Crashing the Inauguration

Megan Baker — 2009-01-17T16:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College

As President elect Barack Obama works his way down the east coast in the tricked out "Obama Express," I am preparing to make the road trip of a lifetime. On Monday at 6 p.m. I will be departing from Rochester, NY on a bus with Rochester for Obama to head to Washington, D.C. to attend the inauguration.

Now, saying that I will be attending the inauguration is sort of misleading. I don't have tickets, nor do I have anywhere to stay. I will be (trying to) sleep on the seven-hour bus ride down then will stand outside for hours in the 30-degree weather in hopes of getting a good view of one of the jumbo screens that I'm told are lining the National Mall. Once it's over, I will hop back on the bus and head back to Rochester. (I have to go to my internship Wednesday morning, after all).

Why am I going, you ask? Why would I want to make a seven-hour trip to stand in the freezing cold uncertain if I will even get into the city? Because this is the moment I have been waiting for. This was the first election I was able to vote in, and I want to see it through. That and it will make for some killer coverage for the Cardinal Courier, my college paper that I just so happen to be the Editor-in-Chief of. (Trust me, I'm not above shameless plugging.)

On a side note, this will actually be my third one day trip to the Capitol. My most recent one was an anti-war protest a couple years back; and while I was utterly exhausted, it was a really cool experience.

If it all works out according to plan, I will be updating you all via Twitter. Just think, you can experience it with me without the crappy bus ride or risk of hypothermia! So, on Tuesday as you sit cozy in your living room, office, etc. log onto Bright Hall and I will share my experience with you.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Graduate Auctions off Virginity to Pay for Tuition

Megan Baker — 2009-01-15T22:53:00+00:00

Filed under: St. John Fisher College, Odd News

A 22-year-old Sacramento State graduate is auctioning off her virginity online to cover her tuition costs...and there's nothing the government can do about it.

Natalie Dylan (not her real name) is getting away with this scheme because the "transaction", if you will, is set to take place in Nevada, where prostitution is legal. To be more specific, it will take place at the Moonlite Bunny Ranch, made famous by the HBO documentary series, Cathouse.

Think it's a stupid idea? Her offer has attracted more than 10,000 bidders and she has apparently reached bidding as high as $3.7 million.

While I went the old-fashioned route for college funding - applying for scholarships and financial aid then getting loans for what remained - this chick was inspired by her sister who paid for college through prostituting herself for a mere three weeks.

On this proposition, Dylan said that "I know that a lot of people will condemn me for this because it's so taboo but I really don't have a problem with that." And to defend her chastity, she has also offered to have lie detector and medical tests done to prove that her virginity is, in fact, intact.

Ironically enough, Dylan earned her bachelor's degree in Women's Studies and she wants to pursue a master's degree in marriage and family therapy. Something tells me she didn't learn too much in her classes. She shouldn't be paying Sacramento State, she should be asking for her money back.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Google Helps Minimize Drunken Email

Megan Baker — 2009-01-11T20:16:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Featured Stories, St. John Fisher College, Media

It's 2 a.m. Friday night and you've had one too many. Everyone goes home with their respective partners while you're alone in your room thinking about that toxic ex or that attractive guy/girl you've been eye-balling in your Intro to Sociology class. (In your defense, it is quite the snooze-fest in there and it's not like you need it for your major, right?)

With no one to stop you, you send an embarrassing email confessing your undying lust for this person.

In the morning, your headache will be temporary, but the email is out there for good. Fortunately, those Google whiz kids now provide an inventive new way to keep users from making this mistake weekend after weekend. Good old fashioned math problems to the rescue!

Users can activate Mail Goggles at specified times, with the default time being between 10 p.m. and 4 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. Within the Mail Goggles window, a user must answer five math questions in a limited amount of time in order to enable the "send" button. Presumably, the over-imbibed will mash their keyboards in disgust, pass out, and be thankful the next day for the self-imposed (but Google simple) barrier.

To set up Mail Goggles, go into Gmail's settings and turn on Mail Goggles in the "Labs" tab. Then adjust how and when it works in the "General" tab. Users can also determine the difficulty level of the problems.

