JAMES O'KEEFE
In examining cultural relativism, we must first ask ourselves whether or not certain cultural differences ought to be tolerated to such a point where we approve of cultural traditions that seem to us unjust or even ethically evil. Among these we find genital mutilation, the Hindu practice of suttee – burning women at the stake – and making women cover their faces like Cousin Itt from the Adams Family. The Multiculturalist connoisseurs and anthropological relativists would say yes, while the conservative intellectuals Allan Bloom, Robert Bork, William Bennet, or “neo-cons,” as they are called, would say no.
So is it morally justified for us to rescue Afghan women from their society? Absolutely.
Those who oppose the “neo-con” efforts of George W. Bush, Paul Wolfowitz and the rest of the gang include author Lila Abu-Lughad in her essay, “Do Muslim Women Need Saving?” Lughad uses the justification that particular cultural traditions that “we” westerners denounce, like the practice of stoning a woman to death because she left her home without the company of a male relative, are ignorant because our disapproval itself contains hidden Western prejudices about the history of exploitation and racism that indirectly led to such savagery in the first place. Lughad, similar to most postmodernists, prefers an historical and political view of any region to a review of its religious or cultural aspects. Lughad describes how U.S. involvement is responsible for stonings and burnings due to our support of the Taliban during the last twenty-five years in our effort to fight the Soviets. If Lughad is arguing that brutality against women under Shari’a Law been caused by the Americans, then aren’t we obligated to fix this? Even if it is our actions and not religious extremism (that’s a big “if ”) that explains stonings and burnings, they certainly don’t justify such brutality. Lughad justifies not brutality but the wearing of cultural dress; this focuses on the wrong issue. It is not the burqas and
other forms of cultural dress we hope to save Muslim women from, it is their right not to be butchered, not to have their lives taken from them when they speak their minds in the home or in public. Living in the free world, Lughad takes those rights for granted. Saving women from oppressive tyrants does not constitute western imperialism; it is a confirmation of the fundamental rights of all human beings. Lughad’s argument ignores extreme forms of brutality in its attention to the burqa, and then focuses on the question of moral relativism. The notion that truth is a reflection of a certain cultural bias – the idea that what is right and what is wrong differs from culture to culture, from era to era, from person to person, et cetera – can be first understood in the context of David Hume’s distinction between facts and values. We know for a fact that the world is round, but whether or not the world is lovely is a different thing entirely, and arguably of little importance. The Comedian George Carlin made our egocentrism poignant to a modern audience with his hauntingly wise rebuttal of environmentalism: The planet Earth is fine, it doesn’t care what color or shape it's in; it is dependent rational animals like human beings, not a chunk of rock in the cosmos, that are emotive enough to make those determinations. “The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we’re gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, ‘cause that’s what it does. It’s a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic.”
But some emotions and values can and should be universal. There should be standards of judgment among people, ideas and events to prevent harmful perversion. Otherwise personal liberation will become on one hand the Sartre-inspired Marxist doctrine of everybody determining their own truths, and on the other the extreme libertarianism of Ayn Rand, where public virtue is ignored. Both bring about an inability to make universal judgments on anything, and we are forced to accept the extremist behavior of others. And since we are indifferent to extreme forms of tolerance, we become... bored. Worse, without a moral standard upon which to rely, we need to be given one from the cultural elites that begin to develop an excessive amount of dominance over our values. These elites may be professors at a University where the young-uns lack a common moral foundation, or worse, elites that serve selfish purposes, like the pigs George Orwell told us about on that farm of his, where society as a whole lacks a moral foundation.
Individualism has to be restrained in order to avoid undermining the traditional values of the community. To preserve these values, some universal truths are required to govern the community. This philosophy has been attributed to Pope Benedict XVI, whose philosophy echos Allan Bloom’s sentiments:
Truth is not determined from what is popular in a democracy, truth is discovered by leaving your cave and discovering what is eternal. Without God, you run the risk of tyrants making that determination. Without a compromise where individuals slightly subordinate themselves to their communities, communities will be governed by tyrants that replace God. The people should govern themselves and be given the right to do so from a divine authority.
When you deny objective values, you create what may be called "men without chests," as C.S. Lewis put it in his short book The Abolition of Man. Curious how we expect "virtue and enterprise" of these men when the organ that provides such services has already been removed.
James O'Keefe is a Rutgers College Senior majoring in philosophy.
NJO: Originally printed in the December 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Friday, December 09, 2005
I Have a Dream
Much has changed since the time of Edmund Burke. While prudence, honor, restraint, reverence, self-discipline, liberty and conviction will always be conservative, modern “conservative” declarations seem to directly contradict these classical virtues. There is no better time than now to explore how these themes have changed and how these virtues clash. This is a time when Peter Lawler believes the Republicans will become two parties split between anti-libertarians and libertarians. Former Soviet political prisoner Natan Sharansky’s The Case for Democracy is the neo-conservative version of the Declaration of Independence; calling for the promotion of democracy for oppressed people’s throughout the world. Fiscally, our Republican allies are anything but conservative. As the Wall Street tycoon once said, “our trade deficit and its fiscal deficit are at nightmare proportions.”
But our universities are also at a crossroads, becoming what David French calls "islands of repression in a sea of liberty." Professors have seemed to have figured out answers to all of life’s great questions. The Academy is, without a doubt, the left’s last vast impenetrable fortress. It is an ideological monopoly on truth, which, as Victor Davis Hansen has said, “has adopted a therapeutic curriculum in pursuit of political objectives.” The pseudo-religious rhetoric of “diversity” has replaced the great rhetorical social questions of Plato and Aristotle; the relationship between God and man, virtue and vice, heroism and cowardice, and beauty and wisdom. These questions have been replaced with an obsession, not of veritas, but with skin color.
Rutgers Professors and staff gave 104 times more money to John Kerry than George W. Bush in the 2004 election cycyle. One Hundred and Four to One. This ratio is comparable to the political diversity present under the rule of Genghis Khan.
In our beloved Academy; a supposed citadel of intellectual brilliance, its commanding officers have become intellectual sloths; unchallenged by any principled conservative opposition and unbridled to invite speakers to campus to compare Bush to the Ku Klux Klan, or rant about how the war to liberate the middle east is morally bad in a class completely unrelated to international relations or its relating philosophies.
From a journalistic standpoint, THE CENTURION is an avowedly conservative magazine. We implore our detractors who demand political balance to weigh us on the scale against other student publications including The Medium, the Green Print, The Review and The Caellian. Let’s not forget The Daily Targum, a newspaper from which I was once fired. Worry not my Leftists; the academic fulcrum still tips in favor of you; if not in print (we’ll take this potential newfound conservative leaning as a testament to our success), then decidedly so in the classroom. THE CENTURION arrived on the scene last November to a blazing fire, extinguishing it with guerilla tactics; awards on doors, sensitivity complaints, racist cereals and needed muckraking against local political cronyism. This sardonic approach seems to have had more efficacy and influence on our student body which cares as much about truth as Muslims care about Jesus.
On our campus common sense is blurred by obfuscation; the p.c. patrol, the diversity police, the self-esteem deans, the speech codes, and the professors violating core tenets of academic freedom, etc.
I founded THE CENTURION because I have a dream...
I have a dream where diversity refers to more than just the melanin in one’s skin; where conservatives are not to be called “fascists” for advocating pluralities of methodologies, perspectives and common sense views.
I have a dream that Lucky Charms is thought of as a breakfast cereal rather than a symbol of Leprechaun oppression.
I have a dream where the banning of “offensive” Grease Trucks sandwich names is of little consequence compared to the rapes of women off campus.
I have a dream someone realizes Rutgers’ financial woes just might be due to dozens of committees and caucuses “devoted to advancing our common purposes” as well as pork programs and counselors and their Deans that believe self-esteem is more important than the process by which you earn it.
I have a dream where we realize guns are no more responsible for Columbine than spoons are responsible for Michael Moore’s obesity.
I have a dream where we lay our presents under Christmas Trees, not holiday shrubs.
I have a dream at least one building or program or committee or scholarship will be named after our Rutgers’ Nobel peace prize winning graduate Milton Friedman, RC ’32. His axiom that political freedom requires economic freedom is a lesson learned only by visiting the graves of the innocent women and children butchered to death by bloodthirsty tyrants; economic atrocities condoned by the applause of Paul Robeson's supporters.
I have a dream where bureaucrats, uneducated in matters relating to life’s great questions, stop putting restrictions on what I can or can’t say, stop enacting policies that arbitrarily prohibit behavior, and stop making value judgments on what I believe.
I have a dream where conservative faculty are free from ideological witch hunts; where political opinions and/or skin color is prohibited from being considered in the hiring of university professors.
I have a dream where the unfair employment practices and accusations against one of our nations most gifted sociobiologists because of his conservative leaning, is prosecuted by the fullest extent of the law.
I have a dream where they will introduce a biology prerequisite for women’s studies classes.
For we the conservatives, ironically, have become the modern day Henry David Thoreaus, albeit in a less revolutionary way. For we, the silent majority, “stand athwart history yelling stop” in a place and at a time when our professors and peers call for radical change.
None of us knew each other a year ago. A man I considered my best friend last year betrayed me over chalk yielding, gown wearing overly ambitious students buying into their own hype. I have met others since then. The unappreciated wisdom of the encyclopedic Wesley James Young; whose civility is only matched by his compassion. The southern legal language of Jeff Erickson. The untapped artistic genius and patience of Justine Mertz. The editorial prowess of my successor, Dan Whitney, who spent late nights (and their accompanying early mornings) at production meetings curbing his enthusiasm, as well as the timely alarm on his wristwatch. The honor in Alan Marrero’s eyes. The steadfast morale of Greg Walker. The Enigmatic Matt Klimek, consummate but withdrawn...
We publish onward, not in the name of our friendship, but for the love of our cause. We have nothing to offer but a slightly naïve, scant knowledge of modern conservatism from our readings in outside publications, books and recently, online journals. The intellectual sloths and anonymous cowards at the pulpit in the ivory tower at Rutgers who read this sentiment will post on their blogs, with relief, our efforts are not nearly enough to dethrone them! For we do not have the required experience, cannot battle student apathy and have not read as much third-rate Marxist hogwash.
But our superior ideas have been time tested, consecrated by the blood of martyrs, victorious in the world of reality strife-torn by a century plagued by revolution. Our naiveté is offset by our courage, bound not for each other but for our cause on a campus that unites in condemning us. I have been hated more in the last year of my life than in the past 20 years of my existence combined, and most likely more hated than you readers. And if that seems somewhat dramatic, you’re damn right it is. So entrenched are we in our cause, Matt, Justine and I forfeited characteristics of coyness and prudence long after we received the anonymous death threats, to prove a point that we weren’t even certain would turn out to be effective.
