Last Monday, Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts announced at Newton City Hall that he would not seek reelection in 2012. Redistricting seems to be the biggest reason for this announcement. The new voting district adds 325,000 new constituents, which would entail more campaigning and increased fundraising. However, despite the redistricting, Democrats still expect to win the seat. For Frank, the extra campaigning proved to be too much at the age of 71. That means after serving 16 terms in the House of Representatives, he will not seek a 17th.  As one of the faces of American liberalism, he left a legacy of spending and government expansion.

Frank held office for eight years in the Massachusetts State house before being elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1980.  He was one of the first openly gay representatives to serve in the House. In 1989, he faced an ethics scandal involving hiring a male prostitute as an aide as well as pardoning numerous parking tickets of that aide. He was a big part of the push for home ownership and subsidized housing especially encouraging the lax loan standards of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

In 2007, he was named chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, a committee that oversees the financial services industry. Signed by President Obama and passed into law in July of 2010, was a law initially proposed by Frank and cosponsored by then Senate Banking Committee chairman, Chris Dodd. This bill, called the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (colloquially referred to as “Dodd-Frank”), sought to protect against another financial collapse by limiting the risk banks could take.

However, this 2,300-page bill proves very costly for both the banks and consumers. This bill reduces the number of mortgages products offered and makes it more difficult for individuals to get a mortgage. Essentially, the bill drives prices up while offering fewer options. It includes the government oversight of large banks in the name of making sure they do not fail. Bank of America proves as an example of how this bill hurts rather than helps. They recently announced layoffs of 30,000 employees.

Overall, Frank is seen as a smart, passionate liberal. He had an impeccable liberal voting record and vehemently opposed the war in Iraq. On almost all accounts, he is described as indignant and a bad person to work with. His nasty personality extends to people on both sides of the aisle who disagree with his stances on issue. In his announcement to not run again, he joins 16 other Democrats and 6 Republicans in the decision to not seek reelection in the House in 2012.

Maxine Watters is expected to take over his position in the House Financial Services Committee as the ranking Democrat.  Reports include that agents contacted Frank to write a book, sign a media contract and schedule lectures. While he does not want a daily show, weekly appearances and a speaking circuit have appeal. ‘‘I’ll be honest: I will make a lot of money,’’ Frank said. ‘‘I will talk less than I used to and get paid much more for it.’’ He also plans to work on his Harvard graduate thesis.

With this announcement, one more member of the political establishment who pushed for big government retires. Hopefully, this marks a shift towards accountability of politicians.

First, this year’s students who are still jealous that they never got to see Matt Ryan run out of the tunnel in Alumni Stadium got to witness their own generational talent in Luke Kuechly. The students have seen Kuechly blossom into a likely top ten draft pick right before their eyes. Kuechly gave Eagle fans a season to remember, and improved upon one of the greatest careers an Eagle has ever had on the Heights.
Also the team’s underclassmen gained valuable experience on the field. After suffering crucial injuries to key players on both sides of the ball, including the school’s all-time leading rusher Montel Harris, the Eagles saw their inexperienced reserves fill in and play well. Max Holloway, Deuce Finch, and Manny Asprilla lead a group of underclassmen that succeeded after being thrown into the fire. This hints towards a bright future the Eagles have, as these reserves will be back next year experienced, and ready to be big contributors.
Along with the losses in player personnel, BC also lost first year offensive coordinator in Kevin Rogers early on in the season. This forced Dave Brock into action as interim coordinator while BC was already learning a new system. There is no way to tell how much this affected the team’s offense, which struggled throughout the season.
Looking at the losses Boston College had to deal with on and off the field, it’s hard to judge Coach Spaziani solely on wins and losses. Instead we should focus on how after having a bad start, the Eagles rebounded with a strong second half against much tougher competition. Spaziani was able to keep his team motivated amongst all the injuries and losses and kept them playing hard until the final minutes of the season. This is something that should not be overlooked. With him under the helm next season along with starters, now a year older, returning at all the major positions, and the possibility of Harris, Kuechly, Kaleb Ramsey and Ifeanyi Momah returning as well, the Eagles could be poised to make this season a distant memory in 2012.

This streak was a great accomplishment for the program. It was something for the school to be proud about. It displayed just how consistentBostonCollegehad been for over a decade. Despite holding its student athletes to higher standards than other big time football schools,BostonCollegewas able to field a competitive team year in and year out without having an off year. This was something only a handful of schools could boast.

However,BostonCollegeis no longer one of those schools. These are dark times for the program. It was only four seasons ago that Coach Jagodzinski and Matt Ryan lead the Eagles to an eleven-win season. Unfortunately Coach Jags was let go after that season for interviewing for the New York Jets coaching job, and since then Coach Spaziani has coached the Eagles to seasons of nine, eight, seven, and now three wins. This is not progress. The program is regressing.

This is disconcerting forBostonCollegefootball, as the team had a great chance to boost itself into the next tier of college football programs. BC had all kinds of momentum following Matt Ryan’s eleven-win season. The Eagles should have been able to use this national success to attract better recruits, and in turn slowly continue to improve the program until it could compete with perennial powers Virginia Tech andFloridaStatein the battle for ACC supremacy.

This has not happened forBostonCollege. They have seen their win total decline every season since they recorded double digit wins in both 2006 and 2007, the first seasons the Eagles had reached double-digit wins since Doug Flutie was on campus. Those seasons unfortunately seem to have been the peak of the Eagles recent success. For eight consecutive years the Eagles consistently racked up seven or eight wins a season. Then in 2006, thanks in large part to great coaching and sound quarterback play; BC reached an uncharted level of success.

Flash-forward to today, andBostonCollegeis lacking in both categories. They have been playing musical quarterbacks since Ryan left, using four starters, Chris Crane, Dominique Davis, Dave Shinskie, and Chase Rettig, in four seasons. Along with the question mark in the backfield, the Eagles also have a question mark on the sidelines. Coach Spaziani appears to have squandered the golden opportunity of an eleven-win team that fell into his lap. He has mismanaged talent, and his conservative style has all but undone the confident aura that Ryan and Jagodzinski brought to the Heights mid-way through the decade.

Looking back, it’s hard to imagine that the Eagles achieved a #2 ranking only four seasons ago. Since then the Eagle’s have not given Alumni Stadium much to cheer about, with the loss of the bowl streak being the latest heartache. But although it is gone, Boston College’s bowl streak was an outstanding display of the school’s strength and consistency, and is something that Eagle’s fans can look back on to cheer themselves up during these depressing times around campus.

There is a certain etiquette that the major holidays of the fall season follow.  First, Halloween has sole possession over October.  Television channels start airing horror movies, children carve pumpkins, and the haunted hayrides begin operating.  Following suit, Thanksgiving has complete reign over the month of November.  After the sugar overload on Halloween night, we start to look forward to the hearty Thanksgiving meal of turkey, mashed potatoes, and stuffing.  And then immediately following Thanksgiving, Black Friday marks the beginning of the Christmas season.  This is the tradition that retailers are trying to unhinge.

