Unlike the “lesser of two evils” mentality that governs his opposition’s support, a clear majority of those going to the polls for President George W. Bush actually believe in him. Be one of them.The causes of increased tuition range from crumbling state budgets to bizarre, enigmatic dining plans – OK, maybe just at UR. However, the Bush administration has decidedly met the challenge of making a college education more accessible and affordable. The fundamental difference between Republicans’ programs and Democrats’ whines, among other things, is three powers of 10. Sure, Bush has made a few minor cuts in types of aid, cuts measured in millions. However, he has increased total aid – increases measured in billions. All things considered, total student aid will reach $73 billion, an increase of 55 percent since Bush took office in 2001. Pell Grants appropriations, now nearing $13 billion, are keeping pace with 47 percent increase. These percentages clearly beat inflation and tuition increases, which, public and private, hover around 30 percent and 40 percent during the same time period. Ironically enough, the same students who treat our president with such hateful disapproval just may have been part of the increased number of students who, under Bush’s watch, now obtain Federal aid (2.3 million more students, an increase of 30 percent since Bush took office). According to a June 2004 USA Today feature, “the actual amount paid in tuition and fees at four-year public universities fell 32 percent from 1998 through 2003.” Although not everyone has the grades, pedigree or pocketbook to attend an expensive school, Bush has done his part to make college more accessible and affordable.At Meliora Weekend, Larry Kudlow quipped, “liberals love jobs. They just hate the businesses that create them.” The same people who will be starting up this nation’s new companies are the ones who will have their personal tax cuts protected under the Bush administration (the tax bracket of about $200,000). Contrary to liberals’ moaning, these individuals are not tea-sipping, rolling-in-it, condiment-empire-magnate socialites who will go out and buy a 20th yacht with the tax cut. They are the nation’s entrepreneurs who have the capital and are looking to increase their assets. They are the ones most likely to start new businesses. With these new businesses comes a higher demand for college graduates in support firms (accounting and advertising firms), such as MBAs to manage their accounts and BAs to advertise for them. It goes without saying that many of these small businesses might hire college graduates directly. They are the companies who are helping America remove itself from a 2000-2001 recession followed by the September 11 attacks. Regardless, liberals will wield their misleading data, fly in the face of logic and pin the whole thing on Bush’s economic policy. These small-scale entrepreneurs should not be punished for massive profiteering at higher levels. Bush encourages job growth for new college graduates by ensuring that small business development is not hindered by taxation.If there really is a “global test” – whatever that means – the Bush administration has proven that those who have failed it – perhaps France, Germany and Russia – will not tell this country how to act. These are not countries who have the moral standing to influence American foreign policy decisions. Even though the United States had the common sense to sever contacts with Saddam Hussein after he invaded Kuwait, this trio of nations – as a result of the corrupt oil-for-food program and lucrative oil contracts – still maintained contacts with that ignominious dictator. Something tells me that these countries took the “global test” after a long night on the frat quad. If going to war over oil is evil, then protecting an evil dictator over oil is vastly worse. Then again, the “war for oil” spiel is getting worn out quickly. First, America does not even get the majority of its oil from the Middle East. Second, if Bush went to war over oil, then surely he would have given a few trillion barrels of Iraqi oil to his Big Oil buddies so that oil costs will stabilize – which, 1.5 years later, obviously has yet to materialize. Rather, Bush’s foreign policy tendencies are a perfect example of his administration. Much like job creation, Bush’s foreign policy reflects a president following through with an admirable promise (that even his opponents make), even though it must come with unpopular decisions (that his opponents will not make). That is the essence of leadership, rhetoric with action: that is the Bush administration. Scott can be reached at tscott@campustimes.org.

In five days this nation will decide who will be president for the next four years. Here are some issues you should consider when voting:This administration has made a conscious effort to ignore its own National Academy of Sciences study which indicates that global warming has real consequences and is caused by humans. Maybe it was National Security Adviser Condolezza Rice’s egomaniacal fear that decreasing consumption would cause Chevron to stop using the 130,000-ton oil tanker that it named after her. Or perhaps it was Vice President Dick Cheney, the former CEO of Halliburton and this decade’s poster child for white collar crime, who convinced President George W. Bush not to address this issue. Regardless of reason, this administration’s solution to warming has been to re-classify CO2 as not a pollutant and to adopt voluntary do-nothing programs. Senator John Kerry offers a better alternative. He voted for the Climate Stewardship Act written by Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman – the Administration opposed it. He supported working with the international community to revise the Kyoto Protocol – the administration scrapped it altogether. Kyoto is set to become international law now that Russia has ratified it and we were unable to negotiate for changes in the treaty because we refused our seat at the table. The consequences of inaction on global warming are so unimaginable that it would be unethical to wait and see if the scientists in the minority and Bush is right. This President’s homeland security solution has been to construct fear-based politics and the requisite garrison state. It is common, three years after September 11, to see signs on the Beltway in D.C. that request that citizens “report suspicious activity.” The TIPS hotline was set up to facilitate this. A color-coded homeland security system has been instituted to make sure citizens know when to be afraid. Thousands of Arabs and Muslims in America were profiled and underwent questioning. Hundreds were arrested. Some were deported for minor infractions. Many are still locked up indefinitely and are being denied access to counsel. Many of these actions and others were taken using powers granted to the Ashcroft justice department via the USA PATRIOT Act. Kerry supports reforming this bill – Bush thinks it is perfect in its current state. Even when Congressman Bernie Sanders of Vermont successfully amended the bill to eliminate the provision that enables the FBI to secretly monitor library transactions, the Republicans held the vote open for an extra 15 minutes while they coerced the Republicans who had voted for the amendment to changing their votes. John Kerry thinks that rather than devoting resources to inspecting libraries, we should be devoting resources to inspecting container ships, 95 percent of which come into our ports unchecked. Bush has frequently said that Kerry doesn’t understand the nature of the war on terror because Kerry would submit United States security to a Global test. In fact, Bush doesn’t understand the nature of the global war on terror because he thinks it can be fought unilaterally. In the wake of September 11 we had the overwhelming support of the world and an opportunity to work with the world to combat terrorism. Instead, we deliberately shirked our responsibility to international law through human rights abuses at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. We disregarded the United Nations by
pulling out inspectors before they had finished their job in Iraq. The administration’s lack of support for the Kyoto Treaty, the International Criminal Court, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the International Landmines Treaty also demonstrates a lack of effort to work with the international community. We need the cooperation of other nations to freeze the financial assets of the terrorists. We need an international effort on intelligence matters in order to perceive and prevent threats. We need international legitimacy so that we can shut down the bases of terrorists abroad. We cannot win this war alone – Bush seems to think we can. Kerry would have let the inspectors do their job before rushing to war in Iraq – then we would have known if the intelligence we had was right. Kerry will do a better job in working with the international community not only in preventing terrorism but in fostering a more peaceful world. Cast your vote in favor of taking action on global warming – the biggest long-term threat we face. Cast your vote in favor of protecting our civil liberties and our homeland. Cast your vote in favor of an international effort to fight terrorism. Cast your vote for Kerry.



Dinner for Peace was an unconventional way of protesting for Palestine

The dinner showcased aspects of Palestinian culture. It was a unique way of protesting against the genocide, against the Israeli occupation, against the university’s involvement with the genocide.

Zumba in medicine, the unexpected crossover

Each year at URMC, a new cohort of unsuspecting pediatrics residents get a crash course. “There are no mistakes in Zumba,” Gellin says.

Time unfortunately still a circle

Ever since the invention of the wheel, humanity’s been blessed with one terrible curse: the realization that all things are, in fact, cyclical.