Transcending all of this; we decided to do something about which we cared. We challenged people to see our version of the truth. It is my contention we have succeeded.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, leaves us about the hottest thing in town.
Originally printed in the December 2005 issue of the Centurion.
But our universities are also at a crossroads, becoming what David French calls "islands of repression in a sea of liberty." Professors have seemed to have figured out answers to all of life’s great questions. The Academy is, without a doubt, the left’s last vast impenetrable fortress. It is an ideological monopoly on truth, which, as Victor Davis Hansen has said, “has adopted a therapeutic curriculum in pursuit of political objectives.” The pseudo-religious rhetoric of “diversity” has replaced the great rhetorical social questions of Plato and Aristotle; the relationship between God and man, virtue and vice, heroism and cowardice, and beauty and wisdom. These questions have been replaced with an obsession, not of veritas, but with skin color.
Rutgers Professors and staff gave 104 times more money to John Kerry than George W. Bush in the 2004 election cycyle. One Hundred and Four to One. This ratio is comparable to the political diversity present under the rule of Genghis Khan.
In our beloved Academy; a supposed citadel of intellectual brilliance, its commanding officers have become intellectual sloths; unchallenged by any principled conservative opposition and unbridled to invite speakers to campus to compare Bush to the Ku Klux Klan, or rant about how the war to liberate the middle east is morally bad in a class completely unrelated to international relations or its relating philosophies.
From a journalistic standpoint, THE CENTURION is an avowedly conservative magazine. We implore our detractors who demand political balance to weigh us on the scale against other student publications including The Medium, the Green Print, The Review and The Caellian. Let’s not forget The Daily Targum, a newspaper from which I was once fired. Worry not my Leftists; the academic fulcrum still tips in favor of you; if not in print (we’ll take this potential newfound conservative leaning as a testament to our success), then decidedly so in the classroom. THE CENTURION arrived on the scene last November to a blazing fire, extinguishing it with guerilla tactics; awards on doors, sensitivity complaints, racist cereals and needed muckraking against local political cronyism. This sardonic approach seems to have had more efficacy and influence on our student body which cares as much about truth as Muslims care about Jesus.
On our campus common sense is blurred by obfuscation; the p.c. patrol, the diversity police, the self-esteem deans, the speech codes, and the professors violating core tenets of academic freedom, etc.
I founded THE CENTURION because I have a dream...
I have a dream where diversity refers to more than just the melanin in one’s skin; where conservatives are not to be called “fascists” for advocating pluralities of methodologies, perspectives and common sense views.
I have a dream that Lucky Charms is thought of as a breakfast cereal rather than a symbol of Leprechaun oppression.
I have a dream where the banning of “offensive” Grease Trucks sandwich names is of little consequence compared to the rapes of women off campus.
I have a dream someone realizes Rutgers’ financial woes just might be due to dozens of committees and caucuses “devoted to advancing our common purposes” as well as pork programs and counselors and their Deans that believe self-esteem is more important than the process by which you earn it.
I have a dream where we realize guns are no more responsible for Columbine than spoons are responsible for Michael Moore’s obesity.
I have a dream where we lay our presents under Christmas Trees, not holiday shrubs.
I have a dream at least one building or program or committee or scholarship will be named after our Rutgers’ Nobel peace prize winning graduate Milton Friedman, RC ’32. His axiom that political freedom requires economic freedom is a lesson learned only by visiting the graves of the innocent women and children butchered to death by bloodthirsty tyrants; economic atrocities condoned by the applause of Paul Robeson's supporters.
I have a dream where bureaucrats, uneducated in matters relating to life’s great questions, stop putting restrictions on what I can or can’t say, stop enacting policies that arbitrarily prohibit behavior, and stop making value judgments on what I believe.
I have a dream where conservative faculty are free from ideological witch hunts; where political opinions and/or skin color is prohibited from being considered in the hiring of university professors.
I have a dream where the unfair employment practices and accusations against one of our nations most gifted sociobiologists because of his conservative leaning, is prosecuted by the fullest extent of the law.
I have a dream where they will introduce a biology prerequisite for women’s studies classes.
For we the conservatives, ironically, have become the modern day Henry David Thoreaus, albeit in a less revolutionary way. For we, the silent majority, “stand athwart history yelling stop” in a place and at a time when our professors and peers call for radical change.
None of us knew each other a year ago. A man I considered my best friend last year betrayed me over chalk yielding, gown wearing overly ambitious students buying into their own hype. I have met others since then. The unappreciated wisdom of the encyclopedic Wesley James Young; whose civility is only matched by his compassion. The southern legal language of Jeff Erickson. The untapped artistic genius and patience of Justine Mertz. The editorial prowess of my successor, Dan Whitney, who spent late nights (and their accompanying early mornings) at production meetings curbing his enthusiasm, as well as the timely alarm on his wristwatch. The honor in Alan Marrero’s eyes. The steadfast morale of Greg Walker. The Enigmatic Matt Klimek, consummate but withdrawn...
We publish onward, not in the name of our friendship, but for the love of our cause. We have nothing to offer but a slightly naïve, scant knowledge of modern conservatism from our readings in outside publications, books and recently, online journals. The intellectual sloths and anonymous cowards at the pulpit in the ivory tower at Rutgers who read this sentiment will post on their blogs, with relief, our efforts are not nearly enough to dethrone them! For we do not have the required experience, cannot battle student apathy and have not read as much third-rate Marxist hogwash.
But our superior ideas have been time tested, consecrated by the blood of martyrs, victorious in the world of reality strife-torn by a century plagued by revolution. Our naiveté is offset by our courage, bound not for each other but for our cause on a campus that unites in condemning us. I have been hated more in the last year of my life than in the past 20 years of my existence combined, and most likely more hated than you readers. And if that seems somewhat dramatic, you’re damn right it is. So entrenched are we in our cause, Matt, Justine and I forfeited characteristics of coyness and prudence long after we received the anonymous death threats, to prove a point that we weren’t even certain would turn out to be effective.
Transcending all of this; we decided to do something about which we cared. We challenged people to see our version of the truth. It is my contention we have succeeded.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, leaves us about the hottest thing in town.
James O'Keefe
Originally printed in the December 2005 issue of the Centurion.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
The Centurion Goes Caroling at Rutgers
NJO: Video and blurb from the Rutgers Centurion's YouTube account.
Uploaded on May 3, 2009
It was December and pretty gloomy
around campus, so we decided to go out and spread some Christmas cheer
to everybody at the University.
Friday, November 11, 2005
James gets an IM from his maybe-on-a-break maybe-ex-girlfriend, hilarity ensues
███████: James, it's been a while since we've talked, I just want to tell you Goodbye since I'm goign to Italy
James: Are you Kidding me ███████?! Goodbye?! How could you??????? You're not leaving for another two months, and I'm going to Europe also!!! And that's after Christmas vacation... and you just got cheated on!!! I never cheated on you, ever! How could you say this.
[...]
███████: [...] I'm not a cold-hearted bitch [...]
James: So
cruel... so so cruel. You IM me tonight to make you feel better about
yourself, "I'm not a cold-hearted bitch?" you ask. You remove youself
from my facebook wall, you tell me you won't talk to me because "you're
going to Europe." You don't even talk to me now!! Do you realize how
much you've hurt me? You can't say anything nice! You expect me to make
you feel better about yourself and reasure you?! I just saw on on your
profile you were fucked over by Jason S████████.
He played you like a piano. YOu left me for a fucking scumbag who
cheats on you and fucks other girls, and your poor little heart is
broken. Your broke the heart of a caring, charismatic, sensitive loyal
boyfriend for a fucking scumbag. Now your dirtied up. How does it feel ███████?
I think I'm worth more than that, in fact I know I am, and I'm know
other girls know I am as well. So no, I don't want to be friends with
you, until you look into my eyes and give me the most sincere apology of
your life. Until then, leave me alone.
NJO: Reconstructed from this post.
NJO: Reconstructed from this post.
Monday, November 07, 2005
November Issue
The November issue of
The Centurion is out now! Look for it at the usual distribution sites
around campus, or you can read the pdf version online at www.rucenturion.com once it’s been posted.
In our Feature section this issue we discussed corruption at Rutgers, ranging from Jon Corzine not being fined for violating sign ordinances to the apparent campaign to kick the Greek organizations off campus.
In our Feature section this issue we discussed corruption at Rutgers, ranging from Jon Corzine not being fined for violating sign ordinances to the apparent campaign to kick the Greek organizations off campus.
We also have a run down of what went on at Rutgers over the past month, as well as the usual coverage of important national topics.
We want to hear YOUR opinion on the issue. Leave your comments here!
Originally posted at The Centurion at Rutgers at centurionjournal.blogspot.com.
We want to hear YOUR opinion on the issue. Leave your comments here!
Originally posted at The Centurion at Rutgers at centurionjournal.blogspot.com.
We know Intellectuals Hate Capitalism. But Why?
JAMES O'KEEFE
How ironic is it that the hatred of capitalism is disproportionately composed of proletariat theorist professors who make over 100,000 dollars a year. Ironic also is the doctrince of socialism is an intellectual phenomenon, not a working class one, derived from these professor who reside in the top income bracket.
When the Federalist Papers were written, the property owners were the most educated. This is no longer the case. An entrepreneur has a practical intelligence, whereas the professor has a theoretical one and often distances himself away from the free market.
But why such capitalist loathing? Ludwig von Mises proposed the intellectuals are resentful of the few who make more money than they do; namely investment bankers, corporate lawyers, etc. Others say they intellectuals feel undervalued in a system which rewards for talent, individual initiative and personal merit, not intelligence.
Robert Nozick proposed the intellectuals derive their hate from their tensions in elementary school with other children. This is a theory we'll explore at another time. As Nozick says, intellectuals will likely have the last word, a form poetic justice that is anything but ironic.
NJO: Originally printed in the November 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Illiteracy Count: 8
How ironic is it that the hatred of capitalism is disproportionately composed of proletariat theorist professors who make over 100,000 dollars a year. Ironic also is the doctrince of socialism is an intellectual phenomenon, not a working class one, derived from these professor who reside in the top income bracket.
When the Federalist Papers were written, the property owners were the most educated. This is no longer the case. An entrepreneur has a practical intelligence, whereas the professor has a theoretical one and often distances himself away from the free market.