Is this fair to Thanksgiving?  No.  Is this fair to the poor viewers who have to watch the same commercial campaigns for two consecutive months?  No.  Since retailers are already pushing the holiday season upon us, you would think that these commercial campaigns would be funny and entertaining.  Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of Christmas commercials are clichéd.  The corny jokes and overused carols become grinding and painful to listen to by the time December eventually begins.  Strangely, it seems that this style of commercial is what retailers are often aiming for.  There is no way the geniuses behind the Kay Jewelers Christmas commercials that always feature the husband surprising his wife with an expensive piece of jewelry near the Christmas tree believe the commercial is truly romantic.  They try to make the commercial as trite as possible so people will remember it.  And it works, but at every viewer’s expense.

I think this lengthening of the Christmas season speaks to the increased materialism in this country.  People are becoming more obsessed with the newest gadget and fad that they are getting coerced into the temptations that these retailers are offering through their overbearing ad campaigns.  Even though the retailers are using obnoxious methods to attract attention from customers, it must be proving effective for them to continue each year.

I hope people don’t lose sight of what is truly important during the holiday season.  Thanksgiving and Christmas are times to appreciate family and friends.  They are also times that stress the virtues of sharing, giving, and caring in regards to others. It would be very disappointing if Thanksgiving loses importance because of the growing materialism of Christmas.  I am all for Christmas decorations and caroling, but just make sure it starts after the last Thursday in November.

Jessica Rinaldi

Although much of the media still presents Mitt Romney as the most likely Republican Presidential nominee, that outcome remains uncertain.  At nearly every single debate, Romney’s flaw of flip-flops consistently reappears.

For example, last Wednesday, when Republicans met for a debate in Michigan, the usual Romney flip-flop issue resurfaced when the moderator contrasted his previous support for the auto-bailouts to his current opposition to them. Considering that this occurred only a few years ago and that the entire Republican Congress was united in their support for sending GM and Chrysler to bankruptcy court, it was discomforting to see that he broke with the party in order to say what was more popular at the time.

As one of the top candidates seeking to take the Presidency away from such a heavily ideological President during very bad times, Romney is the strangest of all the candidates.  While several others have offered flat income tax proposals, not only has Romney not offered one, but he has actually suggested changing a currently flat capital gains tax into a progressive one.  Since when do Republicans create progressive taxation?  Whenever he is asked about this, he always says that he wants to help the middle class.  The problem with this response is that we currently have a President who thinks along the same lines of social class division and divides Americans by income.  The President of the United States should not only serve the middle class, but all social classes.

Everything Romney says sounds like it comes right out of a machine maximizing public opinion.  If Trump had not momentarily surged, I doubt Romney would have went after China for currency manipulation in his economic plan.  And on the merits of the issue, why can’t the Chinese manipulate their currency when we do the very same thing through easy money and quantitative easing?

It will be very interesting to see if Romney’s endorsements from Republican governors excite Republican primary voters.  Normally, those endorsements would help, but these are not normal times.  It is possible that Republican primary voters will read those endorsements to mean that Mitt Romney is just another big-spending establishment Republican who does not represent anything new.

If Romney wins the nomination, it will also be very interesting to see if his thin ideological soup pleases independents or bores them.  The Democratic National Committee is already fully equipped with online videos and newspaper ads showing Mitt Romney’s flip-flops.  If voters do not see any significant difference between Romney and Obama, he could end up as the Republican version of John Kerry in 2004.

As Charles Krauthammer wrote in his latest column, the last year has been very hard to classify politically.  Republicans gained seats in Congress last November, both won and lost special elections in New York, lost the issue of union reform in Ohio, and gained less seats than expected in Virginia.

As many debates are planned for the next two months, it would be good to think about who could most convincingly contrast Obama’s radical liberalism not just with what the voters want to hear, but with a coherent intellectual message for the future.  That candidate will be the one who wins.

When not fighting allegations or releasing ridiculous ads, pizza magnate and presidential candidate Herman Cain has proposed his “bold” 9-9-9 plan; not be confused with Domino’s 5-5-5 deal for three medium pies at five dollars each. Cain essentially combines two good things—the flat tax and the fair tax—into one rather bad thing. 9-9-9 would replace the current federal tax code (which needs replacing) with a 9% tax on personal income, a 9% tax on corporate income, and a 9% national sales tax. The last part—the national sales tax—takes its inspiration from the fair tax. Introduced in Congress in 1999, the fair tax would eliminated the current tax code with a national sales tax and make the promise to repeal the 16^th amendment in the future. That last part is important; the 16^th amendment gives the federal government the power to tax income. Without its repeal, the fair tax could end up being added to future income taxes, essentially becoming a sales tax on top of the something not unlike the current tax code. Of course, 9-9-9 makes no promise to attempt to repeal the 16^th amendment and politicians may not keep rates a 9% forever. There are other problems with 9-9-9 as well, so Republican primary voters would be wise to look elsewhere.

Two GOP candidates have proposed similar, superior plans to oppose Cain’s 9-9-9 plan. Unfortunately, one of those two candidates is Rick Perry. Both Perry and Newt Gingrich have proposed moving to an optional flat tax. A purer version of the flat tax would completely throw out the current tax code in favor of a tax form that could fit on a postcard. All that would be required of taxpayers is their income, family size, and little else. Unlike this type of flat tax, these optional plans give taxpayers the choice to pay via the old code or the new flat one. The main difference between Perry’s plan and Gingrich’s plan is that Gingrich would set the flat rate at 15% (12.5 for corporate income) while Perry would set it at 20%. While these plans fall short of what a “true” flat tax would accomplish, they are certainly steps in the right direction. The low tax rate would leave people with less of a burden and more cash in their pockets while the flat rate wouldn’t punish success. Also, both plans eliminate the death tax and capital gains tax. However, deductions and loopholes would still remain, there would just be less of them. In addition, the specifics of how one would choose between the optional flat tax or the current tax code are not disclosed by Perry or Gingrich. In seems we will have to wait until either of them take office to find out, which—in Perry’s case at least—should happen sometime after the Cubs win the World Series and before the Arrested Development movie comes out. Given Gingrich’s ascent in the polls in the light of possibly fatal developments to the Cain and Perry campaigns, his plan may very well become reality. Those seeking a simpler and fairer tax code can see this as a victory, if just a small one.

Now, take the Penn State sex abuse scandal. Last week, State College, Pennsylvania was rocked by the news surfaced about sexual abuse. Former assistant coach of Penn State and heir apparent to long time head coach Joe Paterno’s throne, Jerry Sandsuky, was arrested for alleged molestation and sexual abuse. The Grand Jury report tells of eight separate victims, each of them boys when allegedly sexually abused by Sandusky. These boys were part of The Second Mile, a charity founded in the late 1970s by Sandusky to help at risk boys in the State College area. He treated the boys, who ranged from 7 to 12 in age at the time, to Penn State football games and gave them numerous gifts.  In an attempt to help the situation, the Penn State Board of Trustees dismissed President Graham Spanier and Joe Paterno. Until he was fired a game short of the completion of his 62^nd season, Paterno was synonymous with Penn State football. While we do not know exactly what part either of these two played in the abuse, it seems like a rash act. Some students protested against this decision, and many other fans showed verbal support for the longtime coach throughout the week and into the weekend. However, almost undoubtedly if Paterno or the President had contacted authorities at the time back in 1998 and 2002, neither one would be in the mess they are in at the moment. If Sandusky had been turned in a decade ago like he should have been, the name of Penn State football would not be at the terrible state it is now.

