4A - Wednesday, January 25, 2012
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
4A. - ensaJaur 5.01.h.ihga al iciadiyo
C4be1Iidhiown &Ut*
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, Mt 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
ASHLEY GRIESSHAMMER
JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ANDREW WEINER JOSH HEALY
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
Imran Syed is the public editor. He can be reached at publiceditor@michigandaily.com.
A little less conversation
Obama and Congress need to work together
ast night President Barack Obama gave a forward-looking
State of the Union address that offered many worthwhile pro-
posals in the face of major domestic issues, read: the economy.
While he addressed a wide range of topics, the president specifically
elaborated on issues relevant to students across the nation, including
access to education and a grim employment outlook for many college
graduates. In order to make his proposals a reality, however, Congress
must not continue their inefficient trends and stalling tactics, but
rather, work with all parts of government in creating a better future
for the United States.
That was the least funny milk-related thing since
'Milk.' #sotu"
- Washington Post blogger Alexandra Petri tweeted after President Barack Obama's
"Crying over spilled milk" joke received few laughs during the State of the Union address.
-
Taking America backward
popular Internet meme House GOP colleagues are leaving cant problem, the reason for dis-
nowadays is the Socially no stone unturned. Last year, they enfranchisement is clear. For
Awk- introduced a bill that would ban African-Americans, the laws are
ward Penguin, funding for all contraception. Talk particularly harmful because an
focusing on about taking the country way back. estimated one-quarter don't have
people who lack For reference on this bill's unpopu- a photo ID. The requirement is a de
social skills and ', larity, the Guttmacher Institute facto poll tax. Still not convinced the
do embarrass- found that more than 99 percent GOP wants to take the country back
ing things, like of sexually active women aged to the 1950s? According to Public
holding the door 15-44 have used contraception. Policy Polling, 46 percent of Missis-
for someone too Also, doesn't contraception prevent sippi Republicans want to ban inter-
far away. DAR-WEI unwanted pregnancies that might racial marriage, and an additional 14
I bring up the CHEN otherwise lead to abortions? percent are undecided onthe topic.
meme because one of the worst things about
I believe the these attacks on women's health is
modern GOP is that theysuggest women aren't smart ,,.
0I
The proposals put forth by Obama to
improve access to higher education were fair-
ly moderate, but were encouraging - a clear
improvement over the status quo. He called
on states to stop deftnding higher education
as a means of addressing budget crises, the
policies have a long-term impact of creat-
ing an ill-prepared workforce. The Univer-
sity has been significantly affected in recent
years by Lansing's massive funding cuts, and
tuition has risen at unprecedented levels in
response to decreased public funding. Michi-
gan's legislators must take Obama's message
to heart and work toward more affordable
higher education.
Several ideas Obama detailed are especial-
ly relevant to students, including doubling
the number of work-study jobs over the next
five years and extending federal tuition tax
credits. He expressed his desire for Congress
to stop interest rates on student loans from
"doubling" within the next six months. Final-
ly, he told colleges and universities that they
must work hard to stop tuition increases, or
risk losing public funds. Obama's proposals
would offer some relief to the countless stu-
dents struggling to pay for higher education
despite universities' focus on maximizing
endowment investments rather than increas-
ing accessibility to eager students.
As part of his plan to address unemploy-
ment, which has decreased during his ten-
ure, Obama called on Congress to take its
responsibility seriously in funding essen-
tial research and development projects.
High-tech research jobs have the potential
to become careers for many college gradu-
ates and concurrently deliver incalculable
benefits to society. Part of the president's
proposal to protect and expand private and
public research and development revolved
around a call to shift multi-billion dollar sub-
sidies from oil companies to the development
of clean energy projects, which would benefit
states like Michigan, where the advanced bat-
tery industry is, thriving and only has room
to grow. This proposal, in particular, would
serve dual purposes by creating jobs and
moving toward a more sustainable nation.
Although many of Obama's proposals were
a positive step forward, they can't be ana-
lyzed ina vacuum. When all is said and done,
the State of the Union is only a speech. A
year's worth of detailed plans can't be deliv-
ered in an hour-long address - especially one
interrupted by what seemed like 59 minutes
of clapping. It can't be ignored that over the
past three years the Obama administration
has fallen short of many of his fundamental
campaign goals, including promises to imple-
ment a public option for health care, closing
the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and ending
the Bush-era tax cuts. To assure that the pro-
posals put forward last night positively affect
students, and the entire country, Americans
must avoid becoming apolitical bystanders
expecting our government to benevolently
work in the public's interest.
socially awkward, especially with
historically subjugated populations.
However, the Republicans do some-
thing the penguin doesn't - they
mask the awkwardness through slo-
gans like "take our country back,"
which charges voters emotionally so
they don't have to vote logically.
Who do the conservatives want
to take the country back from and
what time do they wantto go back to?
Trust me, it's awkward.
For women, the GOP wants to take
the country back to pre-1960, before
women were reproductively liber-
ated by events like the FDA approval
of birth control pills. Former Repub-
lican presidential candidates Rick
Perry and Michele Bachmann and
current Republican presidential can-
didates Newt Gingrich and Rick San-
torum have all stated that abortion
should be banned, even in cases of
rape, incest or danger to the mother.