But why such capitalist loathing? Ludwig von Mises proposed the intellectuals are resentful of the few who make more money than they do; namely investment bankers, corporate lawyers, etc. Others say they intellectuals feel undervalued in a system which rewards for talent, individual initiative and personal merit, not intelligence.
Robert Nozick proposed the intellectuals derive their hate from their tensions in elementary school with other children. This is a theory we'll explore at another time. As Nozick says, intellectuals will likely have the last word, a form poetic justice that is anything but ironic.
NJO: Originally printed in the November 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Illiteracy Count: 8
- How ironic is it... (If the sentence is a statement, it should be "it is". If it's a question, it should have a question mark.)
- doctrince
- Ironic also is... (The whole sentence is quite the fucking omnishambles, but perhaps some small vestige of life could have been restored to its abortion-like form by injecting "the fact that" after the first three words.)
- these professor who
- von Mises proposed the intellectuals (Replace "the" with "that")
- Others say they intellectuals ("They intellectuals"? Is he from fucking Fife all of a sudden?)
- Nozick proposed the intellectuals (Replace "the" with "that")
- a form poetic justice
The New Core Curriculum
JAMES O'KEEFE
ISI books, a division of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, recently sent us a copy of their 2006 masterpiece “Choosing the Right College,” which rates the best 134 colleges from a classically conservative perspective, emphasizing the core curriculum and the college experience.
Wouldn’t you know it, Rutgers University made the list (after all, our philosophy department alone was ranked number one by the Philosophical Gourmet Report). Despite a less-than stellar review of residence life, (frankly, we deserve it), our academics received great praise. ISI also published a list of classics that could compose a core curriculum (which the administrators have been removing from the list of requirements since the 1960s).
Contemporary “postmodern” (and often Marxist) dogma attacks the achievements of those who authored the classics because they were privileged and powerful white males. However, such ad hominem attacks against the character and socialization of such individuals ignores the superiority of their objective insights and their achievements.
Another of the points contributing author Mark Henrie emphasizes in his introduction is that students are losing the opportunity to gain a broad understanding of the laws that govern human nature and human understanding. The decline of classical education is a modern tragedy.
Bill J. Bennett of the Heritage Foundation pointed out that, upon graduating, only 14 percent of students know that James Madison wrote the United States Constitution, one of many statistics indicating a pathetic lack of civic knowledge and responsibility perpetuated by strange agendas of “multiculturalism” and “diversity.” Most electives do not focus on anything of substantive historical value,
Timely axioms like “god and man,” “virtue and vice,” “heroism and cowardice,” “tyranny and freedom,” and “truth and untruth” are replaced with electives concerning racial, ethnic, sexual and non-literary themes. The focus of the humanities is now underdog appeasement, e.g. encouraging the use of Ebonics.
Though the classics are no longer required of students, we encourages students to register for classes in western civilization and philosophy - you may just learn something.
NJO: Originally printed in the November 2005 issue of The Centurion at Rutgers.
ISI books, a division of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, recently sent us a copy of their 2006 masterpiece “Choosing the Right College,” which rates the best 134 colleges from a classically conservative perspective, emphasizing the core curriculum and the college experience.
Wouldn’t you know it, Rutgers University made the list (after all, our philosophy department alone was ranked number one by the Philosophical Gourmet Report). Despite a less-than stellar review of residence life, (frankly, we deserve it), our academics received great praise. ISI also published a list of classics that could compose a core curriculum (which the administrators have been removing from the list of requirements since the 1960s).
Contemporary “postmodern” (and often Marxist) dogma attacks the achievements of those who authored the classics because they were privileged and powerful white males. However, such ad hominem attacks against the character and socialization of such individuals ignores the superiority of their objective insights and their achievements.
Another of the points contributing author Mark Henrie emphasizes in his introduction is that students are losing the opportunity to gain a broad understanding of the laws that govern human nature and human understanding. The decline of classical education is a modern tragedy.
Bill J. Bennett of the Heritage Foundation pointed out that, upon graduating, only 14 percent of students know that James Madison wrote the United States Constitution, one of many statistics indicating a pathetic lack of civic knowledge and responsibility perpetuated by strange agendas of “multiculturalism” and “diversity.” Most electives do not focus on anything of substantive historical value,
Timely axioms like “god and man,” “virtue and vice,” “heroism and cowardice,” “tyranny and freedom,” and “truth and untruth” are replaced with electives concerning racial, ethnic, sexual and non-literary themes. The focus of the humanities is now underdog appeasement, e.g. encouraging the use of Ebonics.
Though the classics are no longer required of students, we encourages students to register for classes in western civilization and philosophy - you may just learn something.
NJO: Originally printed in the November 2005 issue of The Centurion at Rutgers.
Letters to the Centurion: men galore
In your October 2005 issue you listed three all-male colleges which you claimed to be the only ones in the US, but there’s at least one more: Deep Springs College in California.
According to their site, “In accordance with the Deed of Trust, Deep Springs is an all-male college.”
Best,
Alex Kasavin
Alex is right. There are a whopping four all-men’s colleges in the country. Plus, Deep Springs school admits 10 - 15 students, hardly comparable to the tens of thousands of women enrolled in all women’s colleges.
There is a serious advantage to a single sex education for men, especially since much "classical" literature has been de-emphasized by feminist influence due to the postmodern notion that a narrative
sexual identity is relevant and/or necessary in answering life's great questions. Sure, social injustice was committed against women in the time of Socrates, Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, and Hamilton, but the principles which brought women's suffrage came about because of a better understanding of these great Western philosophers, not in spite of them.
To this day, there is value and understanding in these works that is lacking in contemporary authors. The links between the United States Constitution and Plato's De Enima as just as significant as the links between John Locke and the Declaration of Independence. Intelligent interpretation of classical thinkers has established the freest, most prosperous modern society in the world.
The abandonment of the core curriculum in higher education has been a surreptitious, radical demand stemming from the 1960s to censor superior insight because the authors of such wisdom weren't underdogs. Such ignorance will only lead to tyranny by denying how we attained our freedoms; no matter what the feminist majority says.
As Pope Benedict XVI said, "Truth cannot be decided by a majority vote."
NJO: Originally printed in the November 2005 issue of The Centurion at Rutgers. The editor's reply is unsigned but I would infer that it is probably by James O'Keefe through the details and the writing style.
According to their site, “In accordance with the Deed of Trust, Deep Springs is an all-male college.”
Best,
Alex Kasavin
Alex is right. There are a whopping four all-men’s colleges in the country. Plus, Deep Springs school admits 10 - 15 students, hardly comparable to the tens of thousands of women enrolled in all women’s colleges.
There is a serious advantage to a single sex education for men, especially since much "classical" literature has been de-emphasized by feminist influence due to the postmodern notion that a narrative
sexual identity is relevant and/or necessary in answering life's great questions. Sure, social injustice was committed against women in the time of Socrates, Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, and Hamilton, but the principles which brought women's suffrage came about because of a better understanding of these great Western philosophers, not in spite of them.
To this day, there is value and understanding in these works that is lacking in contemporary authors. The links between the United States Constitution and Plato's De Enima as just as significant as the links between John Locke and the Declaration of Independence. Intelligent interpretation of classical thinkers has established the freest, most prosperous modern society in the world.
The abandonment of the core curriculum in higher education has been a surreptitious, radical demand stemming from the 1960s to censor superior insight because the authors of such wisdom weren't underdogs. Such ignorance will only lead to tyranny by denying how we attained our freedoms; no matter what the feminist majority says.
As Pope Benedict XVI said, "Truth cannot be decided by a majority vote."
NJO: Originally printed in the November 2005 issue of The Centurion at Rutgers. The editor's reply is unsigned but I would infer that it is probably by James O'Keefe through the details and the writing style.
Monday, October 24, 2005
Premiere of Our Blog
We at The Centurion are pleased to announce the premiere of the
Centurion Blog. This blog is intended to serve as a way for our readers
at Rutgers and elsewhere to comment on the content of our issues. Once
our new issue comes out we will be creating posts for comments to be
left, so check back here once you the November issue has been released.
Originally posted at The Centurion at Rutgers at centurionjournal.blogspot.com.
Originally posted at The Centurion at Rutgers at centurionjournal.blogspot.com.
Sunday, October 09, 2005
Women WANT nice guys but are ATTRACTED to assholes.
My friend Roger Masi introduced me to this philosophy...
What women WANT is different than what women are ATTRACTED to... Women desire arrogant, brutish, confident, cocky men, who are, well, funny. Women WANT men who are nice, rich, handsome, good family, etc. Men ARE ATTRACTED women who are hot, young, and fertile. It's biological, stemming from evolution and an ecological desire to produce offspring. Women don't want sissies. Nothing is worse to a woman than a guy who obsesses over them, worships them, thinks about them constantly. Women want men who are dangerous and strong. Looks are less important to them; probably second behind this strong personality.
And the above applies to HOT women. HOT women are ATTRACTED to jerks, brutes, and assholes, which to them, radiate such unbeffitting magnetic wonder without even trying. HOT women like morons, (with big cocks), who know the games women play, because they have the balls to approach them. Most gentlemen don't know what it is about jerks that makes them get women. I'll tell you...
The Jock Cock takes every opportunity to skillfully and shamelessly air the Hot girl's dirty laundry within unbeffitting jests and jokes, and candidly mocks her with light hearted irony. then he does somethin nice once in a while, but he ALWAYS uses it against her. This is what keeps her on her toes and attracted to him. Women love it. They feel a little embarrased, always pinned, helpless and challenged... Nice Gentlemen finish last, guaranteed.
Another thing, Hot, attractive women are always desperately seeking and competeting for something... and YOU can be that something... you don't have to manipulate! The true manipulation is how men ordinarily act! Buying gifts, makeup, candy, flowers, dinner, sucking up to girls... this is all based on WHAT OTHERS THINK IS NORMAL. Wussies, my friends are manipulators. wussies supresses his inner desires, The truth, so some girl will like him. If you think you're being selfish by using the methods above, know that women want you to use the new method!
A common error is that women care about LOOKS, like men do. Our personality, something within our control, is what women really want. Women aren't attracted to jerks because they like the abuse - its because they are bad boys. Women like domination.
My Friends, women logic is quite simple - the logic is complicated in its being counterintuitive -when you realize the truth behind the way they act and what they desire, the reasons they dump you (or reject you off the bat) will begin to make sense, and when you realize this, you will be wise.
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
Friday, October 07, 2005
Sweet ███████
Everyone will tell you to burn her
photographs, return her gifts, ignore her, etc. That's terrible advice for your conscience and your heart, which tells you to keep talking, keep communicating, keep fighting to keep her with you. Writing journal entries about girls leaving you are introverted cliches, but it couldn't work any other way, it rings true every time you go through it. Breaking up with your first love is the hardest thing you will ever have to do.