The prevailing moral maxim to come out of these actions is that the cover up always makes the crime worse for everyone involved. The lie automatically makes the crime exponentially worse, especially when it is exposed. When parents discipline their children, they instill into them that if they tell the truth and they will be given a lesser punishment, but if they lie, then the punishment will be much worse. There is much truth in this simple teaching. Such a basic concept is often forgotten when people get older, the offenses get worse and the stakes get higher. In this case, the victims cannot be forgotten. If no one brings to light heinous acts likes these, how can the victims be helped? The victims were boys at the time and now are men. Think of the suffering borne during the formative years of their lives and the damage carried over into adulthood. Because no one reported Sandusky’s crimes, the victims could not get the help they needed. That’s what must be taken out of this terrible situation, i.e. not reporting the crime hurts everyone involved. Penn State football and the administration let everyone down in failing to surface these crimes as soon as they knew, and the cover up makes them look worse, but most importantly the victims must suffer even longer. Unfortunately, crimes like this will happen. However, those who know of them must report them immediately for the sake of the victims.

In a clear effort to pander to young voters who may have become disillusioned with Obama’s failures, Obama announced reasons why student loan debt is a priority for him.  However, the initiatives have consequences that may in fact harm some borrowers rather than help them.

Student loan debt eclipsed credit card debt for the first time last year, and is now the number one source of household debt.  The initiatives aimed at reducing the debt included Limiting student loan payments to 10% of a graduate’s income (down from 15%), forgiving outstanding debt after 20 years (instead of 25), and allowing students to consolidate loans in order to cut interest rates. The plan essentially seems to lower monthly payments and get loans forgiven faster – both great changes at first blush.

Obama’s plan, however, is not going to help all with loans.

The Wall Street Journal exposed that many students will not reap large savings from the changes and some will not qualify for the initiatives at all.  Some borrowers will actually end up paying more in interest rates over the life of their loans.

To qualify for the new loan structure, students must take out a loan in 2012, and not have any loans prior to 2008.  Those who do qualify can reduce their monthly payment on existing loans as well as future ones.

The savings under the new program can be big on a month-to-month basis, and will fluctuate based on one’s salary and will never exceed a standard payment. However, the lower monthly payment requirements draw out payments beyond the typical 10-year schedule, increasing the amount of interest one would pay over the course of their loan.  Therefore, the amount borrowers end up paying under the plan may actually increase!

18.2 million undergrads enrolled in college last year, and 6.8 million of those used student loans to help defray the cost.

The White House has estimated that Obama’s initiative will benefit only 1.6 million of those borrowers.

While helping those 1.6 million people is commendable, the public should be aware that Obama is not the student loan savior he has made himself out to be.

He mentioned to a crowd gathered in Denver that he and the First Lady graduated with a combined $120,000 in student loans, which clearly makes people identify with him and believe he sympathizes with his cause.

But the potential drawbacks to his plan were conspicuously absent from his cliché speech.

In a time when unemployment numbers for recent college graduates are higher than ever before, overall economic growth won’t be achieved by increasing debt or loan payments for any borrowers.

The three month long slumber party we call Occupy Wall Street is, in many cities, in direct violation of city ordinances. There are more and more concerns now that these encampments are rife with illegal drug use and thievery.  With these protests entering their third month, and winter on its way, it seems as if the movement is not destined to continue much longer. To this I say, good riddance. This is a movement that has done very little with its national spotlight, marred by a lack of coordination and an absence of group unity.

Occupy Wall Street, in its early weeks, benefited from a tremendous media bias, allowing it to gain a favorable following, even through bouts of protester violence, arrests, and most recently, murder in the encampments. Why has Occupy Wall Street not been forced to jump the same media hurdles that were thrown in front of the previous grassroots movement: the Tea Party? When comparing the Tea Party’s coverage in mainstream media during its early days with OWS, the differences are night and day. The media tried its hardest to label the Tea Party as a racist, close-minded group, despite its country-wide appeal. Even with this obstacle, the Tea Party was able to get its leaders into office in 2010 and enact serious discussion and change at the top level. Unlike the Tea Party’s platform on smaller government, outlined with clear policy demands – lower taxes and lower government spending –Occupy Wall Street, as a collective group, has yet to formulate any coherent policy recommendations, opting instead for a list of broad demands.

Unemployed college-aged kids, nomads, and homeless vagrants camp out in parks across our country, with stories just now coming to light about violence and sometimes fatal drug use, not to mention the arrests, which have become a bit of a daily occurence. At their inception as a movement there were many videos posted to youtube of Occupiers making racist and anti-Semitic remarks to interviewers, yet where were the media generalizations? As the recent shock stories pile up like urine bottles in an Occupy Wall Street camp, it is clear that this media-favoritism has been squandered by OWS.

Dead man found at Occupy Salt Lake, TB in Occupy Atlanta, suicide at Occupy Vermont, rape at Occupy Philly, and murder at Occupy Oakland; these headlines speak for themselves. Occupy Wall Street has run its course as a movement, and seems to have degenerated further into lawlessness. In the interest of safety, law, and public health, these campers should be cleared out sooner rather than later.

Now what?

Gaddafi’s death takes away the unifying force for the rebels. This lack of a unified vision could cause a power struggle, which then in turn could easily lead to a civil war. The Middle East is not known for their democratic elections, although the Arab Spring might turn that notion around. Either way, it is imperative that the National Transition Council (the interim Libyan government formed in late February of 2011, often referred to as the NTC) ensure that democratic elections are established in Libya. If this fails to happen, another tyrant could rise to power just as Gaddafi did back in 1969.

What role should the U.S. play from this point forward? Is our work finished or should we make sure a democratic government be established?

There are two sides to this argument. One side posits that because we have the best military and most resources in the world, we have a duty to be the world’s policeman. In others words, we have an obligation as the leader of the free world to make sure anyone who wants to live in a democratic society free of unjust treatment has the ability to do so. The reason for this is not only a sense of moral duty, but also that it is in the best interest of our country (both in terms of national security and the economy) to make sure that democratic governments based on free-market principles are established throughout the world.  The other side to the argument is that a collective body of people (in this case a country) cannot have a moral obligation. Each person within that body certainly can, but not the group itself. In other words, the U.S. as a whole does not have an obligation to rid the world of all its injustices. Even if one were to determine that a country has this type of duty,

it would not be physically possible to simultaneously rid the whole world of suffering and oppression. One has to remember that U.S. taxpayer dollars fund our military’s actions around the globe. Are U.S. citizens willing to pay for the liberation of other countries? Is it acceptable for our politicians to use our tax money in that way? To that extent, how does a country then go about picking and choosing which countries to intervene in? And how susceptible would this decision process be to petty politics?

