Opinion

SHOHAM GEVA
EDITOR IN CHIEF

CLAIRE BRYAN 

AND REGAN DETWILER 
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LAURA SCHINAGLE
MANAGING EDITOR

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at 

the University of Michigan since 1890.

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.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Tuesday, January 19, 2016

H

is 
rhetoric, 
passionate; 

his rallies, electric; his 
supporters, eclectic. Sen. 

Bernie 
Sand-

ers has captured 
the hearts and 
minds of exas-
perated 
voters 

across the coun-
try who want to 
restructure our 
economy to bet-
ter enfranchise 
people 
of 
all 

classes, 
colors 

and creeds. This 
makes him the 
best available candidate for secre-
tary of labor.

Now, I know, Americans don’t 

actually vote for secretary of labor. 
The secretary of labor is nominated 
by the president and then approved 
by the Senate. That being said, Sen. 
Sanders, with his impassioned focus 
throughout his political career on 
leveling the economic playing field, 
makes an excellent appointee.

Sen. Sanders is, in fact, running 

for president. I wholeheartedly 
agree with his goals of “a progres-
sive economic agenda that creates 
jobs, raises wages, protects the 
environment and provides health-
care for all.” I also agree with 
his desire to advance the social 
services that our global partners 
have had for years, allowing for 
lower rates of incarceration, lower 
income inequality and better health 
outcomes for less money. Many of 
these goals fit within the mandate 
of a secretary of labor, however, 
more so than that of the president.

The president has a greater 

responsibility. In addition to cul-
tivating an environment in which 
all Americans have the tools and 
opportunity to live up to their 
potential, a president needs to 
maintain America’s image abroad. 
To do so, a president of the United 
States must demand respect on the 
world stage. They must have intri-
cate knowledge of both how to 
make our country a better place to 

live in and how to tackle problems 
that involve a diverse set of global 
stakeholders with vastly different 
histories, cultures and social envi-
ronments.

Now, I understand that as a 

child of immigrants who has lived 
abroad, I may approach this issue 
with a slightly different perspec-
tive. It is a perspective, however, 
that I feel is important when con-
sidering your choice for our next 
president.

Growing up in South Africa, my 

friends and I saw the United States 
in its best light. We saw a country of 
plenty with the resources to provide 
its citizens with the opportunity to 
achieve their dreams. Moving to 
the United States, and the accom-
panying experiences, has slowly 
exposed the naiveté of my idealistic 
fantasy, but I still hold that how the 
United States is portrayed abroad 
is important strategically and a 
responsibility of the president.

President George W. Bush’s 

years in office exposed some of 
the worst sides of America to the 
world at large. We saw unchecked 
military oversteps and govern-
ment-endorsed — or at least not 
government-condemned 
— 
sci-

entific denial. Conversely, Presi-
dent Obama, in my opinion, has 
restored some trust in the United 
States through his global leader-
ship. He negotiated the Iran deal 
and played a pivotal role in the 
recent climate change COP21 con-
ference. While not everything he 
has done has worked to restore 
global trust in the United States 
(for example, his use of drones), 
there have been concrete steps 
taken in the right direction.

In this respect, I feel that Sen. 

Sanders is unprepared. While his 
nuanced grasp of our stacked deck 
of an economy is admirable, his 
failure to demonstrate any desire to 
take on foreign policy questions is 
concerning.

The advantages of a healthy glob-

al image, while it may seem unim-
portant to an average American, 

provides us with not only increased 
security and an increased ability to 
shape global affairs, but also with an 
inflow of migrants who propel our 
economy forward — drawn, like my 
parents, to the opportunity of better 
lives for their children. Creating and 
nurturing that image takes time, and 
given Sen. Sanders’s lack of global 
name recognition and experience, I 
am not yet sure he is the best candi-
date to continue President Obama’s 
progress on this front.

Secretary Hillary Clinton cer-

tainly has the poise and expertise to 
effectively maintain and strength-
en our image abroad. She is, howev-
er, not without her drawbacks. The 
Clinton name, for one, is haunted by 
past controversy. Her association 
with Establishment American poli-
tics may be as much of a liability as 
it is an asset in our current political 
climate. Lastly, her trustworthi-
ness rating among potential voters 
is frighteningly low.