To describe her is like trying to describe a feelign which can only be felt. Some remember displeasure, disatisfaction, whatever helps them recover from the depression of her leaving you. Not I. I remember the side of her face, how she would look out of the corner of her eyes, an infinity of lovely moments. The first semester of college was hard. Temptation, distance, uncertainy, homesickness, new surroundings. Some are nostalgic for their freshman year. Not I. It was hard, and at the time I couldn't appreciate my relationship with her. She used to cry on the phone with me, and I used to melt to it. The better man is loyal and committed, no matter how tough it is inside. The better man is patient. I didn't treat her right, of course, I took her for granted. Because I knew I hard her and she would never leave me.
The years went by, and I was lonely. She was immature at times, I wanted something more and dreamed of someone else. But something magical happened in the background and underneath it all. Some type of connection had developed, independent of lust, attraction, "love" desire, dependency and trust. It was like she became life, I became hers, we were each other, and integral to how we though, spoke, lived and hoped. I don't know what love is but I imagine it is what you make of it; hard word. I worked hard for ███████, probably not as hard as how much she worked for me. You can't just end that, certainly not with a phone call or a letter or a decision. Nothing overrides 4 years of contact and togetherness. You may think you can just say goodbye, what you feel will ultimately matter.
███████ has left me because she says it is what is needed in both of our lives. Everbody tells me it is time to move on. Like a President waiting to press the red button after the entire cabinet has agreed to drop the bomb, I stand pondering. There are lot of fish in the sea, so the proverb goes. So so so so many beautiful fish. But none like ███████. I hope one day we get back together. I think she is a wise, strong, independent, caring human being with a simple yet wonderful way of looking at life. She really loved me and then she went to college. She now wrestles with all the desires I fought off.
Earlier today she asked me if "I missed her." With my cabinet screaming in my ears to ignore her, I melted and told her the following: My Dear, I miss you more than the moon misses the sky, the waves miss the ocean, the desert misses the rain, the flower misses the sun … I don’t care what advice people give me, since you left, not a day goes by without me wishing I would have never took you for granted, and to this day I feel more attracted to you than ever, with every wickedly silly thing you do, my heart flutters, but the strength and inspiration you gave to me will far out live any stupid short term fling (which I Have yet to have). Even so, I want nothing more than to have fun with you. I hope guys are treating you like the beautiful princess you are, and deep inside, I hope you miss me too.
Tonight ███████ told me she has been dating another guy for six months. It is time for me to move on, this I realize. I will not leave crying, kicking and screaming, I will leave happy for what she brough into my life. If you are reading this ███████ I have to thank you, for giving me yourself for so long. You've left me because of temporary confusion but one day, we'll fly again. Until then, I need to meet someone else, and soon.
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
Franklin College
I shall have an interview with the Swiss on Monday in Manhattan, to see if I will be spending the next semester abroad. To your left is a picture of Lake Lugano, 50 miles north of Milano, Italy located in the southern province of switzerland. I intend to use this blog as my travel log, if I go
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
I shall have an interview with the Swiss on Monday in Manhattan, to see if I will be spending the next semester abroad. To your left is a picture of Lake Lugano, 50 miles north of Milano, Italy located in the southern province of switzerland. I intend to use this blog as my travel log, if I go
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
Monday, September 26, 2005
Screw This
The Daily Targum
By James O’Keefe
Published: 12/8/2003
This goes out to all the Rutgers students who have been screwed like a 60-watt light bulb, like a demented organ grinder, like a lug nut off a flat tire. This goes out to the innocent first-year scholars who experience more bureaucracy here than the DMV on Monday morning, more red tape than a Kmart on Christmas. This goes out to all those who finally have adapted to things such as bus and registration paradigms that are as inefficient and cumbersome as square snails.But as you might know, it's not just the clichéd RU Screw that can fill you with more rage than a lion in heat. It's the small things - the silly things - the little moments comprising your everyday routine that torment you. Things that administrators and the public could never understand. I've held my pride in for too long. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, which gets its satisfaction from surprising me with an array of vexations from its bureaucratic bag of antics, will now feel my wrath.This goes out to all those people who despite their last-minute sprinting, will always miss that A, EE or LX, by 15 seconds, no matter what the time, place or situation. They will watch that bus, operating on arbitrary time intervals, merrily accelerate onward just past their reach. Those faint green letters on the rear will mock their disappointment, and they will think what could have been if only they had taken the stairs instead of waiting those precious seconds for that malfunctioning elevator.This goes out to all those people who think those "handicapped" doors in front of the computer lab on College Ave. just don't make any sense. Like others around campus, I have never seen them work properly, and once I saw them close on a helpless man who was actually in his wheelchair pushing that ridiculous blue switch. You are obliged to open them manually, requiring more strength than if they were just regular doors. Uncanny.Maybe laxatives aren't in the food at Brower. Perhaps, like the "Captain Commons" faculty person exclaims on posted napkins, (notice the goofy, super-hero-like terminology), it is the juice we drink, not the glop we consume, that makes us jet for the lavatories. But how are we supposed to drink all this juice when those funky, slow machines are always spitting out diluted water? Regardless of the mysterious source of one's digestive stimulation, how are we supposed to relieve ourselves when the dorm bathrooms are being cleaned at the most inopportune times, leaving us desperately darting around the dorm floors frantically searching for toilets like squirrels.Then there are those brown paper towel dispensing devices in the bathrooms that also makes less sense than the story line of "Dude, Where's My Car?" They are always empty, and if they aren't empty, the towels get stuck coming out. The completely modernized bathrooms are void of the more clean, reliable, and environmentally friendly hand dryers. The dirty, old bathrooms are filled with them. If there are infrared heat-sensing laser beams on toilet stalls that automatically flush for you, why can't they have hand dryers that just blow warm air?This goes out to all those students who lined up and waited patiently his or her turn to sell all those expensive, seldom-used books you bought with irrelevant material not on your exams. It's your turn, the moment of truth. You encounter the book nazi who screams, "These books are no good! No buyback for you!" You tilt your head in shame, stuck with those worthless hundred-dollar investments. You reflect on the candor, the brutal mercilessness of the book nazi who shot your high economic spirits down like a clay pigeon in the sky; whipped you like the four-eyed kid in the schoolyard!And what is with all the pornography? From chairs in the lecture halls to the desks in Alexander library. Kudos to anyone who can concentrate on studying with penises and vaginas sprawling every inch of your workspace.What is with those dreary looking students checking your backpack when you leave the library? What purpose does this serve? Do they even care what's inside? All that is required of me is that I wave my backpack around giving the illusion that they are checking it! Same thing with the buffoonery of writing down guest's names when they enter dorms ... for only five hours out of the day! The only time they've checked my key is when I've offered to show it to them! Will someone please show me the administrative geniuses who come up with these foolproof ideas for my safety?The Hurtado Health Center seems to be more of an assembly line, an illusion of caring, another bureaucratic requisite than anything actually useful for the protection of my health. It took them a year to remove that "Immunization Hold" from my transcript, even after I sent them letter upon letter verifying what they wanted. Those exclamation points online made me feel more like a rabid tiger at a circus than a student at a university.And those lottery numbers. They claim they're random, but I tell you they are cursed, perhaps staged. It seems only the previously fortunate go to the exact room with the exact person they want, while those who were in tripled dorm rooms, or moved around campus like pawns on a chess board, get screwed. How equitable.This goes out to all the victims who've had mailbox partners who haven't checked their mail in six months, giving you a tiny stuffed box filled with his outdated newsletters that you must constantly sort through every week. Yet this itself is a daunting task, considering you must carefully remove letters without them falling into the abyss on the opposite side. That is - if you can actually open those puny doors with the outdated combination mechanisms.This goes out to the Rutgers students who are changing their minor simply because it is so challenging to get in the appropriate classes, dealing with departments that can't figure out what requirements they want for the major, programs with ambiguous rules for admission, smelly old men hogging televisions in the Red Lion Café and cars that are magnets for parking tickets.But we must understand Rutgers is a state of mind, our distinguishing collegiate privilege, and a piece of cake for what's to come in our lives. However frustrating all of this nonsense seems, however loud the laughs coming from gravesite of bureaucratic theorist Max Weber are, we must remind ourselves not to retreat, not to go quietly into the night. We must use bigger scissors when encountering red tape, perhaps listen to the inspirational "Chariots of Fire" as we run faster to those buses, and write columns in The Daily Targum commenting on all that insanity abundant with odd similes stranger than a gang of drunken mimes.