The U.S. cannot go about the world, fighting war after war, trying to make sure everyone is free. While we do have the best military in the world, it does not follow that we then have to constantly use it for the benefit of other countries. The United States’ armed forces should only intervene when there is a direct threat to our national security.

In their quest to free consumers from the constraints of ‘big agribusiness’, food mile activists have demanded locally grown produce be given preference over imported food in American markets. Not only does this proposition go against the principles of free trade, but it has large detrimental effects on poor farmers in developing southern countries, and, despite what these ‘food mile’ activists will have you believe, on the environment and humanity as a whole.

The immediate losers to this food fad are the farmers in the countries from which we import much of our food from. The reason we import from these countries is simple: their prices are much lower, due in part to the fact that their environment is more suited to cultivate the crops, meaning they can grow more than our local farmers with much more fuel efficiency. Even when the transportation via land or sea is factored in, this produce still has a lower carbon footprint than most locally grown food (air and sea transport account for less than 1% of a food’s greenhouse gas emissions).

Another, perhaps deeper, flaw with the concept of only buying locally grown food is its impact on global hunger. As of last Sunday night, the symbolic 7 billionth human was born on this planet, and the United Nations and the U.S. both predict that we will see a total world population of over 9 billion before the year 2050. As our numbers continue to grow at such a fast pace, we need to be constantly increasing the efficiency with which we use the finite amount of arable land in order to provide for Earth’s increasing number of inhabitants. By encouraging citizens to go out of their way to only consume locally produced goods for whatever reason, these activists are demanding that American consumers and governments buy food not produced as efficiently as its faraway competitors. The end result is the demonization of food that is produced cheaply and efficiently in other, often poorer, areas of the world.

We should not be fighting the globalization of food, especially under the guise of eco-friendliness. There are many acceptable reasons for eating locally grown food, freshness and quality being a few, but please let’s not make this choice anything more than that. To do so is to propagate faulty logic and ill-informed choices.

The phrase “education reform” is often used by both conservatives and liberals.  When conservatives mention it, they speak about charter schools and voucher programs.  When liberals mention it, they speak about spending and class room sizes.  Both approaches do not do anything to improve the quality of education.

The conservative approach just makes the alternatives to public schooling slightly less expensive by giving parents $3,000 or $5,000 to send their children where they like.  It does not do anything to help children who attend public schools.  Similarly, the liberals’ approach of spending more on schools and hiring more teachers to reduce the size of classrooms secures fat pensions for teachers and enlarges the teachers union.  This too, does not do anything to help the children sitting in classrooms.

My idea for education would be the following: (a) abolish middle school; (b) abolish art, music, gym, health and sex classes; (c) increase the rigor of the math, reading and writing curriculum; (d) impose a dress code for both students and teachers; and (e) transition teachers to performance-based pay and defined-contribution pension plans.

By the end of high school, students will have spent 12 years on relatively useless schooling.  They graduate knowing less than they should with a degree that is meaningless.  It should not take 12 years to learn how to read, write and do arithmetic.

How many interviewers do you think ask college graduates what middle schools or high schools they attended?  None.  Since it is the education after k-12 which matters the most, the government should get out of individual’s lives as much as possible by abolishing middle school, which is mostly a repetition of elementary school, to save everyone three years.

Students now spend a minimum of 4 years receiving a college education, plus additional years studying a specialized field.  With law school, that is an additional 7 years after high school.  As our economy grows increasingly sophisticated and knowledge-based, the amount of time young people spend towards schooling will likely increase.  A highly educated population is certainly good, but it has its drawbacks.  Additional debt, for example, and more interestingly, undesirably changed social interactions.

With so much time devoted towards schooling, it is harder for men and women to realize when their lives will grow and develop to include a stable career and family.  As a result, the period of adolescence has been greatly extended.  Young women have forgotten to look for husbands, and young men have forgotten to look for wives.  By eliminating middle school (three years of education), the period of adolescence will shorten, freeing young men to pursue higher studies and develop careers at a younger age.  As men will then have careers at a younger age, they will be earlier prepared for marriage, and consequentially hold young women to higher standards of character and morality.

In addition to reducing the amount of time children spend in relatively insignificant k-12 education, I also suggest better utilizing the time they do spend in school by increasing the rigor of the curriculum.  Art, music, gym, health and sex-education classes could all be eliminated to ensure that students focus on the three R’s known as reading, writing and arithmetic.  All students should know script by the second grade (as opposed to the fifth) and should have learned algebra and geometry by the fifth as well.

In order to remove bad teachers from the classroom, a state governor should do what he could through the legislative process to get performance based pay and defined-contribution pension plans for teachers.  Additionally, a governor could offer teachers who voluntarily leave the union a higher salary, in exchange for a contribution defined-pension plan.  It is better to have a half-unionized workforce than a fully unionized one.

Such an educational system would teach its students what they need to know in the least amount of time.

The sports world has been in a state of chaos recently.  With the football and basketball lockouts happening within the same year, it’s been a frightening twelve months for devoted sports fans.  Throughout this time of turmoil, baseball has been every fan’s constant.  It’s the backbone of the country, and nothing makes this more apparent then when the sports world is upended and baseball remains close to everyone’s heart.

Baseball has become part of the tradition in the United States.  It’s associated with the country just as closely as apple pie. Baseball has been played since the late 1800’s and has only gained momentum and popularity through the decades.  There have been timeless heroes born out of the baseball tradition, including Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, and Nolan Ryan.  These are men that have transcended the diamond and have become part of American lore and history.

Many argue that American football has stepped into the limelight of popularity in the sports world, and for good reason.  Football Sundays have become a tradition in this country, just as baseball has always been.  The fast-paced, hard-hitting play keeps the audience interested.  In an age when people are always on the move and attention spans seem to have dwindled, football’s game play matches society’s quickened pace.  But despite the growing popularity of football, baseball reminds fans of a simpler time that was slower-paced and the word “multi-tasking” wasn’t in one’s vocabulary.

The peoples’ dedication to baseball is evident with the attendance of the many games throughout the season.  The baseball season is very long, yet many ballparks sell out their stadiums nearly every game of the season.  For instance, Fenway Park has sold out 700 straight games.  Obviously Boston is one of the most popular baseball markets in the country, but that momentous a streak is impressive nonetheless.  There is something special about going to the ballpark to watch a game, and people understand that.

Most importantly, baseball games are more attainable to the public.  There are so many games in the season that it is much easier to attend one of these games.  Since football only has sixteen games per season, it’s more expensive and more difficult to nab a ticket.  I think attending a game is the impetus that creates a true fan.  If one attends a game, he feels more connected to the team and to the sport.

When one sees his favorite player or team, in person, a passion for the sport is born that is hard to erase.  Since baseball offers a greater chance of seeing a game in person, more people have developed that personal connection to the game, which is why it remains our favorite pastime.