Unfortunately for college students, sending out an email is the least of our worries. It is the dreaded text message that can really ruin your rep while out and about on the weekends.According to Urban Dictionary, these texts are oftentimes sent to someone the sender desires and involve a message that the sender would not send if sober. They are a "lame attempt at a booty call" because the person is not self-assured enough to make the actual drunk dial.

This is such an epidemic that there is a Facebook group with nearly 400,000 members in honor of the subject. The Drunken Text Appreciation Society encourages users to post their best and worst drunken texts and share ways to avoid drunk texting. The only suggestions I saw were to get a touch screen phone and to drink yourself into a stupor... both not the greatest of remedies.

This topic is so serious that it earned some airtime on CBS (perhaps it was a slow news day?) The only advice I can offer is if you find yourself being a repeat offender, turn the phone off when you get home and drink a couple bottles of water...you'll thank me in the morning.

Watch CBS Videos Online

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Blagojevich Impeached

Megan Baker — 2009-01-09T15:36:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College

The Illinois House of Representatives voted nearly unanimously (114-1 with three not voting) to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich in light of corruption charges brought against him, including the accusations of attempting to sell President-elect Barack Obama's Senate seat.

"Today is the day that we begin to give back democracy to the people of the state of Illinois," Democratic Rep. Jack Franks, a panel member, said Thursday night as he cast his vote in favor of impeachment. "I believe that Rod Blagojevich is a liar, and I believe he is a thief. He has stolen the trust of the people."

According to ABC news, "The article of impeachment now goes to the state Senate for a trial. A two-thirds vote is required there to convict Blagojevich and remove him from office. The trial will be presided over by the chief justice of the Illinois Supreme Court and could begin as early as Jan. 26."

Blagovich was arrested on December 9, but has not yet been indicted. U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald initiated the criminal complaint after listening to wiretaps of Blagojevich's phone calls. He now has until April 7 to decide whether or not to charge Blagojevich.

Aside from discussing Blagojevich's future, the committee also heard testimony from Roland Burris, the man Blagojevich appointed to the Senate seat. Burris assured the room full of lawmakers that he "had nothing to hide" and that his appointment was not tainted. Burris must now await the court's decision to determine whether or not he will be sworn in at the junior Senator from Illinois.

Blagovich is scheduled to hold a press conference at 3 p.m. today, so stay tuned.At his press conference today, Blagojevich said that the actions taken by the House was "not a surprise." He said that there have been issues with the House of Illinois since the summer of 2007 when there were difficulties creating a budget for the state.

He blamed the House for standing in his way when we has tried to pass property tax relief for his constituents since his re-election in November of 2006.

Apparently trying to sell a Senate seat doesn't matter because he tried to get legislation passed that the House did not agree to. Hopefully his lawyers that helped him "get around the legislation" will help him "find creative ways" to get out of this one.

It's amusing that he wants the House to pay more attention to the issues rather than focusing on him, maybe so he can get away with more than he already has?

Blagojevich clearly does not feel that he has done anything wrong, and that's the real problem.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Bright Hall Awards 2008

Megan Baker — 2009-01-09T14:02:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College

As we look forward to a big transition period, we thought we might have a little fun and announce some real winners (or perhaps losers) for the year of 2008. Feel free to add some categories and winners of your own in the comments section.

Most Presidential Looking: Mitt Romney The guy just screamed president. If it weren't for that whole Mormon thing, he would have been the obvious choice. Maybe he can play a president in a movie someday. If Harrison Ford can do it, Mitt Romney can do it too.

Hottest Republican...Probably Ever: Sarah Palin She gave all those Republican college kids out there hope that maybe someday it will be cool to be Conservative. Not only that, but she gave inspiration to countless college kids out there searching for the ultimate Halloween costume.

Most Unable to Take an SNL Skit: David Paterson Sarah Palin got ripped on every single week, and she took it great. Hell, she even appeared on the show during the election. Paterson on the other hand apparently can't take a joke. Maybe that's why he wants to tax the crap out of everything...he's bitter.

Worst Husband: Elliot Spitzer and John Edwards This one had to be a tie. Spitzer cheated on his wife with a high profile call girl and then America finds out Edwards was cheating on his wife with a campaign worker. Shame on you two, you should have to sleep on the couch forever.