Almost the entire field of candidates
- the above group plus Mitt Romney
and former Republican presidential
candidate Jon Huntsman - wants to
cut federal funding for services like
Planned Parenthood and Women,
Infants and Children. So, let's get this
straight: All pregnancies - even pre-
carious ones - should be carried to
term. Then, the government should
further deprive the baby of needed
plantiing and sustenance. These guys
aren't pro-life, they're pro-birth and
apathetic about life.
But that's not all. U.S. Rep. Mike
Pence (R-Ind.) and some of his
enough to make decisions about their
bodies. Even the ostensibly small-
government supporter Ron Paul
has said that he wants Roe v. Wade
repealed. Why? So the government
can monitor every woman's uterus?
Women are now earning more col-
lege degrees than men. If anything,
maybe men - in male-dominated
politics - aren't smart enough.
For African-Americans, the GOP
wants to go back even further to the
early 1950s, before the Civil Rights
Movement. As election season heats
up, Republicans have been advocat-
ing for tighter voter identification
laws that require photo IDs in'several
states to help places like Wisconsin,
which Republican National Commit-
tee Chairman Reince Priebus says is
"riddled with voter fraud" as quoted
in a Dec. 2 ThinkProgress.org article.
However, a study at the Brennan
Center for Justice found that a scant
0.0002 percent of Wisconsin votes
were cast fraudulently during the
2004 elections.
Maybe you're thinking, "What's
wrong with improving election
integrity, and how's this relevant to
African-Americans?" First, the idea
that the GOP wants accurate elec-
tions is laughable - remember the
2000 presidential election when the
Republicans tried to stop the Florida
recount? Second, think about who
these laws affect most - the young,
the poor and African-Americans, all
Democrat-heavy voting blocs.
If voter fraud is not a signifi-
The good ol'days
weren't good
for everyone.
Examples of GOP social awkward-
ness are everywhere. At a time when
support for gay marriage is more
than 50 percent for the first time
according to Gallup, the Bachmanns
are still running "cure the gay" clin-
ics, and Santorum is comparing
homosexuality to "man-on-dog" bes-
tiality. Despite the progress Ameri-
cans have made in religious tolerance
post-9/ll, Gingrich is still saying that
Sharia law is a "mortal threat" to our
freedoms,, and former Republican
presidential candidate'Herman Cain
wouldn't consider appointing Mus-
lims in his administration.
"Take our country back" sounds
nice because it brings back memo-
ries of the "good ol' days," but the
GOP doesn't acknowledge that
those days weren't good for every-
one. Undoing the progress made
since that time would make Amer-
ica a laughingstock to the Western
world. But even worse than being
awkward, undoing social progress
would be devastating to many. Don't
be fooled by the slogan.
Dar-Wei Chen can be reached
at dwchen@umich.edu. Follow him
on Twitter at @DWChenMDaily.
0
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Aida Ali, Laura Argintar, Kaan Avdan, Ashley Griesshammer, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein'
Patrick Maillet, Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Timothy Rabb, Vanessa Rychlinski'
Sarah Skaluba, Caroline Syms, Seth Soderborg, Andrew Weiner
JULIA WALSH |
The celebrity effect
CONTRIBUTE TO THE COVERSATION
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and viewpoints. Letters should be fewer
than 300 words while viewpoints should be 550-850 words. Both must include the writer's full
name and University affiliation. Send submissions to tothedaily@michigandaily.com
MAX HELLER I
Engage in productive discourse
Watch out poison ivy, you've got some com-
petition. On Jan. 7, proud parents Beyoncd and
Jay-Z welcomed a joyful little cherub into the
world and named her Blue Ivy. No, this ridic-
ulous name isn't a joke. The couple forever
branded their child with a color and plantas her
identity. It could be worse, though. She could be
named Apple, Maddox, Suri or Seraphina - all
names of children who are blessed and cursed
with having world-renowned celebrities as
their parents. Why do celebrities think it's
okay to give their children such bizarre names?
Are they trying to make them feel special and
unique? These children are already destined to
have an off-beat and unusual upbringing, and
giving them strange names is only going to add
to the stresses of their lives.
I honestly think that celebrities use their
children's names as a competition. Let's play
"Who can give their child the most horren-
dous, embarrassing name?" They're using
their child's birth certificate in order to gait
fame and media coverage. If Beyonce had
named her child Mary, do you think anyone
would have cared? No. In true diva fashion,
she made sure that her child's name reflected
her career - flashy and showy.
I know what you're thinking: "How does a
celebrity naming their child something odd
affect me at all?" Step outside the box. Maybe
Tom Cruise naming his child Suri doesn't
personally affect you, but it certainly affects
society - though oftentimes this effect is
unconscious. The naming of a child was once
a beautiful, meaningful moment. Children
were named after their great-grandpa Tom,
who earned a medal of honor in World War
I. They received the name of their aunt Sue
who joined the nunnery and dedicated her life
to God. And now? Children are being named
after fruits, cars and plants. Once again, celeb-
rities have taken control of another aspect of
our lives.
Whether you realize it or not, their deci-
sion to give their children wacky names has
an influence on all of us. Every year, thou-
sands of people change their names. They're
"too boring" or "too plain." Since when are
Denim, Speck and Seven better names than
Robert, Joseph and Thomas? Celebrities
never fail to change and control society. We
seem to be their little puppets, eagerly await-
ing their next drastic move so we can attempt
to imitate it.
Celebrities give their children unusual
names because they can. It makes them feel
powerful and better than everyone else.
Celebrities are constantly in competition with
one another. They have to be the first to get
married, the first to have twins and the first to
name their child some ugly excuse for a name.
They crave attention and are willing to accept
it in any form - negative or positive. And we
the public? We drink it all up. We love the
hip, new, risky things celebrities do. We try
to be just like them. Sure, maybe you haven't
named your child Moses or Camera, but you
can't deny that as a child, you once longed to
change your name to match that of your favor-
ite celebrity.
Maybe our generation hasn't completely
fallen into the dreaded whirlwind of exotic
baby naming, but that doesn't mean the gener-
ation following us won't. All I'm saying is this:
don't be surprised if your grandson winds up
with the name Rocket or Jermajesty.
Julia Walsh is an LSA freshman.
In the Dec. 11 viewpoint "It's time to talk about Pal-
estine," co-authors Bayan Founas and Noor Haydar use
inflammatory rhetoric and obscenely inaccurate myths
about the Middle East in order to propagate the idea that
Israelis are engaged in a systematic oppression of the
Palestinian people. While both sides in the Arab-Israeli
conflict are justifiably frustrated with the sluggish pace
of the peacemaking process over the past several years,
it's counterproductive and flat out dishonest to claim
that the Israeli government is racist and expellingIsraeli
Arabs from their homes. It is similarly troubling that
the co-authors and their organization, Students Allied
for Freedom and Equality seem to suggest that Israel is
somehow not rightfully entitled to enjoy the same rights
as any other sovereign nation when dealing with issues
of national security.
While it may seem admirable that SAFE "simply
believes in the self-determination of the Palestinian
people" and is committed to "promoting the rights of
Palestinian refugees to return to their homes," some
historical perspective can shed light on the underlying
goals of these initiatives. The 1947 United Nations par-
tition plan would have created two states side-by-side,
but the Palestinians rejected it. When Isreal declared
its independence, the Palestinians again were given an
opportunity to live peacefully within the new state with-
out leaving their homes. Some instead decided to vacate
their properties, relying on Israel's Arab neighbors'
promise to "drive the Jews into the sea." The 1978 Camp
David Accords also presented an opportunity for a last-
ing peace, which was again rejected by Palestinian lead-
ers. Back in 2000, President Bill Clinton hosted a round
of peace talks between the two camps again. In addition
to spurning yet another opportunity for peace, Palestin-
ian leadership afterword initiated the bloody Second
Intifada against Israeli civilians
More recently, the Palestinian-administered Gaza
Strip fell into the hands of Hamas - a terrorist organi-
zation steadfastly dedicated to the destruction of Israel
- by way of democratic elections. While both parties
desire a long-term peace, every Israeli effort to cede con-
trol and sovereignty to Palestinian leadership has been
met with hostility, escalated tensions and, in the cases of
the Intifada and Hamas, gutless and cowardly violence
targeted at defenseless Israeli civilians. Such radical tac-
tics are embraced by Palestinian leaders like Mahmoud
Abbas, who continually refuses to recognize Israel as a
Jewish state, and Saeb Erekat, the Palestinian Liberation
Organization's chief negotiator, who has suggested that
any future Palestinian state must expel all Jews from
within its borders.
SAFE claims that its only cause is to advocate for the
self-determination of the Palestinian people. They deny
any association with the PLO as well as Hamas and
Fatah, and decline to take a position on Palestinian state-
hood. Such a form of advocacy is dangerous, for uncon-
ditionally supporting the Palestinian people's right to
self-determination implicitly supports the institutions
and policy platforms of the very organizations the Pal-
estinians have chosen to lead. Dating back to Israel's
founding, history has demonstrated that Palestinian
decisions made under the guise of "self-determination"
have come at the expense of both public safety and long-
term peace in the region.
I take issue with SAFE's reasoning behind itswalk-out
demonstration during Israeli diplomat Ishmael Khaldi's
speech at the University last semester. Founas and Hay-
dar's contention that Khaldi should not have been per-
mitted to speak at the University runs counter to the very
idea ofliberty that they advocate for the Palestinian peo-
ple. Israel sent a diplomat to campus to give students an
opportunity to question, and contribute to, the dialogue
surrounding the negotiations in the Middle East. Given
the opportunity to participate and determine their role
in the peace process, SAFE chose to go for shock value
and engage in destructive dialogue, something that their
Palestinian counterparts have demonstrated time and
time again. Should we really be surprised?
Max Heller is a Business Junior. He is Michigan's
campus fellow for the Committee for Accuracy
in Middle East Reporting in America.
0
0
A 4
A