NJO: Originally appeared in Rutgers University's newspaper The Daily Targum, later posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
The Daily Targum
By James O’Keefe
Published: 12/8/2003
This goes out to all the Rutgers students who have been screwed like a 60-watt light bulb, like a demented organ grinder, like a lug nut off a flat tire. This goes out to the innocent first-year scholars who experience more bureaucracy here than the DMV on Monday morning, more red tape than a Kmart on Christmas. This goes out to all those who finally have adapted to things such as bus and registration paradigms that are as inefficient and cumbersome as square snails.But as you might know, it's not just the clichéd RU Screw that can fill you with more rage than a lion in heat. It's the small things - the silly things - the little moments comprising your everyday routine that torment you. Things that administrators and the public could never understand. I've held my pride in for too long. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, which gets its satisfaction from surprising me with an array of vexations from its bureaucratic bag of antics, will now feel my wrath.This goes out to all those people who despite their last-minute sprinting, will always miss that A, EE or LX, by 15 seconds, no matter what the time, place or situation. They will watch that bus, operating on arbitrary time intervals, merrily accelerate onward just past their reach. Those faint green letters on the rear will mock their disappointment, and they will think what could have been if only they had taken the stairs instead of waiting those precious seconds for that malfunctioning elevator.This goes out to all those people who think those "handicapped" doors in front of the computer lab on College Ave. just don't make any sense. Like others around campus, I have never seen them work properly, and once I saw them close on a helpless man who was actually in his wheelchair pushing that ridiculous blue switch. You are obliged to open them manually, requiring more strength than if they were just regular doors. Uncanny.Maybe laxatives aren't in the food at Brower. Perhaps, like the "Captain Commons" faculty person exclaims on posted napkins, (notice the goofy, super-hero-like terminology), it is the juice we drink, not the glop we consume, that makes us jet for the lavatories. But how are we supposed to drink all this juice when those funky, slow machines are always spitting out diluted water? Regardless of the mysterious source of one's digestive stimulation, how are we supposed to relieve ourselves when the dorm bathrooms are being cleaned at the most inopportune times, leaving us desperately darting around the dorm floors frantically searching for toilets like squirrels.Then there are those brown paper towel dispensing devices in the bathrooms that also makes less sense than the story line of "Dude, Where's My Car?" They are always empty, and if they aren't empty, the towels get stuck coming out. The completely modernized bathrooms are void of the more clean, reliable, and environmentally friendly hand dryers. The dirty, old bathrooms are filled with them. If there are infrared heat-sensing laser beams on toilet stalls that automatically flush for you, why can't they have hand dryers that just blow warm air?This goes out to all those students who lined up and waited patiently his or her turn to sell all those expensive, seldom-used books you bought with irrelevant material not on your exams. It's your turn, the moment of truth. You encounter the book nazi who screams, "These books are no good! No buyback for you!" You tilt your head in shame, stuck with those worthless hundred-dollar investments. You reflect on the candor, the brutal mercilessness of the book nazi who shot your high economic spirits down like a clay pigeon in the sky; whipped you like the four-eyed kid in the schoolyard!And what is with all the pornography? From chairs in the lecture halls to the desks in Alexander library. Kudos to anyone who can concentrate on studying with penises and vaginas sprawling every inch of your workspace.What is with those dreary looking students checking your backpack when you leave the library? What purpose does this serve? Do they even care what's inside? All that is required of me is that I wave my backpack around giving the illusion that they are checking it! Same thing with the buffoonery of writing down guest's names when they enter dorms ... for only five hours out of the day! The only time they've checked my key is when I've offered to show it to them! Will someone please show me the administrative geniuses who come up with these foolproof ideas for my safety?The Hurtado Health Center seems to be more of an assembly line, an illusion of caring, another bureaucratic requisite than anything actually useful for the protection of my health. It took them a year to remove that "Immunization Hold" from my transcript, even after I sent them letter upon letter verifying what they wanted. Those exclamation points online made me feel more like a rabid tiger at a circus than a student at a university.And those lottery numbers. They claim they're random, but I tell you they are cursed, perhaps staged. It seems only the previously fortunate go to the exact room with the exact person they want, while those who were in tripled dorm rooms, or moved around campus like pawns on a chess board, get screwed. How equitable.This goes out to all the victims who've had mailbox partners who haven't checked their mail in six months, giving you a tiny stuffed box filled with his outdated newsletters that you must constantly sort through every week. Yet this itself is a daunting task, considering you must carefully remove letters without them falling into the abyss on the opposite side. That is - if you can actually open those puny doors with the outdated combination mechanisms.This goes out to the Rutgers students who are changing their minor simply because it is so challenging to get in the appropriate classes, dealing with departments that can't figure out what requirements they want for the major, programs with ambiguous rules for admission, smelly old men hogging televisions in the Red Lion Café and cars that are magnets for parking tickets.But we must understand Rutgers is a state of mind, our distinguishing collegiate privilege, and a piece of cake for what's to come in our lives. However frustrating all of this nonsense seems, however loud the laughs coming from gravesite of bureaucratic theorist Max Weber are, we must remind ourselves not to retreat, not to go quietly into the night. We must use bigger scissors when encountering red tape, perhaps listen to the inspirational "Chariots of Fire" as we run faster to those buses, and write columns in The Daily Targum commenting on all that insanity abundant with odd similes stranger than a gang of drunken mimes.
NJO: Originally appeared in Rutgers University's newspaper The Daily Targum, later posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
The Miracle of life
The Daily Targum
By James O’Keefe
Published: 9/19/2003
Each time a man ejaculates, 500 million sperm - a number exceeding the population of Europe - eagerly swim forth. Ingrained in each one of these feisty chromosome-filled tadpoles is the incessant, instinctual, dire need to pursue and discover the pot of gold over the rainbow. Every human being was at one time a mindless, helpless, microscopic piece of bean sprout-looking matter with a mere chance of one in 500 million (all other things being equal) of fertilizing our mother's egg. But somehow in a world of six billion, each one of us has beaten these astronomical odds. We are walking and talking exceptions to a statistical impossibility; virtual pieces of art sculpted from bare nothingness; manifestations of an oppressed chance in a world where we can't even win the raffle at a little league baseball game. But not all sperm are created equal. Take a look in the mirror. You are essentially looking at an Olympian. You sprinted through dark canyons, solving mazes and using inherent superpowers to break through shells of steel. You emerged triumphantly winning the gold medal in a race of 500 million. First place receives a bright journey filled with meaning, truth and accomplishment. These special sperm grow up to become doctors, lawyers, puppeteers, and professors - perhaps curing a disease, becoming president, preventing a war or writing a thesis on kangaroo psychology or what-have-you. The other 499,999,999 (give or take a couple) vanish into the dark recesses of an unacknowledged life they never get to live.It amazes me that an entire species is composed of these Olympians - those special sperm who beat unthinkable odds and come from nothingness with no probability of ever existing to persevere over those statistical detractors. Right now take a look around you at the people who take their lives for granted. Look at them. They don't even consider how incredible their journey has been. They don't realize how much of an impact they will have on the world around them. Everybody has an impact on the world around them. If Christopher Columbus's mother didn't have sex with her husband on the exact day she did, in the exact form she did, the whole fate of the western world would be changed forever. When Columbus was a sperm he could have decided he would give up on his way to fertilizing the egg, tired of meandering through tunnels of darkness with no egg in sight. A different, less adventuring sperm could have mistakenly bumped into him and fractured Columbus's tail. The other sperm could then reach the egg, and Chris could have grown up with different interests to become a jester, instead of a skilled entrepreneur like Columbus. The entire free world would have ceased to exist as it does now. Perhaps Japan or the Swedes would have discovered us. Native Americans could have lived in tranquil serenity for another hundred years. Perhaps we would turn into a communist breeding ground. But whatever the outcome, everybody would be having sex in different ways with different people in different places. Maybe there would be no melting pot. Entirely different people would have been born. Life on earth would be irrevocably changed into a new paradigm that would have stayed the course of human history forever. Perhaps we should really accredit the discovery of the "New World" to the less adventurous sperm not getting in the way of Columbus.As you can see, this isn't just a reproduction phenomenon. It is also connected to fate. We choose a path, take it and one thing leads to another. One could eternally retrace steps not taken and roads less traveled to no end, realizing there were so many people and places not encountered. That is why when I'm talking to anyone, I realize how amazing it truly is that I am with that person, at that time, in that place, when things could have turned out completely different in infinitely many ways. A 100-year-old man has discovered so many forks in his journey, so many twists and turns since he was conceived. There will be generations of people affecting the world due to the choices he made; due to the fact his parents decided to immigrate to America. He has made an eternal ripple on the pond of time. Billions of people, just like him, operate all over earth. We meet in subways, at Starbucks or in school. If we change our desire for coffee one morning, or our decision to take the F instead of the EE, perhaps we'll be missing out on potential friendship or some type of epiphany; deciding to have a cappuccino could change our lives drastically.Now you can't live your life like this. You would probably never choose your major here at Rutgers. You would never marry anyone ever. You would obsess over every decision you have to make. But the next time you hear a mathematician belittling your chances of winning the lottery, tell him both of you were once facing odds approaching 1 in 500 million. You were both one of about 10 trillion sperm produced in a man's lifetime. Explain that you both beat the impossibly small likelihood of meeting each other in a universal realm of infinite space-time. Perhaps he'll look at you, shrug, and say, "You've got a point." Whatever you believe in, whatever your origin and whatever ideology you ascribe to, you cannot deny the miracle of life. Believe in yourself and in your ability to achieve impossible things, because you already did.
NJO: Originally appeared in Rutgers University's newspaper The Daily Targum, later posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
The Daily Targum
By James O’Keefe
Published: 9/19/2003
Each time a man ejaculates, 500 million sperm - a number exceeding the population of Europe - eagerly swim forth. Ingrained in each one of these feisty chromosome-filled tadpoles is the incessant, instinctual, dire need to pursue and discover the pot of gold over the rainbow. Every human being was at one time a mindless, helpless, microscopic piece of bean sprout-looking matter with a mere chance of one in 500 million (all other things being equal) of fertilizing our mother's egg. But somehow in a world of six billion, each one of us has beaten these astronomical odds. We are walking and talking exceptions to a statistical impossibility; virtual pieces of art sculpted from bare nothingness; manifestations of an oppressed chance in a world where we can't even win the raffle at a little league baseball game. But not all sperm are created equal. Take a look in the mirror. You are essentially looking at an Olympian. You sprinted through dark canyons, solving mazes and using inherent superpowers to break through shells of steel. You emerged triumphantly winning the gold medal in a race of 500 million. First place receives a bright journey filled with meaning, truth and accomplishment. These special sperm grow up to become doctors, lawyers, puppeteers, and professors - perhaps curing a disease, becoming president, preventing a war or writing a thesis on kangaroo psychology or what-have-you. The other 499,999,999 (give or take a couple) vanish into the dark recesses of an unacknowledged life they never get to live.It amazes me that an entire species is composed of these Olympians - those special sperm who beat unthinkable odds and come from nothingness with no probability of ever existing to persevere over those statistical detractors. Right now take a look around you at the people who take their lives for granted. Look at them. They don't even consider how incredible their journey has been. They don't realize how much of an impact they will have on the world around them. Everybody has an impact on the world around them. If Christopher Columbus's mother didn't have sex with her husband on the exact day she did, in the exact form she did, the whole fate of the western world would be changed forever. When Columbus was a sperm he could have decided he would give up on his way to fertilizing the egg, tired of meandering through tunnels of darkness with no egg in sight. A different, less adventuring sperm could have mistakenly bumped into him and fractured Columbus's tail. The other sperm could then reach the egg, and Chris could have grown up with different interests to become a jester, instead of a skilled entrepreneur like Columbus. The entire free world would have ceased to exist as it does now. Perhaps Japan or the Swedes would have discovered us. Native Americans could have lived in tranquil serenity for another hundred years. Perhaps we would turn into a communist breeding ground. But whatever the outcome, everybody would be having sex in different ways with different people in different places. Maybe there would be no melting pot. Entirely different people would have been born. Life on earth would be irrevocably changed into a new paradigm that would have stayed the course of human history forever. Perhaps we should really accredit the discovery of the "New World" to the less adventurous sperm not getting in the way of Columbus.As you can see, this isn't just a reproduction phenomenon. It is also connected to fate. We choose a path, take it and one thing leads to another. One could eternally retrace steps not taken and roads less traveled to no end, realizing there were so many people and places not encountered. That is why when I'm talking to anyone, I realize how amazing it truly is that I am with that person, at that time, in that place, when things could have turned out completely different in infinitely many ways. A 100-year-old man has discovered so many forks in his journey, so many twists and turns since he was conceived. There will be generations of people affecting the world due to the choices he made; due to the fact his parents decided to immigrate to America. He has made an eternal ripple on the pond of time. Billions of people, just like him, operate all over earth. We meet in subways, at Starbucks or in school. If we change our desire for coffee one morning, or our decision to take the F instead of the EE, perhaps we'll be missing out on potential friendship or some type of epiphany; deciding to have a cappuccino could change our lives drastically.Now you can't live your life like this. You would probably never choose your major here at Rutgers. You would never marry anyone ever. You would obsess over every decision you have to make. But the next time you hear a mathematician belittling your chances of winning the lottery, tell him both of you were once facing odds approaching 1 in 500 million. You were both one of about 10 trillion sperm produced in a man's lifetime. Explain that you both beat the impossibly small likelihood of meeting each other in a universal realm of infinite space-time. Perhaps he'll look at you, shrug, and say, "You've got a point." Whatever you believe in, whatever your origin and whatever ideology you ascribe to, you cannot deny the miracle of life. Believe in yourself and in your ability to achieve impossible things, because you already did.