That being said, it seems presi-

dential elections are as much about 
persona as they are about grasp of 
the issues. Judging by Secretary 
Clinton’s most recent debate perfor-
mance, in addition to her mastery 
of both domestic and international 
issues, she can successfully weave 
together policy and emotion to 
make a succinct argument for how 
to move forward as a country.

At this point in the election sea-

son, I am highly conflicted. While 
I recognize the importance of Sen. 
Sanders’ domestic message, his 
seeming lack of interest in global 
affairs discredits him on the world 
stage and makes him a better candi-
date for secretary of labor than for 
president. Secretary Clinton has a 
complete grasp of the responsibili-
ties of the presidency, but she needs 
to prove that her missteps will stay 
in the past.

The primary is not until March, 

though; plenty of time to start feel-
ing the Bern …

—Danny Sack can be reached 

at sackd@umich.edu.

Bernie for secretary of labor

Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Caitlin Heenan, 

Jeremy Kaplan, Ben Keller, Minsoo Kim, Payton Luokkala, 

Aarica Marsh, Anna Polumbo-Levy, Jason Rowland, 

Lauren Schandevel, Melissa Scholke, Rebecca Tarnopol, 

Ashley Tjhung, Stephanie Trierweiler, 

Mary Kate Winn, Derek Wolfe

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

T

hursday night’s GOP primary debate 
was business as usual. “The Donald” 
was loud and off the cuff, squab-

bling with Ted Cruz over 
poll numbers in Iowa. 
We were reminded of the 
real challenges facing the 
United States, like The 
New York Times and Hill-
ary Clinton. As a proud 
son of New Jersey, every 
fiber in my being wanted 
to disown Chris Christie 
when he spoke, and Ben 
Carson seemed to hover 
somewhere 
between 
a 

casual nap and the deep-
est of REM cycles.

To the naked eye skimming headlines Fri-

day morning, the contest on Fox Business 
Network was standard operating procedure. 
With one big exception — moderators Neil 
Cavuto and Maria Bartiromo offered the most 
unabashedly biased performance in the pres-
idential primaries to date. They asked ques-
tions that played to Republicans’ strengths, 
they neglected to ask follow-ups and kept 
the conversation centered on the candidates’ 
strengths — national security, gun rights and 
Obama-bashing.

The softballs started early with a ques-

tion to Gov. Christie regarding appropriate 
use of military action 
by a president, a ques-
tion worthy of any pri-
mary debate. That is, 
if the question had not 
been so loaded. Bar-
tiromo 
prefaced 
her 

inquiry 
with 
discus-

sion of Iran’s capture 
of 
American 
sailors, 

North Korea’s nuclear 
ambitions, “an aggres-
sive China,” a deterio-
rating Middle East and 
a stronger ISIS. “Some-
times,” she continued, 
teeing it up for Christie. 
“It seems the world is 
on fire.” Offering a clearly alarmed summa-
ry of evil in the world, coaxing Christie into 
his bread and butter of fear mongering and 
“no-nonsense” statements, Bartiromo’s ques-
tion simplified the complexities of national 
security and military engagement beyond 
all reason. How do we keep Americans safe? 
Strengthen the military. Talk to our allies. It’s 
that easy!

Later, Trump was asked about whether 

or not, if he should win the White House, he 
could unite the Republican Party. The mod-
erators waited politely as the front-runner 
chose to dance around the question, reciting 
a slice of his stump speech on incompetence 
and anger. Time constraints then (supposed-
ly) forbade Bartiromo’s follow-up that anyone 
at home might have phrased, “Did you even 
try to answer the question, or were you dis-
tracted by a bumblebee while I asked it and 
decided to just spout your usual nonsense?”