Baseball and football are very different games, and both offer fans great reasons to root passionately for their teams.  While football is faster and more action-packed, baseball is slower, more methodical, and more calculated.

However, the tradition of baseball is too deeply rooted in our country for it to ever be passed in importance by football.  Baseball has become embedded in all aspects of society, including movies, music, and literature.  People will always love baseball and they will always yearn for those late, brisk October nights when teams and players make history on the diamond.

What I believe to be clear is that the original decision to invade Iraq was a mistake. It is unfair to classify those in the Bush administration as heartless warmongers on the hunt for oil. They—in all likelihood—truly believed that disposing of Saddam Hussein would make the world a safer place and give democracy a foothold in the Middle East. But much like Keynesian economics, Wilsonian foreign policy is a road to hell paved with good intentions. In invading Iraq, the Bush White House forgot the oldest rule in the book when it comes to international relations: the balance of power. The stalemated Iran-Iraq War of the 1980’s demonstrated that whatever Baghdad’s expansionist tendencies were, they would be checked by the power of Iran and vice versa. With Iraq now effectively out of the picture as a military power, Iran, a country with a nuclear program more advanced than 2003’s Iraq and a population more than twice that of Iraq with little of the sectarianism, can express greaterinfluence in the region.

This brings us to the current dilemma. Should the United States have continued to lose both capital (over $800 billion thus far) and human lives (4,480 U.S. troops killed and over 32,000 wounded) in order to check the power of Iran? It is apparent that Iraq’s fledging democracy will have difficulties doing this alone, not to mention providing for the country’s internal security. However, the threat of Iran may be overblown. Iranian tanks won’t likely be rolling over the border the day the last American troop leaves Iraq. The same goes for Iran’s position with regard to Israel. Yes, Iran now has a nuclear program and yes, the Iranian president has said he wants Israel wiped of the face of the Earth. Nevertheless, any sudden act of aggression by Tehran will be suicidal, given America’s vast military superiority. There isn’t any real need to keep an infantry force in Iraq just in case the leadership of Iran looses the instinct of self-preservation.

The question over the withdrawal from Iraq concerns more than just Iranian expansionism, however. Iraq is a young, unstable democracy that is prone to sectarian violence. One could make the argument that the U.S. must continue to protect Iraq from internal threats. However, there comes a point when enough is enough. American taxpayers and soldiers should not be expected to pay for the defense of a foreign state indefinitely. Indeed, even the Iraqis supported the withdrawal, rejecting offers by Washington to keep several thousand American troops in the country to train Iraqi forces.

While the Obama administration has made mistakes in everything from Afghanistan to Libya to the economy, it seems to have made the right choice here. We can now say the Iraq War is over, let’s just hope that it stays that way.

However, those times are over. Sports like lacrosse now poach potential participants from baseball, weakening its popularity. Playing Little League Baseball is no longer a right of passage for a young man, and increasing numbers of kids are growing up without ever swinging a bat. So, with the sport on a gradual decline in esteem among sports fans, it is time for baseball to finally pass on the title of America’s pastime.

Baseball should gracefully relinquish the honor and give it to football. The high scoring, hard-hitting game of football is more conducive to the nature of today’s Americans than the methodical game of baseball. People today are impatient and constantly looking for action, rendering them poor matches for slow-paced baseball games.

Football is capitalizing on this change in the American mindset, and reaping the benefits. In fact, regular season football contests are drawing more viewers than the pinnacle of the baseball season: the World Series. This fact alone points to a need for baseball to pass on its title.

The balance of power in the National Football League gives it another advantage over Major League Baseball. In the MLB, there are a handful of large market teams that are competitive every year because they take in more revenue than the teams in less populated areas. This enables the large market teams to compose better rosters than the rest of the league year after year.

Contrast this with the NFL, where a salary cap insures that every team spends the same amount of money on players. Due to this restriction the NFL has great parody. Any team can win any game, and aside from a few exceptions, most of the teams are of equal caliber. Before any season, there are a great number of teams with a realistic shot of competing for the Super Bowl, compared with only a handful in the MLB with a realistic shot at reaching the World Series. This equal playing field is something that appeals to Americans, and keeps football fans passionate about the sport and their favorite team.

Football fan’s passion is fueled further by the emergence of fantasy football. Everybody and their mother, literally, has a fantasy football team. This simple game, which parallels the NFL regular season, preoccupies countless numbers of football fans every Sunday during the fall and winter. This game not only draws new fans into the sport and away from sports like baseball, but also increases the amount of attention existing fans pay to football, as they now are interested in more games than just the one their favorite team is playing in.

Fantasy football is a complement to the sport’s popularity, strengthening football’s hold on its fans, but it is not its source.  Football’s acclaim can be attributed to one reason; the sport simply mirrors the culture in today’s America better than baseball does. Times are different, and pitch-outs and extra-base hits have been replaced by touchdown passes and quarterback sacks. With baseball slowly fading away, it’s time for fathers and sons to put down the rawhide, pick up the pigskin, and engage in America’s new pastime.

The now dead Jobs Act is a combination of political maneuvering and misguided economic policy. Given the Republicans’ majority in the House and the Democrats’ slim majority (53-47) in the Senate, the bill was doomed from the start. However, this didn’t stop President Obama from announcing the bill with a nationally televised speech to Congress, followed by a media blitz urging its immediate passage. With the bill’s unsurprising defeat, Obama now has something more to backup his claim that the Republicans are the party of “no”, just in time for 2012.

The Jobs Act itself is a product of the well meaning but ultimately fruitless Keynesian economic thinking that has characterized the Obama presidency. The spending measures in the bill would have been funded by a 5.6% surtax on incomes over $1 million. This would put an increased burden on the businesses that hire workers in the first place. To quote Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell “Four out of five of these so-called millionaires are small businesses”. In Obama’s vision, the job of creating jobs belongs not with profit-minded businesses that hire more workers once profits increase, but with an increasingly Kafkaesque bureaucracy.

With this in mind, the bill is characterized by measures that sound good but have little logical coherence. For instance, the Jobs Act would give temporary payroll tax cuts to businesses that hire more workers. I like tax cuts as much the next person, but it is unwise to expect businesses to make long-term hires on the basis on short-term tax breaks whose life expectancy remains unknown. The business world is a foggy one, so the best the government can do is reduce the fog as much as it can. That means keeping tax laws and regulations stable, simple, and not arbitrary. This bill, of course, is nothing but arbitrary and irrational. The Jobs Act, in an effort to curb long-term unemployment, would prohibit businesses from requiring that all job applicants to currently have a job. However, businesses are still allowed to inquire into an applicant’s employment history, in essence negating the original regulation. Then why have it in the first place? Moreover, the bill would increase long-term unemployment benefits, giving the unemployed less motivation to find work while heavily taxed business are given fewer reasons to hire them.

Seeing as the American Jobs Act failed to pass—and never really had a chance to, one could say it is a waste of time to scrutinize it. However, the bill is a valuable insight into how the Obama White House sees the road to economic recovery. When lower taxes, a simpler tax code and rational regulations that keep options for employers and workers open are needed to lower unemployment, the administration proposes the opposite. This is not the road to prosperity. There is at least one somewhat bright spot, however. The Jobs Act would have expanded payroll tax cuts, reducing the amount paid by employees for their first $106,800 earned from 6.2% to 3.1%. I can’t say I oppose that, though I pessimistically doubt that it signals a fundamental change in the president’s economic thinking.

For the second straight election, the Republicans have failed to produce a definite favorite for their nomination. Cain, previously unknown to most members of the GOP before this year, is taking advantage of this failure and using his unique credentials to make headway in the Republican Party.

Cain is an intriguing candidate. Since his graduation from Morehouse College in 1967, he has gone on to hold a diverse range of positions at nationally known and respected organizations. His resume includes stops at the U.S. Department of the Navy, the Kansas City Federal Reserve, Coca-Cola, Pillsbury, Burger King, and Godfather’s Pizza. He currently hosts The Herman Cain Show, a syndicated talk radio show based out of Atlanta.

While Cain’s views on most issues are unknown, analyzing his occupational history introduces some uncharacteristic strengths for his candidacy. Cain has a strong background in business and economics. He has not only worked for, but also assumed major leadership positions in several different corporations during his life. As a result he is connected more with the business world than the political world. In a time when our economy is struggling and we are desperate for job creation, Cain’s prowess in industry gives him a unique perspective other candidates do not possess when dealing with these important issues.

Cain’s business experience leads to another one of his strengths, his leadership skills. Cain has been in charge of large numbers of people in various industries. He knows how to delegate and manage all different kinds of people. These traits will serve him well in gaining voters’ confidence in his prospects for success.

Cain has also energized voters who are looking for a candidate that represents them. He is a refreshing change of pace from the professional politicians that voters are used to choosing from. His background away from politics makes him relatable to viewers, who feel he understands what they need because he is out working in the business world with them.

As of right now, there is not much to hold against Cain. Ironically, this is because of the biggest hole in his resume. Cain has never held high political office. As a result, his stances on key issues are unknown and he has not done anything politically in the past that voters can use against him. This is a cause for concern, as there is no indication of how Cain will handle the pressures and responsibilities of the presidency.

But this could also be viewed as a positive for Cain, as he is not a career politician who is running to play the political game. Instead he is a businessman throwing his name in the ring to attempt to fix the country in which he works. His motives bring a fresh perspective to the presidency. In a time where voters are still waiting for the change they were promised in 2008, Cain may be just what this country is looking for.

Che Guevara was instrumental in the Cuban Revolution of the 1950s and the driving force in Fidel Castro’s rise to power. The revolution did overthrow a bad government, but it was replaced with a regime of censorship void of personal rights and freedoms. Castro appointed Che the head of La Cabaña prison, where people were imprisoned for disagreeing with the regime, for being homosexual, listening to rock and jazz music, or even for acting too effeminately. There he served as judge, jury and sometimes even the executioner. Known for swift trials, he led the firing squads and was said to have killed several hundred people himself. His brutal conduct and reputation earned him the nickname “the Butcher of La Cabaña”. He ordered his comrades to err on the side of execution if someone’s loyalty came into question. The government was a Stalinist like police state; it killed thousands of people and imprisoned more people per capita than Stalinist Russia. On top of all of this, Che was also a racist. An excerpt here from Guevara’s memoir, The Motorcycle Diaries displays his racism, “the black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspirations.” The quote dispels myths the he was a champion of human rights.

Many young people who wear shirts with Che’s image are just the type of people he would have imprisoned, namely those with long hair and who listen to rock music. Most of these people have little idea of who he really was. Che did not allow the youth to question the regime and thought they should think and act as one mass. Sound like 1984 anyone? We have to remember that Guevara was a close associate of Fidel Castro, the dictator of communist Cuba that many people still try and flee from. Today, people see Che as a symbol liberty and individual rights, but these are the exact ideals that he wanted to abolish; he wanted to get rid of the notion of the individual. Ironically, the face of a communist revolutionary is milked for cash to sell t-shirts in capitalist societies. The idolized conception of Che thrives on the lack of people’s historical understanding. So next time you see someone with a Che Guevara image, remember the truth that this man was not a champion of freedom and individual rights, but a cold blooded communist killer.

Kaylin Walker/The Observer

Celebrate Responsibly

From the beginning of this school year, this exaggerated term has explained the police overreaction to students’ off campus parties, issuing court summons to entire houses of students and placing other houses on a ‘black list’, which seems to work like party purgatory, promising harsh penalties if the house is caught having a party. This all seems incredibly excessive, the court summons especially, due to the fact that BC also becomes involved in the disciplinary process, dishing out university probations and mandatory community service hours like candy on Halloween. Between Steve Montgomery, BCPD, and Boston Police, there is no shortage of law enforcement available to keep off campus houses quieter than Bapst during finals week.

The humor I find behind this whole situation are the BC emails we all recieve that proceed and follow this one sent from the Boston Police. Emails asking “what’s your night lookin’ like?”, detailing planned events on campus that mean to be an alternative to drinking, off or on campus. Between cupcake decorating, laser tagging, and pumpkin carving, it is easy to see how the few off campus parties that do go on get mobbed by hordes of underclassmen just looking for a good time. Boston College needs to accept partial responsibility for the ‘havoc’ that apparently is unleashed on the weekends here in quiet Brighton. By failing to provide students with fun activities on campus they are all but insuring a rowdier off campus scene. The juniors who host gatherings off campus are often the victims of this scenario; a small party could quickly escalate if the door is not effectively managed, as these students head off campus. Currently BC is quick to punish these gracious hosts, yet fails to understand or combat the ineffective policies that lead to loud weekends in the Brighton neighborhoods.

Unfortunately for former Red Sox manager Terry “Tito” Francona, baseball is a business.  When the business falters and underperforms, the head executives look for the reason.  Whether deserving or not, the failure of the Red Sox this past season was pinned on Francona.  The Red Sox and Francona parted and went their separate ways just days after the last game of the season.

Francona began his tenure with the Red Sox in 2004 and he led the team to its first World Series Championship since 1918.  Francona matched this goal again in 2007.  He helped rejuvenate baseball success in Boston and seemed to hold the key to changing the city’s luck.

Because of Francona’s impressive success in his time in Boston, it is hard to understand why the Red Sox management turned against the manager after this disappointing season.  It seems clear that the Red Sox front office was under heat for the collapse and needed to make a drastic move to silence some of the critics.  Apparently they decided to turn Tito into a scapegoat.

In many sports, the manager or coach’s decision-making is vital to the team’s success.  Football coaches are responsible for analyzing opponents’ game film, developing a sound strategy, and calling the correct plays during the game to bring the team to victory.  Basketball is similar in this sense too.