NJO: Originally appeared in Rutgers University's newspaper The Daily Targum, later posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
18-0
That was the vote count when the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer in the 1990s, and it should have been the vote for John Roberts yesterday, instead of 13-5. The two Bill Clinton appointees are every bit as liberal as Judge Roberts is conservative, and they were just as unforthcoming during their confirmation hearings on how they would vote on specific cases.
Instead, five Democrats voted "no" yesterday. Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Ted Kennedy claimed they didn't know enough about how Judge Roberts would rule on specific precedents. Joe Biden was, well, Bidenesque. Dianne Feinstein apparently thought the candidate had been nominated for Chief Family Man instead of Chief Justice. "Rather than talking to me as a son, a husband, a father -- which I specifically requested he do -- he gave a very detached response," she said yesterday. Imagine that: A judge who is restrained.
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
That was the vote count when the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer in the 1990s, and it should have been the vote for John Roberts yesterday, instead of 13-5. The two Bill Clinton appointees are every bit as liberal as Judge Roberts is conservative, and they were just as unforthcoming during their confirmation hearings on how they would vote on specific cases.
Instead, five Democrats voted "no" yesterday. Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Ted Kennedy claimed they didn't know enough about how Judge Roberts would rule on specific precedents. Joe Biden was, well, Bidenesque. Dianne Feinstein apparently thought the candidate had been nominated for Chief Family Man instead of Chief Justice. "Rather than talking to me as a son, a husband, a father -- which I specifically requested he do -- he gave a very detached response," she said yesterday. Imagine that: A judge who is restrained.
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
What to do When your Girlfriend Dumps You
It's a sad fact of life, but at some point in your life you will get dumped by a girlfriend. And, no guy likes to get dumped, especially by someone you cared for and loved. But, love is a two-way street. Both parties have to love and nurture a relationship to keep it alive. It's no good to be involved in a one-way relationship with a woman that you love and she does not love you back.
I know you're going to feel like shit in the beginning after your girlfriend breaks up with you. But, you will get over her a hell of a lot easier if you will take these steps to get over her and get on with your life:
Don't sit around feeling sorry for yourself and try to scheme up ways to get your girlfriend back. Don't make any efforts whatsoever and whatever you do, don't call her or write her. You need to block her out of your life completely and pretend that she does not even exist on this earth anymore.
If you have any pictures of her laying around, on the wall, or in your wallet, hide them in your attic or somewhere where you will not likely see them. Even better, throw them away or burn them. You could be nice and return them to her if you desire.
Here's a good ritual to get her out of your system: Sit down and write her a letter telling her pissed off and hurt you are about her dumping you and tell her good bye and you don't want to ever see her again. Don't mail this letter, but just set it aside somewhere. This is just a good way to vent your feelings and make you feel better.
Block out of your mind all the good times you had. Just focus on the negative and bad times (her bitchy moods, her always nagging you, standing you up for dates, refusing to have sex with you, telling her you love her and she does not say anything in return, her not returning your calls, her flirting with other guys when you go out, her unsightly nose hairs, her fat ass, all your arguments, etc.). After some serious thinking, you may come to realize that you had mostly bad times and things worked out for the best by you getting out of an unhappy relationship.
Be sure and hide or destroy any love letters or cards she may have given to you.
Return any gifts she may given to you. You don't need the reminders of her and I would consider throwing them away or donating them to the needy.
Don't listen to the crying in your beer songs or songs that you shared together. Listen only to upbeat music that will cheer you up. Laying around listening to sad songs is only going to make you feel worse.
If you can, avoid going to places that will remind you of your ex.
In conclusion, keep real active and busy and spend a lot of time with your friends. And most importantly, get back in circulation and start dating again. And, don't be choosy and particular when you start dating again. Date any and all single women. You need to get back in the groove and don't hold out waiting for some Playboy Playmate type to come along
NJO: Copied content from www.getgirls.com, posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
It's a sad fact of life, but at some point in your life you will get dumped by a girlfriend. And, no guy likes to get dumped, especially by someone you cared for and loved. But, love is a two-way street. Both parties have to love and nurture a relationship to keep it alive. It's no good to be involved in a one-way relationship with a woman that you love and she does not love you back.
I know you're going to feel like shit in the beginning after your girlfriend breaks up with you. But, you will get over her a hell of a lot easier if you will take these steps to get over her and get on with your life:
Don't sit around feeling sorry for yourself and try to scheme up ways to get your girlfriend back. Don't make any efforts whatsoever and whatever you do, don't call her or write her. You need to block her out of your life completely and pretend that she does not even exist on this earth anymore.
If you have any pictures of her laying around, on the wall, or in your wallet, hide them in your attic or somewhere where you will not likely see them. Even better, throw them away or burn them. You could be nice and return them to her if you desire.
Here's a good ritual to get her out of your system: Sit down and write her a letter telling her pissed off and hurt you are about her dumping you and tell her good bye and you don't want to ever see her again. Don't mail this letter, but just set it aside somewhere. This is just a good way to vent your feelings and make you feel better.
Block out of your mind all the good times you had. Just focus on the negative and bad times (her bitchy moods, her always nagging you, standing you up for dates, refusing to have sex with you, telling her you love her and she does not say anything in return, her not returning your calls, her flirting with other guys when you go out, her unsightly nose hairs, her fat ass, all your arguments, etc.). After some serious thinking, you may come to realize that you had mostly bad times and things worked out for the best by you getting out of an unhappy relationship.
Be sure and hide or destroy any love letters or cards she may have given to you.
Return any gifts she may given to you. You don't need the reminders of her and I would consider throwing them away or donating them to the needy.
Don't listen to the crying in your beer songs or songs that you shared together. Listen only to upbeat music that will cheer you up. Laying around listening to sad songs is only going to make you feel worse.
If you can, avoid going to places that will remind you of your ex.
In conclusion, keep real active and busy and spend a lot of time with your friends. And most importantly, get back in circulation and start dating again. And, don't be choosy and particular when you start dating again. Date any and all single women. You need to get back in the groove and don't hold out waiting for some Playboy Playmate type to come along
NJO: Copied content from www.getgirls.com, posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part VII: Sex
Sex
The sexual revolution is a mess. While the professors accuse much literature of being racist, all is sexist. Feminists at Douglass College can’t decide whether they should support pornography for sexual liberation purposes or oppose it due to the degradation of women. They celebrate women’s sexual identity all the while espousing the absence of differences between men and women. The lesbian philosophy at Rutgers has been one of censorship rather than liberation, especially in relation to the grease trucks and the banning of The Medium in previous years. In summary, the Ladies Against Feminism, an anti-feminist group, says it best; “men and women are not identical creatures. Are we equal in human worth? Yes. Equal before the throne of grace? Absolutely. Equal in dignity? Indeed. But when it all boils down to it, if you insist that “equal” means exactly the same, you will have to fly in the face of biology, historical fact, Biblical truth and just plain common sense. In many ways, woman is not equal to man; and, by the same token, man is not equal to woman. They are different creatures with differing roles. Will we complement each other in our distinctive, God-given roles, or will we tear each other to shreds in a territorial dispute? L.A.F. promotes the former.”NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part VI: Equality
Equality
The decline of the Rutgers man (“man” being used to denote male or female human). There is no such thing as a “Rutgers Man” anymore. There is no such thing as a renaissance man. Rutgers does not produce gentlemen as well as scholars, does not shape students anymore, at least not in the way it should. While professors play the role of brainwashers, the administration promotes a form of sensitive homogeneity, using academic methods like “creative ambiguity,” where both sides strongly disagree but come to mutual agreement. The administration’s focus is primarily on skin color, ethnicity and non-western religions. The colorblind demands of the civil rights movement have mutated into the color consciousness of today. Since professors believe that all civilization and culture come directly from race and we are all created equal, the Rutgers anthropologist believes all civilizations and cultures are created equal. The Professor has become so obsessed with race, he will often ignore an argument, instead making ad hominem attacks on the basis of the arguer’s race or social status only. Professor James Livingston of the Rutgers History Department, a self-described “Marxist, Socialist, Feminist and Pragmatic Postmodernist,” made such attacks against the editors of The Centurion last fall, accusing the paper of “White Hysteria.” (Professor James Livingston is a white man who makes around 100,000 dollars a year).Statewide Affirmative Action mandates demanding quotas on race have produced a segregated campus. Livingston College for blacks and Hispanics. Rutgers College for whites. White students are contemptuous of black students and athletes with lower admissions standards and doubt their merits, even though they deny doing so. Attempts to level the playing field bring standards down. English Professor William Dowling has spoken of the decline of academic standards and demanded the university return to its traditional, historical roots. Dr. Dowling has also published a list of works that are considered the great English Classics. In an August 25, 2003 article in Sports Illustrated, he pointed to a football player named Nate Robinson who was accepted into Rutgers with a combined SAT score of 800.
The University wanted none of it.
The “Academic Oversight Committee” demonized Dowling in a Targum column later in September, where they accused Dowling of calling football players “morons.” One student, then Rutgers College sophomore John Little, resorted to an ad hominem attack and accused Dowling of being a “racist.” His April 24th, 2001 quote (for Dowling’s 2003 article was not the first in which he questioned the University’s acquisition of sports players) about Dowling embodies much of the Marxist philosophy: “Professor Dowling only recognizes one style of learning. One leftover from the days when only the wealthy could attend college. Not all students can achieve academically in a typical classroom setting, thus making athletics, drama or art a valuable tool in the teaching process. The lessons that these activities teach students are numerous and every bit as valuable as anything is that can by learned in the classroom.”