To be fair, Cavuto spoke up and asserted, 

“That wasn’t my question” before Marco 
Rubio picked up too much steam when 
attempting to pivot from a question on the 
Common Core to national security. I was 
ready to chalk this one up to seven politicians, 
whose bad habit of not answering questions 
was exacerbated by the pressure and fanfare 
of the approaching Iowa caucuses. The mod-
erators were struggling, but maybe ascribing 
too much of the blame to them was unfair. 

But then came the most ridiculous question 
of them all.

Introduced through the question of wheth-

er or not Bill Clinton’s past indiscretions are 
a legitimate topic in this election, Ben Carson 
was asked, “What do you think of the notion 
that Hillary Clinton is an enabler of sexual 
misconduct?”

Ignoring how irrelevant this question 

should be to Republican primary voters 
(though the question was met with applause) 
and bypassing the ridiculously misogynistic 
notion that a woman is somehow respon-
sible for a man’s misconduct, consider this 
question for what it really says — Ben Car-
son, would you like to take a free shot at the 
Democratic front-runner, who we view as 
the devil incarnate? Here, let me provide you 
with some ammo. Fire away with condescen-
sion and platitudes about values.

Through loaded questions, softballs and a 

strange aversion to ask follow-ups, the jour-
nalistic failures of the moderators allowed 
the candidates to play to their strengths of 
grandstanding and fear mongering. Trump 
spoke about “bombings all over,” and predict-
ed “many to follow” in the footsteps of Paris. 
Christie told us how, if you want to keep your 
homes and your families safe, “you cannot 
give Hillary Clinton a third term of Barack 
Obama’s leadership.” Carson summoned up 
images of cyberbombs, attacks on our elec-

trical grid and “dirty 
bombs,” (shortly before 
he misused the word 
existential, 
which 
is 

another story entirely). 
Why? Because the basis 
of these campaign strat-
egies is fear. Fear of who 
in the world wants to 
attack us, who is coming 
to take your guns and 
the apocalyptic post-
American society that 
will exist if a Democrat 
wins.

Just 
like 
Burgess 

Meredith in “Rocky II,” 
the 
moderators 
were 

clearly in the GOP’s corner, introducing Hill-
ary Clinton as some sort of Clubber Lang in a 
pantsuit, egging them on in a less than subtle 
way. But don’t take my word for it. Count the 
number of follow-ups. Go back and read the 
questions asked. Hear how they were set up. 
Listen to the tone and bias. Hear how it has 
no place in political journalism. Fox Business 
did its job Thursday night. Unfortunately, 
that job apparently was not to present the best 
form of argument to the American people, but 
to insulate the GOP contenders and drum up 
a few soundbites along the way. Look no fur-
ther than the litany of topics omitted from 
the conversation.

Issues from the minimum wage to the 

skyrocketing cost of higher education, from 
income inequality to campaign finance 
reform and women’s reproductive rights 
were not deemed important enough to grace 
the stage. However, the cardinal sin may have 
been that just a 15-minute drive away from 
the site of the Charleston AME Church shoot-
ing, the role of race in criminal justice was 
mentioned once, by Jeb Bush.

Why? Because Republicans are much bet-

ter at talking about ISIS, immigration and Bill 
Clinton’s sex life.

—Brett Graham can be reached 

at btgraham@umich.edu.

Fear mongering and softballs

S

low down, you crazy child. So 
you’ve finished final exams. 
But the stress doesn’t stop 

there. It just piv-
ots from those 
dreaded 
test 

scores to sum-
mer internships, 
job hunts or per-
haps larger existential crises. We 
each have our own ways of dealing 
with the burdens of college life, and 
Winter Break is surely a good start. 
For me, the best method of escape 
is a pair of noise-canceling head-
phones.

A timely release by Larry Fish-

erman, rapper Mac Miller’s pia-
no-playing alter ego, reminds me 
of what’s most important when 
the pressures of school feel insur-
mountable. Miller reworks the Billy 
Joel record “Vienna” with darker, 
pitch-shifted vocals. This stripped-
down cover, absent of any drums or 
bass, is a sign of Mac Miller’s matu-
ration as an artist, but also a sign 
that he faces the same problems that 
college-aged, entry-level job appli-
cants face today.