Most Likely to be Impeached: Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich We all understand the economy is bad, but trying to sell a senate seat? Come on, now. And still naming a Senator while under investigation? That's ballsy.

Most Full of Himself: Roland Burris This man loves himself so much that he had his accomplishments etched into a mausoleum. Who does that before they even die? And even when they do die, it doesn't happen too often. And to say that God told Blagojevich to choose him was a good one too.

Best "News" Coverage: Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert If it weren't for these guys, there are a lot of college kids out there who might not have even realized that there was a presidential election going on. These two kept us entertained all the way to the cluster f*#k to the White House, God bless 'em.

Most Unwilling to Give Up: Mike Huckabee He had absolutely no shot of beating out John McCain for the Republican nomination, but he stuck it out till the end. Did it make sense? No. Was it admirable? It kinda was.

Biggest Inducer of Hope: Barack Obama Whether you think he's going to be a great president or you still think he is a terrorist, president elect Barack Obama always knew what to say to give Americans hope in these trying times. It was his message of hope and change that caught on like wildfire and catapulted him to the White House.
On Bright Hall
Presented by Joshua Sharp

2008's Most Viewed Posts: Rounding out the top three were Matt Negrin's faux Sarah Palin application for Obama's Cabinet, Megan Baker's campus reporting after the vice presidential debate, and Joshua Sharp's inside scoop on Politico's post-election conference at USC.

Most Pop Culture References: Negrin's "4 Fictitious Characters Better Than Hillary for the Cabinet" managed to place Carmen Sandiego, James Bond, Fred Thompson, and Droopy Dog in the same post. Honorable mention here goes to JJ Colao's "Obama Gets Crazy Technological."

Best Comment from a 'Girlfriend': Negrin's better half (or, an anonymous impostor) reassures a mistaken commenter.

Best Anonymous Source in a Comment: A commenter alleges that President Clinton admitted to selling WMDs to Saddam Hussein, citing someone in Chicago. The Chicago Tribune must still be investigating.

Understatement of the Year: "Could Palin make a gaffe on the national stage? It's possible." -- Sharp, after Palin's selection as McCain's VP was unveiled.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama's Not the Only 'Magic Negro'

Megan Baker — 2008-12-29T18:54:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College, Odd News

Chip Saltsman sent out a CD by conservative political satirist Paul Shanklin to Republican National Committee members as a light-hearted Christmas gift. Too bad for him, because not everyone found it very funny.

The CD, entitled We Hate The USA features a song called "Obama the Magic Negro," which is based on an op-ed piece by LA Times writer David Ehrenstein. The piece compares president-elect Obama to the likeness of the "magic negro," which is a term coined by director Spike Lee.

What is a magic negro you ask?

Wikipedia defines a magic (or magical) negro as "A supporting, often mystical stock character in fiction who, by use of special insight or powers, helps the white protaganist get out of trouble." Basically, it is a black character in a film who has gotten into trouble in the past or has something wrong with him but does all he can to enlighten the main white character of the film.

Some examples include:

Laurence Fishburne in The Matrix
Denzel Washington in The Bone Collector
Michael Clarke Duncan in The Green Mile
Morgan Freeman in...who are we kidding, any movie he stars in

While these are all movie characters, apparently this definition delves into the non-fictional realm as well. Barack Obama just so happens to be labeled as one of those people.This all kind of goes back to the "blackness" of Obama. He was ostracized for not being "black enough." As Ehrenstein wrote, "The only mud that momentarily stuck was criticism (white and black alike) concerning Obama's alleged 'inauthenticty,' as compared to such sterling examples of 'genuine' blackness as Al Sharpton and Snoop Dogg."

But with all of this magical negro talk (sorry for using the word negro, I think it's offensive and outdated, but it's the term that has been frequently used for this) it makes me wonder, what other magical categories are out there?

You obviously have your magical Asian. Everyone out there who has seen Rush Hour 1 and 2 (and I think there is a third one out there) knows that Jackie Chan is one magical Asian. Not only can he whoop some butt, but the guy is pretty funny too.