The white Rutgers students, faculty and Administration feel uncomfortable talking about campus segregation between the colleges. They do not like it because it does not fit in their prevailing view that all the races get along and their university has become fully integrated, when in fact is has not.
What results is a barrage of aesthetic “diversity” reassurance and sensitivity training. There are dozens of caucuses, programs and councils to beat the importance of skin color and multicultural sensitivity into the segregated students minds. Diversityweb.rutgers.edu says all Rutgers students needs to be welcomed, valued and respected,” but the administration’s plans to emphasize distinct “cultures” (races) only promotes hostility between them. Heck, there is even an Institute for Executive Leadership and Diversity (http://diversity.rutgers.edu) at Rutgers University. At an “Algeria” award conference for Rutgers College student organizations on May 3rd, 2005, more than half of the awards were for cultural organizations, lauding skin color and little else. The Centurion was peculiarly absent from the “Excellence in Student Media” award ceremony.
NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part V: “L”iberal arts
“L”iberal arts
The average Rutgers student doesn’t care about wisdom or truth. He cares about what he can do with his degree. Rutgers Philosophy of Mind professor Colin McGinn, one of the most respected philosophers in the world, advised a prospective undergraduate in philosophy last year to avoid going getting a graduate degree in philosophy, because, as he stated, there’s “nothing he can do” with a doctoral degree.But without the great revelations, epics and philosophies from Plato, Aristotle, etc. (things some professors would consider prejudice) as a natural part of our perspective, a career in a field such as finance or law has no meaning. Ask a student in any field, what he thinks about spirituality, relationships with others or the human condition, and he will recite quotes off internet websites, or a bit of pop psychology from a movie or a gossip column. If a student can say something of importance, it is due to his dedicated reading outside the classroom.
NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part IV: Prejudice
Prejudice
Professors at Rutgers, particularly in the psychology department, have become obsessed with eliminating prejudice – and not necessarily the illogical and unjust biases that dominate the connotations of prejudice. The wise prejudices like common sense, moral principle and empirical fact have been eliminated with the incorrect justification they are related to racial discrimination.Everything the Rutgers student knows upon entering the University must be replaced, everything learned in the household, community, and religious texts. “Preconceived” or “inflexible” ideas must be abandoned. Only then is the Rutgers’ student’s mind empty, and only then can the brainwashing begin.
NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part III: Literature
Literature
Since the 1960’s, professors have been abandoning the great books curriculum. The classics, by authors such as Aristotle, Plato, Euclid, Cyrus, Theseus, Moses, Romulus, Rousseau have been replaced with third-rate Marxist hogwash, justified by the assertion that the societies that produced the great texts were racist and sexist. What the professors fail to mention is no great literary work was produced during the 1960’s, one of the saddest times for the American Academy.In high school, students are flooded with transcendentalism, self-reliance, Thoreau, Whitman, Angelou, Kwanza, Japanese internment camp memoirs, etc. Absent, with the exception of the Odyssey and perhaps selections from the Theban trilogy, are the great texts of western civilization. Many students realize that if Maya Angelou is great literature, there is nothing to be learned from literature. Unimpressed by what they are told are the “best of books,” they shy away from reading at a very early age. The Bible, being the foundation for many cultures, and containing numerous literary forms, is all that’s left, and the conservative culture is trying very hard not to let go. (This could be a partial motivation for the Bible thumpers in the South and parts of the Midwest).
NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part II: Relativism
Relativism
Rutgers Professors believe there is no such thing as truth. Moral and ethical truths are a matter of cultural constructs and personal experiences. Human action has no value; a terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. If we free ourselves from the moral principles custom and religion bind us to we shall become what Nietzsche called Übermensch, or “Superman.” A Rutgers relativist may wish to justify genital mutilation, genocide and Stalinism with a statement like “who’s to say who’s right?” From this pseudo-thought stems the ridiculous but prevalent notion that proponents of injustice are victims, due to a lack of social, financial, or racial privilege. Therefore, according to the relativist, societies are responsible for the actions of freethinking individuals. After all, “evil” as we have known it is an outdated Judeo-Christian concept, and if relevant, only applies to deeds, not people. “Good” is never defined. Judgment is the only cardinal sin. The irony of the professors’ view is that the relativist position itself is the opposite of relative. It is absolutist! Any moral axiom, for instance, “don’t have sex with babies,” is wrong according to your professor, because it labels an action as wrong. This clearly violates his own view of moral indifference – the view itself is a contradiction.NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part I: Multiculturalism
Indoctrination has Led to the Decline of Our College Experience
BY JAMES O'KEEFE
Multiculturalism
Every student at Rutgers is required to take a “non-western” course in the humanities or social sciences, though there is no required course in “western” humanities or social sciences. The multiculturalist administration wants to incorporate “excluded” works of literature, art, and philosophy into our curriculum that have been unaccounted for due to prejudices of our culture. To the multiculturalist, appreciation for American Culture is completely baseless, founded only in prejudices and propaganda perpetuated by ignorant, racist dead white men. Furthermore, the multiculturalist says principles like natural rights, which unite us, are not grounded in any sort of truth, but are arbitrary and hostile to “diversity” and our differences. Although the word “multiculturalist” sounds like an appeal to a sense of community, to them, an isolated non-Westerner is more “cultured” than a Southern American Christian, even though the Southern American Christian is far more exposed to people with different beliefs and lifestyles. Thus, eventually culture turns into a sort of non-conformist individualism – exactly the type that is celebrated by Davey Thoreau. This explains the contempt American liberals have for rural folk in the heartland with common virtues and a strong sense of community and tradition. It also explains the contempt for patriotism and civic virtue. One often sees Rutgers students in class or on a bus, walking or sitting with their heads down, drowning out their environment with music playing on their Ipods. These students have evolved in educational institutions that have enforced so much independent thought, they find solace in isolation, in virtues they can find only in themselves (thanks to Instant Messenger, students rarely need to leave their dorm rooms). The emphasis on the self is further promoted by the influence of Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud and his perverted philosophies. Students sometimes congregate (due at times to things like mandatory meal plans), but state universities like Rutgers, despite their numbers, are remarkably lonely places. This is because the virtues that bring us together, like respect for the (or any) concept of God, allegiance to the ideals of Country, and reliance upon ethics to govern our actions toward one other, are despised.The multiculturalist connoisseur desires a “transcendent” view, a “cultured” view, a “different” view, other than that native to his homeland. Multiculturalist Rutgers professors have become eccentric elites, sadly out of touch with American culture, family and purpose.
NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Dear Freshmen, ahem... "First-Year-Students"
A year ago, this publication did not exist. Since then we have violated 37 copyrights in our satire of The New York Times, done a review of the most decorated liberal professor doors, investigated the rampant fiscal and electoral corruption of NJPIRG, documented our speech code, and investigated faculty contributions to political parties to find out professors gave 104 times more money to John F. Kerry than George W. Bush in the 2004 presidential election. We have exposed the Stalinism of Rutgers favorite son, Paul Robeson, and printed the appropriate forms to relinquish your United States Citizenship if you are ashamed of your American identity. Additionally, we have filed a “bias incident report form” on one student who wrote “Die” all over one of our issues. We sent Valentines to NJPIRG requesting our money be refunded while documenting threats made to us by our old faculty advisor who told us “not to f*** with him.” We investigated our bureaucracy to find over 33 distinct offices, committees, programs, projects, caucuses and councils that advance nothing but diversity of skin color. As a response to Campus Censorship of the Grease Trucks' sandwiches, we attempted to ban Lucky Charms from the dining halls in a form of satirical protest. We, tragically, succeeded. And we got it on tape. We interviewed Bret Schundler for Governor and confronted a Professor who chased a student out of his classroom because he disagreed with the professor’s worldviews. We responded to the "Vagina Monologues" with the “Penis Monologues.” At Tent State, we counter-protested with patriotic country music and an affirmative action bake sale where we sold brownies for less money to minority customers. Students signed our petition to ban water. Anarchist ninjas assaulted us when we told them about the state scandals. Professors have tried to expel us when we exposed their lies, and the administration has disavowed us when we printed the truth. We have been assaulted, betrayed, and, at times, ignored. But we will never surrender in our pursuit to challenge the academic monopoly of thought. We will never surrender at trying to get students to look at both sides of an issue. We will never surrender in upholding our motto, Veritas vos Liberabit.
Read on. - THE EDITORS
NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Read on. - THE EDITORS
NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Fire On High
I am currently browsing "Google Earth" while listening to "Fire on High" by the electric light orhestra. I remember hearing the song back when I was a Freshman at Rutgers. I was eating in the dining hall when suddenly on the radio following a mosaic of spooky holloween music an archaic strum breaking acoustic guitar that seemed rhythmically unusual echoed through the halls. Then came this majestic, gorgeous rock opera electric guitar with choir a symphony in the background. Withing minutes I loved it, but with no lyrics I could'nt ever identify the artist.
The song is amazing. Probably the best instrumental from the 1970s. It's one of those amazing songs that seem to conjure a memory of something exciting from your past, while making you close you eyes and just feel pleasure. Probably the closest thing to getting a audio high. It's amazing what music can do, especially how it can make you feel.
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
Mr. Roberts Neighborhood
The Washington Post editorialized that Supreme Court Justice Nominee John Roberts is “a man of substance and seriousness.” The LA times reported that he is a “Judicious choice.” Almost. The New York Times brings us a slice of what we know best. Trying to create controversy where there is none, the editorial page of the old grey bitc… er… lady, says that the white house Failed to mention Roberts is a member of the Federalist Society. This act of omission concerns the New York Times which writes that only “washington insiders” knew about it. Hmm. Every other publication and major newspaper seemed to know about it. Maybe the New York Times needs a better Washington Editor. The times editorializes on the failure of the white house to “reveal” Roberts’ affiliation with the Federalist Society. “This apparent contradiction raises questions about how forthcoming Mr. Roberts and the white house has been.” Ah those contradictions! And those forthcomings! Looks like the desperate democrats are fishing for documents to sink Roberts. The times goes on; “for a politically well-connected lawyer and sitting judge, Mr. Roberts has a remarkably opaque record when it comes to his views on controversial issues.” This is good news for two reasons. Personal views on controversial issues like abortion should not be relevant in deciding the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice, and the “opaqueness” is a virtue in itself, indicating a solid commitment to foundation of the constitution rather than the whims of judicial activism. We will see further demands from most media outlets demanding for papers and other memos from Robers’ Past. This will be the Democrats last leg to stand on, exhausting two of three reasons to oppose a nomination; claim insufficient consultation by the white House and two; paint the nominee as a right-wing ideologue. As Duncan Currie of the Weekly Standard writes in this week’s edition, it will make the “aggressor look like the aggrieved.”
