It has now been over a week since the 2004 presidential election took place and 59,459,765 out of more than 120 million U.S. citizens reelected President George W. Bush to a second term in office. President Bush won by 3.5 million votes. I have had some time to reflect on this historic election and allow my emotions a chance to calm down. An opinion written on an emotional high or low would be beneficial to no one. Two days after the election, a student for Kerry said to another student wearing a “W-Four More Years” T-shirt, “The country is going to shit.” The Bush supporter responded, “Yeah, whatever.”

Eleven states have outlawed gay marriages, paving the way for the government to attack more civil liberties. Yeah, whatever. Our president has misled the country with his reasons for engaging a war in Iraq. Our fellow brothers and sisters are dying every day as they still search for weapons of mass destruction and wage war against people who have no fears in battle, did not seek war, and have now basically lost everything. Not to mention the number of civilians we have killed and wounded in the process. Yeah, whatever.

After this election, civil rights for Americans seem uncertain. Eleven state governments have successfully enacted an amendment to define marriage, a term defined by monotheism. And where has separation of church and state gone? If our government can regulate against one minority group, then I feel that there is nothing to stop it from doing it to another. If there are enough people in 11 states that cannot see that the rights of homosexuals are no different from the rights of everyone else, then would those 11 states still allow Jews to attend synagogue, Muslims and Buddhists to still go to their temples, or Christians to practice their faith as they please? Should we bring back designated “white” and “colored” bathrooms and water fountains?

Americans are forgetting that we all deserve the same rights. Marriage is a word. Who are we to stop two, loving, same-sex citizens the right to marry and share the same rights given to heterosexual married couples? Every single person on this earth and in this country deserves the right to be happy and enjoy his or her life like the next person. We should learn to live in a country in which tolerance is our guide. Do not let your ignorance, hatred or mental sufferings interfere with others’ attempt to reach happiness.

I am a firm believer in upholding civil rights for all Americans, no exceptions. To those who enjoy all the civil rights America has to offer: Why are you and not others guaranteed all your rights? Are some citizens more equal under our constitution than others? The answer is not, “yeah, whatever.” It is, “absolutely not.”

Sam Rega can be contacted at s.rega@umiami.edu.

I was trying to write this column and, like, didn’t know what to write about and, like, thought about how stupid we sound today by excessively misusing the word “like.”

I remember as a kid watching movies where the female characters had what I like to call “Valley Girl Syndrome,” where every third word was “like,” and I thought it was stupid then. Almost two decades later it has taken the place of the word “umm” as the new popular interjection, and I still think it is stupid. If you didn’t know, an interjection is simply a short exclamation but is not really connected to the sentence in any way. It is prominent more in speech than in writing.

I am not a grammarian but it isn’t hard to hear how annoying this sounds whenever someone raises their hand in class and “like” is coming out of their mouth at a rapid clip. It is as if the person has no confidence in what he or she is saying. I am not out to chastise anyone because I know I do the exact same thing on occasion. It was brought to my attention by someone older that stopped me in mid-sentence and asked if I realized how many times I used the word “like” incorrectly. I just wanted to point out the obvious to everyone.

It doesn’t help our generation when pop on MTV uses it, and we think they sound horrible but we don’t recognize it as it pertains to ourselves. Damn that mass media! I have actually started a game where I count how many times a person will say it while they speak and sometimes tune them out because it gets annoying once I reach 15.

I just want us all to realize that we sound ridiculous. Remember that we want jobs after we graduate from here and I don’t think the inability to convey a coherent thought to someone without using the word “like” will go over well with future employers. Good luck in your attempts to curb this and, like, don’t, like, stress over it because if you think about it you can easily stop using it. Remember when we used the word “uhh” at one time?

Vontilla Steven can be contacted at v.steven@umiami.edu.

Let me take you on a journey to 2003. I had just completed my second semester, and I had fallen in love with journalism. Ileana Oroza, my CNJ 111 professor, seemed to be everything I needed: She was understanding, knowledgeable (she had been an editor at the Miami Herald), and straightforward (as editors generally are). Naturally, as I signed up for classes for Fall 2003, I jumped at the chance to take Oroza again for CNJ 216.

Enter Mirta Ojito. She was a New York Times reporter with Miami roots on sabbatical from the paper and working on a book. She ended up teaching my class instead.

Ojito was no Oroza. After turning in an assignment one class late, Ojito told me, “In journalism, you get fired for this. Why shouldn’t I fail you?” I responded, “I don’t care what grade I get, as long as you teach me what I need to learn.” She gave me a C. She taught me not to take a class with a professor I don’t know.

But this is difficult to avoid. Most students log on to the EASY system and look up faculty evaluations. They get percentages based on selected classes regarding whether students agree, disagree or are neutral to such questions as “I would recommend this instructor to a friend.” Interestingly, students provide more than just that when they evaluate faculty. There are levels of agreement to these questions that are omitted, and there are open-ended responses, which presumably are used to line Sebastian the Ibis’ birdcage, since we never see them again, and they do little to alter a professor’s methods.

This is insufficient. Asking a student to pick a class based on six or seven “yes/no/maybe” questions is like asking a teacher to grade a student based on six or seven true/false questions. It just doesn’t tell enough. Therefore, I present to you Ben Minkus’ EASY suggestions:

1) Syllabus previews: Let us know what is expected, and when

2) Excerpts from student evaluations: From profanity-laced tirades to encouraging boasts of a teacher’s methods; and, for the sake of objectivity…

3) Professor responses to evaluations

4) Box-and-whiskers plot of the final grades in the class-Is there a grade curve?

5) Show all five levels of agreement!

6) Class style: Lecture? Interactive? Group assignments? Writing? Combination?

7) Does the professor speak English well? Do they refer to the text, notes or both?

8) If a professor is new, what are his or her credentials, both professionally and educationally?

I know that any professors reading this might gasp at these suggestions for being invasive and exhaustive, but don’t they owe it to us to be honest and forthright with their style?

Or is that just the students’ responsibility?

Ben Minkus can be contacted at b.minkus@umiami.edu.

RE: “Even a Yankees fan should applaud the Red Sox,” 10/26

It is incredible that the Red Sox had the team to come back from an 0-3 deficit in the ALCS, but there were many things in Ben Minkus’ column that are wrong.

Minkus wrote about how great it was that a team like the Red Sox, a “David” team, could come up against the “Goliath” team, the Yankees, and beat them against all odds. He was amazed that a team that didn’t have to buy their championships could beat the team with the highest payroll in the league. Has everyone forgotten about Manny Ramirez, who gets paid 22.5 million dollars a year? And if they didn’t buy a championship, how did Keith Foulke close the last game of the World Series? And where did Curt Schilling come from? There was no team that had no money coming up and beating the Yankees. There was no David or Goliath. There was a 127 million dollar, and second-highest payroll, Red Sox against the Yankees. The Red Sox have been doing the same thing the Yankees do, but from a closer view to the Prudential Tower. That’s all.

Another thing to get off my chest: Bucky Dent hits the homerun to beat the Red Sox in a one-game play-off – the Red Sox are cursed. Buckner lets a ball go through his leg – the Red Sox are cursed. Aaron Boone hits a walk-off homerun in the 2003 ALCS – the Red Sox are cursed. The Red Sox come back from 0-3 and beat the Yankees – the Red Sox are heroes. Does anyone notice that nowhere does anyone recognize the other team?! Aaron Boone hit an awesome ball after a post season plagued with errors. Why isn’t he a hero? Other than the Buckner incident, which may have backed up the curse very well, the other team is never recognized as simply better.