The magical red-head goes to Chuck Norris. There is no ginger out there who can take down bad guys like Chuck. Too bad that doesn't help him out with politics...maybe next time, Mike Huckabee. (By the way, only Chuck Norris can prevent forest fires, it's a fact.)

If you have any other magical figures you can think of, share it. This could become a phenomenon, people.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Shoe Thrown at Bush Coming to the U.S.

Megan Baker — 2008-12-22T12:05:00+00:00

Filed under: St. John Fisher College, Odd News

Turkish shoemaker Ramazan Baydan was shocked when he saw a pair of shoes being flung at President Bush's head. But it wasn't the act that shocked him, it was the shoe.

He has been making this style shoe for 10 years now, which before the infamous incident was named the Ducati Model 271. Since reaching fame, the shoe model has now been dubbed "The Bush Shoe" and is now in very high demand.

According to Baydan, a U.S. firm ordered 18,000 pairs and another 15,000 pairs were requested in Iraq, with several firms fighting to be the shoe company's representative in European countries.

Baydan said that he was shocked that the shoes were so aerodynamic, but weighing in at under 11 oz each, he said that the shoe probably wouldn't have done much harm to President Bush (who was apparently an excellent dodgeball player in his youth).

As Baydan prepares to send out thousands of pairs of this shoe, I thought he might consider making some moderations and turn these puppies into some super shoes.

First, 11 oz? Come on now. Those can barely hurt a fly. If these things are going to actually be effective, they need some meat on them. Maybe add a steel toe in there. It would probably help with the aim and if you don't have the time to take them off and throw them, a swift kick to the shin should do the trick.

Secondly, throw in a heat seeking sensor. There probably aren't too many world leaders out there who can dodge like Bush, but it would be a cool feature. No more embarrassing yourself on the world scene by missing your target. If you are going to have to go to jail for attacking someone, you might as well hit them, right?

Next, include a target. If you're planning on hoisting a shoe at someone, you should probably get your practice in. This guy wasn't bad for a first timer, but just think how great his aim would have been if he had practiced ahead of time?

This whole shoe throwing thing could get really big. And since we got rid of women's softball, it could possibly even be an Olympic sport.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Palin's Future In-Law Arrested

Megan Baker — 2008-12-19T16:51:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Breaking News, St. John Fisher College, Odd News

Looks like someone's baby's daddy's momma is in some serious trouble.

According to Anchorage Daily News, 42-year-old Sherry Johnston was arrested by Alaska State Troopers at her Wasilla home on Thursday, December 18 and charged with six felony counts of misconduct involving a controlled substance.

For those of you who may not remember, Levi Johnston is the father of Bristol Palin's unborn child. (According to Bristol's grandfather, the baby is due tomorrow).

Troopers served the warrant of the Johnston home at the "conclusion of an undercover narcotics investigation," according to a statement issued Thursday by the troopers as part of the normal daily summary of activity around the state.

No other information was released, including the type or amount of drugs or how long the undercover investigation had been taking place. Johnston was arrested and booked at Mat-Su Pretrial Facility around noon, and was then released on a $5,000 unsecured bond around 2 p.m.

Palin's people are remaining tight-lipped on the situation. A rep for Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, mother of Bristol, said Thursday: "This is not a state government matter. Therefore the governor's communications staff will not be providing comment or scheduling interview opportunities."

Who ever thought that it would be the 18-year-old getting ready to give birth while grandma is dealing with some dirty business? To think, we all thought Britney Spears' little sister had issues. While her in-laws may not have given the best sex talk known to man, at least they don't (or just haven't been caught) do drugs.To put things into perspective, I did what any other normal person would do: I turned to Google to find other instances of druggie grandmas.

Here were a few of my favorites:

Eleanor R. Schreiner, 65 at the time, was caught delivering less than 50 grams of cocaine and resisting and obstructing a police officer Jan. 12, 2007, at her home. Since she pleaded guilty, she was dismissed of marijuana charges and maintaining a drug house. Ironically, she had to pay a fine of $420.

Leticia Villareal-Garcia, 62 at the time, was running drugs for her son to afford her Bingo habit. (In her defense, old people really do love Bingo). She is currently serving a three-year prison sentence and was fined $150,000.