Baseball differs in this way.  Baseball managers can prepare lineups and pitching rotations to best prepare their players for a game, but baseball is as much an individual sport as a team sport.  If the pitchers don’t perform well and the players don’t hit, there isn’t much chance of winning the ballgame.  For this reason alone, it’s hard to pin the collapse on Terry Francona.

Francona proved his value to the team over the past eight seasons by winning the World Series a fourth of the time.  I think Red Sox management targeted the wrong person by parting ways with Francona.  Perhaps the players themselves should be taking more responsibility for their performance.  The Red Sox have one of the highest payrolls in the league and have a talented group of players.  The lack of victories in September should never have occurred.

With Francona gone, there will be a great adjustment period for Red Sox players and fans next season. Maybe a change of pace will be good for the team, but one thing is certain: If the players themselves don’t step up their game, the Red Sox will continue to be unsuccessful, no matter who’s at the helm.

The government does not have any compelling interest in regulating fuel mileage standards.  If consumers want fuel-efficient vehicles, they will speak with their wallets by purchasing them, and carmakers will respond by producing more in order to maximize profits.  The inability of government to successfully represent consumers’ preferences was best captured by an exchange last week when the CEO of Edmunds.com, Jeremy Anwyl, had to explain to certain members of the House Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs, that although consumers frequently indicate in polls that they view highly fuel-efficient vehicles favorably, very few actually buy them for themselves: “You should not be basing policy on polls. You should base it on facts, what people are actually doing.”

If the Obama administration really wants to prepare the United Statesto transition away from fossil fuels, they should assist automotive companies’ research and development of realistic alternative energies to fuel, such as hydrogen and natural gas, and alternatives to steel car body structures, such as carbon fiber and aluminum.    

An ambitious energy plan that may meet the needs of the American people would: (a) expedite the permitting process for oil companies in the Gulf Coast; (b) drill for oil off-shore; (c) subsidize half of automotive companies’ research and develop of alternatives to steel cars and fossil fuel vehicles; (d) pay for those subsidies by imposing a federal Energy Inventions tax of a quarter of one percent -- 0.0025% -- on income earned by full-time workers, except for those living at or below the poverty line.

The first two components represent typical conservative positions.  The last two are my suggestions.  Auto companies’ research of alternative fuels and physical car constructions should be subsidized in order to encourage private research by the institutions – the car makers – who would be most involved with and would need to know the most about building the vehicles of the future.  Subsidizing them directly is preferable to developing a bureaucracy of scientists and engineers in the Department of Energy because government bureaucrats do not have any incentive to work quickly or efficiently.  As only half of auto companies’ research would be government subsidized, an incentive remains for them to use their institution’s capital productively.

The reason I suggest a modest 0.0025% national Energy Inventions tax is for the purpose of paying for the subsidies.  Because such research and development would yield benefits to all members of society in the form of reduced pollution and therefore, cleaner air, everyone should contribute to offset the costs that were incurred to produce those results.  

Such a plan could radically transform the cars we drive.  It could encourage automakers to produce conventional gasoline powered vehicles with lighter-weight aluminum or carbon fiber bodies in the immediate future, thereby reducing energy consumption and pollution.  Many highway trucks already have aluminum cabs, and the Rocky Mountain Institute think-tank has developed an all carbon-fiber vehicle.  In the longer term, carmakers could fully transition to vehicles powered by an alternative energy, like hydrogen, which Honda already has available for leasing in California.       

As oil grows increasingly scarce, its price will continue to increase.  If the price of gas ever reaches $10 per gallon and we do not have any serious alternatively fueled vehicles or infrastructure developed, panic will spread across the country and our entire economy will collapse.  We should prepare in order to avoid those circumstances. 

Affirmative action, which was instituted in a time where racial discrimination was a serious problem, allows for the acceptance of minorities at lower academic standards. However, in a time where minorities are no longer discriminated against in the admissions process and women represent over half of the university populations, there is no need for affirmative action to provide equal opportunity. At this point, Asian students, because they score the highest of any race on standardized tests, have the toughest time in an admissions process with racial quotas. Those admitted by affirmative action have to deal the stigma that comes along with it. If of a certain race, students are sometimes suspected to be intellectually inferior because of the notion that they were accepted at a lower standard than others. Race-based admissions take away from the hard work and intellectual prowess of minority students. Students accepted by affirmative action face the problem of academic rigor. Many students not qualified enough to handle the academics of their university either drop out or slide through their classes with low grades and graduate with a meaningless degree. Either way, the student loses. Affirmative action hurts universities because it causes them to lower their academic standards. Before long, elite universities could lose their elite status if they keep admitting unqualified students. Also, as mentioned before, universities have to make their classes easier to account for the unprepared students. They have to compromise their academic standards under the name of having more racial diversity. Yet, diversity of thought is the kind of diversity every college needs. College admissions counselors need to find students who think in a variety of different ways and have different perspectives.

If we believe in efficacy of what J.S. Mill called the “marketplace of ideas”, then this variety of thought proves crucial to coming up with the best ideas. Open discussion of controversial issues like affirmative action is essential to all universities.

Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of a nation where people, “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”.  That is exactly the kind of nation I want to live in, and the type of nation America is meant to be. For the benefit of both the students and the universities, admission should be based on merit, not skin color.

The Bruins, Patriots, Red Sox, and Celtics have all won their respective titles in the past 10 years, but along with this success has come more heartache and pain for their fans then any should have to go through in that amount of time. Let’s take a look at the way that each team has broke Beantown hearts.

Last week’s conclusion of the worst collapse in Major League Baseball history was just another addition to the heartache of Boston fans. The Red Sox may have won two World Series over the past couple years, but does anyone remember the 2003 American League championship series against the Yankees? No Red Sox fans went to work happy the next day after they saw Aaron Boone launch a game winning homerun into the upper deck.

And now look at this year: the Red Sox played four months of the best baseball in the Major Leagues and there was much hype that this would be another championship team. In fact, the Boston Herald had a cover this summer that stated, “THE BEST TEAM EVER: WHY OUR SCRIBES RATE THIS THE TOP RED SOX TEAM OF ALL TIME”. No one could have predicted the epic September collapse that followed. As one statistician figured out, the Sox’s chances of blowing their nine game wildcard lead, blowing the last game of the season, and having Tampa come back from a 7-0 hole were 1 in 278 million. Maybe that curse still exists.

Last weekend the Patriots lost to the Bills….Yes, the Buffalo Bills. And last year, the Jets came to Foxboro and beat Brady and Bill Belichick in the first round of the playoffs. Nothing is worse for New England than losing to Rex Ryan. Is it even worth it to go into more details?

Looking back over the past few years, Patriots fans will never forget the pain they felt in the 2008 Super Bowl. David Tyree’s catch was a miracle that ruined the best season of all time. Congrats to New York for getting in the way of history yet again.

The Celtics have been a little kinder to fans over the past years than the other teams. When it comes down to it, they either win or they don’t. After taking the NBA championship in 2008 the Celtics ‘treated’ their fans to some typical Boston pain after they blew a 13 point 3rd quarter lead in game seven of the NBA finals to their Laker rivals. Must have been a long plane ride back to the East Coast.