Thank God that the curse is finally over; now the other teams can be recognized as better. Walk-off homeruns will no longer be overshadowed by some silly curse. Instead, we don’t have to focus on anything overshadowing who is the better team (unless there’s a World Series at Wrigley). Right now, the Red Sox are the better team, but you know The Boss is looking at a few names to change this. Welcome to the Bronx, Mr. Johnson.

Jonathan Malone

Undergraduate

RE: conciliation

Here are some first steps for healing the political rift:

1) Stop referring to your opponents as “the liberals,” “the conservatives,” “the left” and “the right” as if all politically active Americans were a part of two borg-like collective consciousnesses. You should either have the guts to talk about specific individuals or just hold your tongue.

2) No more name-calling. Abusive ad hominem insults that attack the person instead of their argument like, “Dick Cheney is the spawn of satan,” “Only a Massachussetts liberal would say that,” “Bush is just like Hitler,” or “You’re just a whiney-ass crybaby” are completely childish and accomplish nothing but fanning the fires of hatred.

3) Take a time-out. Don’t try to write something or debate someone “on the tilt.” This is how Howard Dean lost his campaign and how I suspect many of the columns that show up in the Hurricane get written.

William Hubel

Undergraduate

Student Government President Vance Aloupis gave his State of the University speech Wednesday afternoon. Despite reading too much while speaking, Aloupis effectively addressed all of his administration’s achievements in the past eight months, like bringing Napster to UM, opening the gates of the Orange Bowl two-and-a-half hours before football games and having the shuttle bus students to the Grove on Halloween. Some members in the audience of senators looked bored, yawned, played with their nails and popped gum bubbles, but the speech was actually a decent, concise overview of the Aloupis administration’s has accomplished thus far.

Aloupis discussed interesting and useful future SG projects, such as an eBay-like website called ‘Cane Exchange and an intriguing proposal to loan umbrellas to students. Aloupis was a little vague, however, regarding progress made to create an Asian and Middle Eastern Studies program, simply saying that “great strides” had been made. What are these strides, and by when can we expect a definitive timeline? SG should be proud that it is working on these laudable projects, and so it ought to make students aware that their concerns are being heard. Getting the student body excited about these projects will only be beneficial to carrying them out.

Unfortunately, Aloupis’ speech did not directly refer to any mistakes or weaknesses in his administration, except for acknowledging lack of publicity for Napster. He said that it is difficult to change curriculums for service-learning classes, which, quite frankly, was a predictable obstacle. Aloupis also said his idea to add headphones to the cardio machines in the Wellness Center didn’t make much sense, considering that the Wellness Center will be renovated in the next few years. His government resorted to attaching pieces to the machines to place CD players and walkmans, which was a practical, if not ideal, alternative.

Aloupis also failed to mention some of the larger problems SG faces. The Executive Board, for example, meets once a week, and this semester there have always been at least three members absent at each meeting, according to their minutes posted online. In the Oct. 27 meeting alone, eight members were absent, including the e-board’s faculty advisor. Granted, it was Homecoming week and SG members tend to be very involved in on-campus events, but that is no excuse for missing meetings that are only held once a week. This is also true for Senate, where, according to the Speaker of the Senate, the Spectrum and Honors Students Association senators have already been dismissed due to too many absences this semester. Students that get involved in SG are aware of the commitment it entails and should follow through with the commitment they have made with their constituents.

And, while on the subject of SG, there was no new business in the Senate’s agenda for its Nov. 3 meeting. The Budgetary Review Committee, like Aloupis said, was created to make Senate meetings more efficient. The Committee was indeed a productive move, since now a few senators meet at a separate time to allocate funds, but the Speaker of the Senate should make sure there is new business to discuss every meeting. The problem of appointees to vacant Senate positions, who apply in an un-advertised process and are not elected by a constituency, also needs to be addressed, presumably by the Speaker as well.

In large part due to Aloupis’ efforts, SG has undeniably increased its presence on campus the past eight months, and it should make its efforts and achievements known to the student body. Yet, until it comes to terms with some of its weaknesses, SG will fail to live up to its potential.