Miller asks, in the first verse, “If 

you’re so smart, why are you still 
so afraid?” The reinvigorated lyr-
ics ring just as true today for any 
University student feeling moti-
vated, yet demoralized at an unclear 
future as they did on the release of 
the 1977 album The Stranger. It’s 
not surprising that Miller chose to 
recreate this Joel classic. The rap-
per has experienced quick success, 
but at 23, he has the world ahead of 
him, and that can be intimidating. 
Miller is like any of us. Studying at 
Michigan is a great start, but that 
doesn’t make the road ahead any 
less treacherous. The overwhelm-
ing sense of uncertainty is partly 
what I’m afraid of.

The song raises several difficult 

questions — difficult because we 
may not want to answer them:

“Where’s the fire, what’s the 

hurry about? / You’d better cool it 

off before you burn it out / There’s 
so much to do and only so many 
hours in the day.”

It’s easy to get caught up in the rat 

race of Ann Arbor. And it’s even eas-
ier for me (or Joel or Miller) to tell 
you to slow down before you burn 
it out. But I think it’s important to 
remember that career goals are only 
half of the picture. Setting personal 
goals to spend time with those close 
to you, being outside more or help-
ing others can put things in per-
spective. New York Times writer 

David Brooks raises an interest-
ing point in his book “The Road to 
Character.” We focus a lot of our 
attention on “resume virtues” to 
further our careers, rather than 
“eulogy virtues,” the traits we’d like 
to be remembered for. When you’re 
sprinting toward a target, you may 
be going too fast to realize you’re 
aiming in the wrong direction. So, 
really, what’s the hurry about?

Recently, I’ve been contemplat-

ing what’s next for me as a second-
semester senior. What jobs should I 
be applying for? Is law school a good 
decision for my long-term career 
goals? The choices I make now will 
dictate the path I head down, and 
that’s a lot to digest. It’s unrealis-
tic to think that where I want to be 
in 10 years is where I will actually 
end up. It’s fun to dream, though 

— maybe I could be an indie record 
label executive, or maybe I could 
manage a talented, emerging musi-
cian. We have no choice but to take 
a blind leap toward a career we’re 
passionate about and hope for the 
best. Joel’s four-decade-old lyrics 
sum up my feelings towards dream 
chasing:

“You’ve got your passion, you’ve 

got your pride / But don’t you know 
that only fools are satisfied? / Dream 
on, but don’t imagine that they’ll all 
come true”

There’s a sense of complacency 

in satisfaction. To set lofty goals 
is healthy, even if we never quite 
get there. It requires reinven-
tion. Eight years ago, Miller began 
releasing mixtapes in high school 
and then moved on to producing 
his own independently distributed 
chart-topping albums. Since, Miller 
has released music using several 
aliases, including Larry Fisher-
man, Delusional Thomas and jazz 
frontman Larry Lovestein with the 
Velvet Revolver. Miller continues 
to redefine his sound as a musician, 
instrumentalist and producer. In 
an industry packed with a surplus 
of artists, it can be hard to stay rel-
evant.

We are all trying to break into 

industries flooded with talented 
candidates. That alone can be a lot 
of pressure to keep your foot on the 
gas. So when your tank’s on empty 
and the grind has taken its toll, don’t 
hesitate to turn the lights down, put 
on your headphones and take a step 
back.

But if I haven’t persuaded you, it 

may sound more convincing in lyri-
cal form:

“Slow down, you crazy child / 

Take the phone off the hook and 
disappear for a while / It’s all right, 
you can afford to lose a day or two / 
When will you realize, Vienna waits 
for you.”

—Zach Brown can be reached 

at zmbrown@umich.edu.

Eulogy Virtues

BRETT 
GRAHAM

ZACH 
BROWN

DANNY 
SACK

 “Fox Business did its 
job Thursday night. 

Unfortunately, that job 
apparently was not to 
present the best form 

of argument to the 
American people.”

 “When you’re 

sprinting toward 
a target, you may 
be going too fast 
to realize you’re 

aiming in the wrong 

direction. 

E-mail FrancEs at FrmillEr@umich.
FRANCES MILLER