The other counterpart of TD Banknorth Garden is your Stanley Cup Champions, the Bruins. Yes, the Bruins are Boston’s best team at the moment, but just a year before they hoisted the trophy, the team was leaving Philly with their heads drooped after blowing a 3 game lead in the playoffs. At least for the Bruins, the pain paid off.

In summary, if you haven’t had your day ruined by the outcome of a game, then you aren’t a true Boston fan. To be a Boston fan means to secretly know in the back of your mind that there’s a good chance your team will let you down.

The last decade has brought us a lot of great moments, but with these moments have come monumental collapses, heartbreakers, and efforts crushed. Let us always remember the decade of success in Boston for the titles, but also never forget how much pain they caused as well.

So is Social Security really a Ponzi scheme? Well, a Ponzi scheme is when an investor gives money to Ponzi or Maddoff or whoever is running the fraud with the understanding that it would be invested. The defrauder then, instead of investing that money and returning the profits, takes the investments of latter investors, gives them back to the earlier one, falsely calling it profit. In this regard, Perry is right to imply that Social Security works in much the same way as a Ponzi scheme. Popular mythology states that the wage tax (FICA) paid by working people is stored by the government in a type of savings account and is gradually returned when one retires or reaches a certain age. In truth, the government immediately spends FICA revenue on retirement benefits. A working 20 year old is not paying for his own retirement, but for the retirement of current 70 year olds (as well as the massive bureaucracy needed to run government programs like Social Security). Like a Ponzi scheme, the investor is being paid not by profits, but by the “contributions” of other investors. Similarly, both schemes are based on deceit. No one would have invested with Madoff if he told them what he was doing and the American people would be less likely to support Social Security if the majority of them knew what it really was.

Ponzi schemes differ from Social Security in much the same way that the 1978 Boston Red Sox collapse differs from the 2011 Boston Red Sox collapse, in that the latter is somewhat more pathetic. For one, the term “Social Security contribution” or “Social Security investment” is an oxymoron, as those terms imply consent. No one volunteers for a forced wage tax, while private Ponzi schemes are—of course—voluntary. Additionally, Ponzi schemes collapse when the stream of unsuspecting investors run dry. The government on the other hand, seeing as its “investors” are being forcefully taxed, simply needs to raise the wage tax to keep the system afloat. So no, Governor Perry, Social Security isn’t a Ponzi scheme; it’s a Ponzi scheme on steroids.

The implications of Social Security are far reaching. For all of progressives’ talk of “helping the working class”, the ever-increasing wage tax puts an unnecessary burden on working Americans. And is it really the government’s job to plan for people’s retirement? Why can’t people do it themselves, with real savings accounts instead of imaginary ones? To quote George Washington, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquent, it is force.” Liberal democratic societies are based on the assumption that the government uses force to protect citizens from coercion or harm. Social Security and the wage tax do not prevent harm, they cause it.

Recently, Newsweek named Boston College 7th on their “Best Food” rankings for colleges.  At first I was surprised about this piece of news.  Boston College Dining has become my bread and butter.  And now, I take it for granted.  After that first month of freshman year, the food at college becomes seldom noticed.  It is what it is.  The excitement of the Tuscan Chicken sandwich from Eagle’s Nest diminishes.  The thrill of Hillside and its famous Baja Chicken dwindles after the first several visits.  The overall quality of BC Dining’s food becomes commonplace, yet it deserves every bit of the recognition it’s receiving.

Boston College Dining deserves high marks for its variety.  With three main dining halls (Lower, Mac, and Stuart) and multiple auxiliary dining halls (The Rat, Eagle’s Nest, The Chocolate Bar, Addie’s, Hillside), there are endless possibilities for students looking for a bite to eat throughout the day.  Each place offers something unique.  Students with the Achilles’ heel of a sweet tooth can trek over to The Chocolate Bar for a Starbucks-style coffee and dessert.  Those looking for the ability to create their own personal pizza can wander upstairs to Addie’s and get their wish.

Not only is there variety in choosing where to eat, there is also variety in choosing what to eat.  Each dining hall has multiple options for students from which to choose. BC Dining provides vegetarian options for those who need them, and are also very considerate of people with food allergies.

I’ve heard many horror stories from friends at other colleges about how extremely unhealthy all of their meals are.  They tell me that students live on pancakes and bacon for breakfast, and hamburgers and fries for both lunch and dinner.  Now, students at BC could decide to eat like this everyday if they choose.  However, BC Dining provides students with many healthy options too.   Students aren’t backed into a corner and forced to pick from Unhealthy Meal #1 and Unhealthy Meal #2.  It seems like the Freshman Fifteen can be a death sentence at some colleges, but Boston College makes it only a voluntary decision.

While the dining halls on campus strive for variety, they also ensure that there are staple meals that students can get whenever they like.  These meals include grilled chicken, pasta, and hamburgers, among many others.  For those that aren’t ambitious or daring enough to try the unique daily entrees, there are always the staples to fall back on.  And herein lies the best part of BC Dining that I think sets it apart from other colleges.  Boston College dining halls offer a variety to always keep it interesting, but also offer high-quality, good tasting daily choices.

So the next time you’re taking that last bite out of a Hillside Burger, take a second to appreciate BC Dining.  Understand that you’re in a unique minority of college students who get to appreciate quality food on a daily basis.  It’s just another reason to make you proud to be an Eagle.

At a time when the integrity of elections is debated by the public, and evidence of voter fraud is present in all 50 states, these voter ID laws are becoming more and more of a necessity in order for the population to take our democracy seriously. Many opponents of these new laws cry foul, saying they are being put in place to depress voter turnout and prevent minority groups and the elderly from casting their votes on Election Day. This is the 21st century, are photo IDs really that big of a burden on the American people? Today, we could not cash a check, have a job, buy a plane ticket, or stay in a hotel room without first presenting a valid photo ID. These are all trivial aspects of everyday life that require a photo ID. Does it not make sense to expand this restriction to casting a ballot, arguably the most sacred privilege of being an American citizen? To further explain this point, let’s use the state of Georgia, which had voter ID laws in place for the 2008 and 2010 elections, as a real-world example. In both the of these elections, turnout from minority voters was much higher than average.

Quelling the critics even further, the Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that Indiana’s law requiring voters to present identification at the polls was constitutional, with Justice Scalia stating, “the burden of acquiring, possessing and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe, because it does not even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.” This should surprise no one, with states offering to waive the fee for voters to obtain the necessary license; there is really no argument for discrimination against the poor.

As these groups downplay the necessity of these laws, the recent news on ACORN’s attempts to register nonexistent voters clearly demonstrates such a need. It boils down to an issue of which side to err to: precaution or ignorance? To maintain the legitimacy of our democracy we need to ensure our elections are fair and not influenced by dishonest individuals or groups, and that only our citizens are able to vote. Our democracy can’t afford to have doubts casted on the winner of our elections. Voters and candidates alike need to be sure that the system is and will remain fair, or else our supposedly democratic elections will lose all of their remaining credibility.