Bruce Fein, a constitutional lawyer and international consultant, wrote in the Washington Times this morning that recognizes Roberts’ modesty and willingness to strictly interpret the constitution, rather than make law. Roberts will bring the Supreme Court’s Constitutional law closer to the people who ratified it. He is an originalist. There is no place for the questioning of his views on Roe within this debate. (Or his wife’s)
But there are still hounds. Salivating and leading the charge is Sen. Chucky “Cheese” Schumer, whom John J. Miller of the National Review calls “The Inquisitor.” Interviewed by my host Greg Corombos on Dateline: Washington, Miller spoke in his vacuous, raspy voice (inbetween French jokes) that Schumer scored a perfected 1600 on his SAT. But Schumer’s greatest accomplishment doesn’t lie within his degree of Harvard Law, it lies within his main talent of grandstanding. First was his attack on guns inside the beltway. Then was his declaration that pro-life activists should avoid fines by declaring themselves insolvent. Schumer adores the spotlight. He craves it. Let the inquisition begin.
But some no likey Roberts… and its not based on his achievements or his qualifications. Roberts has and undoubtedly will not be scrutinized on these things. No friends, it’s based on his skin color, his style of dress and his… name. Oh isn’t the quota patrol ironic! But seriously… “John Roberts.” How much more conventional can you get? And how much more of a politically incorrect president can we have to go so far as electing a (gasp!) white male to the supreme court!
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
The Washington Post editorialized that Supreme Court Justice Nominee John Roberts is “a man of substance and seriousness.” The LA times reported that he is a “Judicious choice.” Almost. The New York Times brings us a slice of what we know best. Trying to create controversy where there is none, the editorial page of the old grey bitc… er… lady, says that the white house Failed to mention Roberts is a member of the Federalist Society. This act of omission concerns the New York Times which writes that only “washington insiders” knew about it. Hmm. Every other publication and major newspaper seemed to know about it. Maybe the New York Times needs a better Washington Editor. The times editorializes on the failure of the white house to “reveal” Roberts’ affiliation with the Federalist Society. “This apparent contradiction raises questions about how forthcoming Mr. Roberts and the white house has been.” Ah those contradictions! And those forthcomings! Looks like the desperate democrats are fishing for documents to sink Roberts. The times goes on; “for a politically well-connected lawyer and sitting judge, Mr. Roberts has a remarkably opaque record when it comes to his views on controversial issues.” This is good news for two reasons. Personal views on controversial issues like abortion should not be relevant in deciding the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice, and the “opaqueness” is a virtue in itself, indicating a solid commitment to foundation of the constitution rather than the whims of judicial activism. We will see further demands from most media outlets demanding for papers and other memos from Robers’ Past. This will be the Democrats last leg to stand on, exhausting two of three reasons to oppose a nomination; claim insufficient consultation by the white House and two; paint the nominee as a right-wing ideologue. As Duncan Currie of the Weekly Standard writes in this week’s edition, it will make the “aggressor look like the aggrieved.”
Bruce Fein, a constitutional lawyer and international consultant, wrote in the Washington Times this morning that recognizes Roberts’ modesty and willingness to strictly interpret the constitution, rather than make law. Roberts will bring the Supreme Court’s Constitutional law closer to the people who ratified it. He is an originalist. There is no place for the questioning of his views on Roe within this debate. (Or his wife’s)
But there are still hounds. Salivating and leading the charge is Sen. Chucky “Cheese” Schumer, whom John J. Miller of the National Review calls “The Inquisitor.” Interviewed by my host Greg Corombos on Dateline: Washington, Miller spoke in his vacuous, raspy voice (inbetween French jokes) that Schumer scored a perfected 1600 on his SAT. But Schumer’s greatest accomplishment doesn’t lie within his degree of Harvard Law, it lies within his main talent of grandstanding. First was his attack on guns inside the beltway. Then was his declaration that pro-life activists should avoid fines by declaring themselves insolvent. Schumer adores the spotlight. He craves it. Let the inquisition begin.
But some no likey Roberts… and its not based on his achievements or his qualifications. Roberts has and undoubtedly will not be scrutinized on these things. No friends, it’s based on his skin color, his style of dress and his… name. Oh isn’t the quota patrol ironic! But seriously… “John Roberts.” How much more conventional can you get? And how much more of a politically incorrect president can we have to go so far as electing a (gasp!) white male to the supreme court!
NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
2 Wishes for AFL - CIO when they blow out their birthday candles!
1)Freedom to Affiliate or disaffiliate
2)Spend mandatory Union Fees on recruiting new members rather than defeating Republican candidates when 43% of people giving us those union fees voted for Republican candidates.
NJO: This was the first post made by James O'Keefe on his blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
1)Freedom to Affiliate or disaffiliate
2)Spend mandatory Union Fees on recruiting new members rather than defeating Republican candidates when 43% of people giving us those union fees voted for Republican candidates.
NJO: This was the first post made by James O'Keefe on his blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Affirmative Action Bake Sale
Uploaded on Aug 27, 2009
So, at our annual Affirmative Action
bake sale, we came across an inner city teacher visiting Rutgers with
her class. Naturally, a discussion ensued about the merits of
Affirmative Action. Who do you think won?
Uploaded on May 3, 2009
Inner city teacher loses debate to conservatives over the workings of Affirmative Action.
NJO: Videos and captions from the RUCenturion YouTube channel.
Original caption from rucenturion.com:
Inner-city teacher shows children how to debate a conservative and lose.
Some photos of said conservatives at their bake sale table:
Additional information at these links:
Feel-good complacency or direct action? The lessons of Tent State Rutgers
Homophobic vigilantes chased from TSU Rutgers
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
WE ARE WATCHING
NJO: On this day, James or someone on Team James made this powerful two-line all-caps foray into the world of LJ drama...
to james and the rest of the centurion staff:
thanks for proving my point. you can't even ask me to print my own words? COWARDS. i DID write letters to james, so don't even try that as an argument. you are left with nothing. i write this in my blog because it seems it's unnecessary to submit my thoughts directly to you; you'll go looking for them here anyway, even after i've given them to you. you're ridiculous and infantile, and if, as it seems, you can't find any real story and must either wait for it to come to you or create it for yourself, go ahead. print that. and sign it with my name. i stand by it.
but please, if you discover any human decency among your editors' tools, let me know.
arielle.
p.s. if you're going to complain about spelling errors in blog entries, of which i caught none in any entry you printed, you might consider spelling "elitist" correctly before you pin the title onto me.
outsiders: part of my journal entry (and a very silly picture of me) has been published in this month's Rutgers Centurion (click here for a PDF file). i'm on pages 3 and 13. page 13 is a portion of my journal entry - they call me a coward for not writing my thoughts in a letter to the editor. page 3 is just the first of my THREE letters to the editor-in-chief, which i wrote before i published my blog entry. plus, the title of the whole schtick, "profiles in cowardice," plays off of comments i made in the second of my letters. whoops! a little fact-checking error, there, boys! better luck next time.
for background info on this whole mess, click here.
not all conversation has to be TO YOU. that's the thing about free speech. it's not restricted to any one direction.
A blog is a place for your personal thoughts - your "if you don't like us, say it to our face" shtick is really tired because most people do use their blogs to vent and express their personal thoughts and opinions, and that's exactly what Arielle did.
It makes YOU look hypersensitive to call Arielle a "coward" - are you too devoid of your own fresh, positive political material that you have to make fun of others simply for not agreeing with your political statements? It also makes you look ignorant, as Arielle had previously written you a letter that is PUBLISHED IN THAT VERY ISSUE!
So go ahead, call Arielle a "coward". Just realize that your magazine will get more respect if you graduate the sixth grade first.
Source: http://labyrinthyne.livejournal.com/13382.html
-
- an extraordinary machine (
labyrinthyne) wrote,
- Mood:
peeved
death, taxes, and idiots like you
thanks for proving my point. you can't even ask me to print my own words? COWARDS. i DID write letters to james, so don't even try that as an argument. you are left with nothing. i write this in my blog because it seems it's unnecessary to submit my thoughts directly to you; you'll go looking for them here anyway, even after i've given them to you. you're ridiculous and infantile, and if, as it seems, you can't find any real story and must either wait for it to come to you or create it for yourself, go ahead. print that. and sign it with my name. i stand by it.
but please, if you discover any human decency among your editors' tools, let me know.
arielle.
p.s. if you're going to complain about spelling errors in blog entries, of which i caught none in any entry you printed, you might consider spelling "elitist" correctly before you pin the title onto me.
outsiders: part of my journal entry (and a very silly picture of me) has been published in this month's Rutgers Centurion (click here for a PDF file). i'm on pages 3 and 13. page 13 is a portion of my journal entry - they call me a coward for not writing my thoughts in a letter to the editor. page 3 is just the first of my THREE letters to the editor-in-chief, which i wrote before i published my blog entry. plus, the title of the whole schtick, "profiles in cowardice," plays off of comments i made in the second of my letters. whoops! a little fact-checking error, there, boys! better luck next time.
for background info on this whole mess, click here.
- Post a new comment
- 6 comments
wow, what a dumbass publication. i read through it.
jesus christ.
jesus christ.
Anonymous
WE ARE WATCHING
YOU TELL US WE ARE A DUMBASS PUBLICATION: TELL US WHY AT MAIL@RUCENTURION.COM, OR DON'T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL.Re: WE ARE WATCHING
centurion:not all conversation has to be TO YOU. that's the thing about free speech. it's not restricted to any one direction.
Anonymous
Re: WE ARE WATCHING
James go fuck yourself.
Re: WE ARE WATCHING
I'm interested in knowing exactly how Arielle was behaving "cowardly" when she had already written to the editors of the Centurion.A blog is a place for your personal thoughts - your "if you don't like us, say it to our face" shtick is really tired because most people do use their blogs to vent and express their personal thoughts and opinions, and that's exactly what Arielle did.
It makes YOU look hypersensitive to call Arielle a "coward" - are you too devoid of your own fresh, positive political material that you have to make fun of others simply for not agreeing with your political statements? It also makes you look ignorant, as Arielle had previously written you a letter that is PUBLISHED IN THAT VERY ISSUE!
So go ahead, call Arielle a "coward". Just realize that your magazine will get more respect if you graduate the sixth grade first.
Source: http://labyrinthyne.livejournal.com/13382.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)