Patricia Tabram, 66 at the time, had her house raided back in September of 2005 (again). She was known for cooking baked goods laced with marijuana and giving them to neighbors. She said that the treats helped her friends deal with pain and depression. Now that's my kind of grandma.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Christmas Comes Early for Automakers

Megan Baker — 2008-12-19T15:22:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, St. John Fisher College, The Economy

President Bush announced this morning that there will be a bailout for automakers GM and Chrysler.

The money is coming from the $700 billion set aside for the Wall Street bailout, with $13.4 billion in federal loans being made available very soon. GM will be getting $9.4 billion and Chrysler will get the other $4 billion.

According to CNN, "With these loans, Treasury will have committed virtually all of the $350 billion of that fund that it can hand out without additional authorization from Congress. Once Congress releases the other $350 billion, the two automakers will be able to borrow an additional $4 billion." The other $4 billion is expected to be made available come February.

But here is the kicker: GM and Chrysler have until March 31 to prove that they are once again "viable" companies. Once that time rolls around, the Obama administration must decide whether or not the goals are being met. If they are, GM and Chrysler will continue to receive aid. If not, the money must be returned to the government and the two companies will have to file for bankruptcy.

President Bush, who believes in the free market, admitted that if this were ordinary circumstances he would have expected these automakers to embark on an "orderly bankruptcy," but due to the recession the government must step in.

"Government has a responsibility to safeguard the broader health and stability of our economy," he said. "If we were to allow the free market to take its course now, it would almost certainly lead to disorderly bankruptcy and liquidation for the automakers. In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action."The loan requires that the companies reduce their debt by two-thirds, mostly through debt-for-equity swaps, and to reach an agreement with the United Automobile Workers to "cut wages and benefits so they are competitive with those of employees of foreign-based automakers in the United States."

The UAW is happy that an agreement was reached, but feel that cutting wages is unfair.

"We will work with the Obama administration and the new Congress to ensure that these unfair conditions are removed," said UAW chieftain Ron Gettelfinger, "as we join in the coming months with all stakeholders to create a viable future for the US auto industry."

Whether you agree with the bailout or not, I leave you with this:

"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their kids pay for it." -Former Colorado Gov. Dick Lamm

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obesity Tax Proposed in New York

Megan Baker — 2008-12-16T22:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Breaking News, St. John Fisher College, The Economy

New Yorkers such as myself may have to start paying an additional 18 percent tax on sales of non-diet soft drinks if Gov. Paterson's proposed budget plan is passed.

The plan, which was released today, hopes to close next year's record $13.7 billion budget deficit mostly with $7.2 billion of spending cuts and $4.1 billion in new fees and increased taxes. While he hasn't ruled out taxing the wealthy, higher rates would "likely drive jobs and taxpayers out of the state during the recession."

Not wanting to irk the already grumpy rich (or formerly rich) suits on Wall Street, he decided to tax items such as pop, wine, beer (gasp!), gasoline, cable and satellite television and car rentals. For you college kids in New York, the taxes on wine and beer could be doubled...so stock up while you still can!

As for the tax on pop, don't worry, not only will that close the budget gap but the state is hoping that it will fight growing rates of obesity as well. Laura Anglin, the state's budget director said that all of the revenue (which is expected to be upwards of $404 million) will go towards the state's health care spending.

While other states have added sales taxes onto "non-essential foods," the tax on non-diet soda will be the first in American history to make a distinction between artificially-sweetened and sugared soft drinks. The tax will also be much higher, as none of the other states have a tax higher than 7.5 percent.

Naturally, Coke and Pepsi aren't too psyched about that.

The American Beverage Association who is representing the opinions of Coca-Cola and Pepsico argues that it is unfair to single out one food category for the rise in obesity in New York, which has a ratio of one in four people being at least overweight.

Pepsico's world headquarters are in New York State and according to a news release on the American Beverage Association website, the beverage industry provides "160,000 jobs in communities across the Empire State that pay $6.7 billion in wages and support $25 billion in economic activity."

Looks like we know where the next bailout may be heading to...

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments