Archives

News

Even Japha can't be cynical about Olympics

March 31

You might not understand this column. At Sports Columnist State University (SCSU) we are taught to always be cynical and negative. Sarcasm is our best friend. We learn that teams never win a game, their opponents blew it. Folks don't earn a gold medal, their competition choked. Ignore the millions of dollars and hundreds of hours an athlete donates to charity, and just wait for him to get caught with a DUI. So this column may fly in the face of hundreds of years of teaching, but... I loved the Olympics. That's right. For two weeks I couldn't get enough of Bob Costas and his never-ending supply of turtlenecks. I loved that NBC owns enough stations to broadcast the games on two channels, and during intermissions of hockey games, I could get financial updates on CNBC. Oh, the Olympics were near perfection for me. Sure, there were some scandals, but we can just sweep those under the rug and do what we've been doing since 1945 _ blame it on the Russkies. These Olympics were entertaining, and most importantly, safe. Maybe it is presumptuous to refer to the Winter Games as worldwide considering a few continents are a little underrepresented, but the games still had a global feel. There was the skier from Cameroon. The gold medalist speed skater from Australia. The bronze medalist alpine skier from Scotland, and the disqualified cross-country skier from Thailand. Don't listen to the complaints that the Winter Olympics are full of sports that no one likes. I mean, it's true, but it's just the old guard of sports analysts talking, and they just talk because they think people are listening. True, no one really likes curling, but I think it's the perfect event to break the monotony of football, basketball, and baseball once every four years. I may not tune in to ski jumping for another four years, but when I do, it will be with anticipation. And the actual events are secondary to the competition. How exciting is it to watch a bobsled team shoot down the track, all the while their time is being displayed alongside that of the leader. And when the American teams go down, and you see them ahead of the split time, oh it doesn't get much better than that. Can you imagine losing a cross-country race by a hundredth of a second? Or losing the gold medal in figure skating by a fraction of a point? Luckily, I'm so unskilled, I'll never have to, but to do so with the grace and dignity that most of the athletes did was impressive. I'm trying to be positive here, so I won't even mention how much more grace and dignity a lot of the Olympic athletes had compared to some of our pro athletes. And speaking of professionals, it was incredible to see hockey played at that level. Some people called the hockey games glorified All-Star games. I don't know exactly what that means, but if it's true, they should glorify all the All-Star games. What a moment to watch the Canadian hockey team, comprised solely of NHL players, rush the ice like junior league players after their gold medal win. By the way, the NHL may want to look into adapting the rules changes that the international game is played with. Getting rid of the two-line pass _ even if you don't know what a two-line pass is _ would make a world of difference in the NHL. As amazing as the hockey games were _ and I'm a big hockey fan _ I couldn't help but enjoy the figure skating. Now I'll admit that part of it was the announcing of Scott Hamilton, who screams every time someone lands a jump. The man injects more enthusiasm into a four-minute performance than I thought possible, but it helps build the tension level. I'll also admit ignorance on the scoring system, so in the women's finals, when they were flashing up the scores of the Russian skater, I was still trying to make sense of it when Sara Hughes was crying on the floor. I don't care how little respect you have for figure skating _ that was a magical moment. All right, I'm done. That felt good. I know I was kind of gushing there, but it was nice to be positive for a change. Now we have to get back to the "real" sports world. You know, the one with conference championships, spring training, player lockouts, arbitration, and free agency. And I think Bob Costas might start wearing ties again.

---

News

Jumbos offense keys victory

March 31

At the end of January, the weather is typically frigid and snow is often on the ground. However, today it felt like a pleasant spring day with a high in the 60s. Perhaps following the lead of Mother Nature, the women's basketball team also heated up, as it had its best shooting day of the year, connecting on 51.7 percent of its shots and tying a season high in points scored with a 84-76 win over the Gordon Fighting Scots yesterday in Medford. "I mean I noticed it first in warm-ups that we were all hot," senior co-captain Jayme Busnengo said. "Everyone was making their shots. We are on a little win streak." "We've had trouble with our shooting in some of our more important games," junior Emily Goodman said. "We were bound to have a game where things go right. We needed a win." Junior Erin Harrington led four Jumbo starters in double figures, scoring 22 points on 8-14 shooting but really stepped it up in the second half when she scored 14 points on 5-7 shooting. Senior Katie Kehrberger also had a huge night, netting 17 points on 8-10 shooting. While Harrington did most of her damage in the second half, Kehrberger was the dominate force in the first frame, connecting on seven of her eight shots for 15 points. In fact, Kehrberger was so hot that she broke her previous season high of 10, by halftime. "She was unconscious," Goodman said about Kehrberger's performance. "She was great. She just stepped it up. They were packing it in tight [down-low] and they would really leave the outside open and she got good looks and converted. She made things happen." Busnengo also had a scorching second half, shooting 4-5 for 12 points and went 6-10 for 16 points overall. Goodman was her usual solid self dropping 10 points and also grabbing a team-high eight rebounds. "That is the kind of balance that was kind of a [plan] for this season," Goodman said. "More all around balance propelled us to win the game." Although the starters made 27 of the team's 31 field goals and took 49 of the squad's 60 shots for a shooting percentage of better than 55 percent, the hot shooting was not limited to the starters. Sophomore Maritsa Christoudias provided a spark off the bench, chipping in with seven points on a perfect 3-3 from the field. Freshman Devin Rhoades also had four points in limited action. "The thing with Maritsa is that she is one of our best defensive players," Goodman said. "Her specialty is defense and its really good when she is doing awesome on offense as well. She played with the confidence she needs to offensively." After the first half, it was clear that the evening was going to be a high scoring affair as both teams shot were already shooting well. While Tufts managed to shoot at a 47.1 clip, the Fighting Scots were even more prolific, connecting on 66.7 percent of their shots. And with 37 points at halftime, Tufts was well on its way to cracking the 70 point barrier - something that it had done only once during the second semester, in Saturday's 71-62 win over Amherst. Overall, the team is 6-1 on the season when it scores more than 70 points in a contest. The lone setback came in the second game of the season, a 85-71 loss to Babson at home on Nov. 20. During the second half, the Jumbos' shooting sizzled while Gordon's fizzled. Tufts' already solid first half shooting improved by more than ten percent in the second stanza, as the team shot 57.7 from the field. On the other hand, the Scots had trouble finding their touch in the second half, as their shooting percentage dropped by more than 30 percentage points to 36.4. "Everybody was hitting their shots," junior co-captain Hillary Dunn said. "We did really well against their zone. We picked it apart with passing and everyone had open looks and we just hit them today." Continuing this offensive productivity will be key this weekend as the Jumbos have the opportunity to move up in the NESCAC standings with games against Colby and Bowdoin on Friday night and Saturday afternoon, respectively. "I don't know if their was anything in particular that made [the offense outburst] happen," Goodman said. "But if we can feed off this for the rest of the season, we will be in good shape."

---

News

Pierre Omidyar?

March 31

For weeks the Tufts community was abuzz in anticipation of the announcement of this year's commencement speaker. Students wondered which big-name politician, entertainer, or athlete would be coming to the Tufts campus. And with Al Gore, Bill Bradley, Bill Cosby, Jim Lehrer, and now Bill Clinton headlining the list of recent visits, we felt as if the sky was the limit for the graduation address. Then came the announcement. This year, we're getting Pierre Omidyar and his wife Pam. Not quite the caliber of speaker that most students were expecting. Now even though the Omidyar's have a very nice Tufts story, and have done so much for the University, I don't see them as appropriate speakers in the context of this year's commencement. The graduation address is the biggest speech of the year at any college or university - period. Which means that if you've had Clinton, Gore, Powell, and Cosby, you've got to have at least an equally important person doing the graduation address. Not Pierre and Pam Omidyar. That would be like having escargot, shrimp cocktail, and Caesar salad for appetizers and having a Big Mac for your main course. Even though a Big Mac is pretty good; its not that great after fancy appetizers. Considering that commencement is the culmination of well over 1,000 Tufts careers, this seems rather anti-climactic. The commencement speech is something that the graduating seniors take with them for the rest of their lives. Bono, from the band U2, recently did the commencement speech at Harvard University. Now I agree it's not fair to compare Tufts to Harvard, but here's another instance where they get the point and we don't. Students don't want regular - albeit distinguished - visitors (the Omidyars have visited Tufts twice in the past two years); we want Bono. We want to tell people in ten years, who have never heard of Tufts, "Hey Tufts was pretty good. You know who spoke at my graduation? Bono." I am sure that the Omidyars will give a great speech. One that will resonate in the hearts of all those who hear it, and many at Tufts will be happy with the decision. But it will leave others wondering exactly how the speakers were selected. Now while my last few points were attempts at humor, the real problem with having the Omidyars speak at graduation is that they have made such extensive financial contributions to the University. It's not like they were the first choice for the Princeton graduation, and we lured them away with a higher bid. No, being significant University donors, the Omidyars obviously had an advantage in being selected as commencement speaker. Their prominence at Tufts is due, in great part, to their tremendous wealth and their generous contributions to the University. I don't believe that's reason enough for them to speak at commencement. If we set a precedent of selecting wealthy and generous Tufts trustees, we will miss all those great, memorable speakers whose prominence is based on factors other than wealth and philanthropy. I'm sure there are plenty of civic-minded alumni, like the Omidyars, who love Tufts and could give a rousing speech. In this particular case, then, it's hard to deny a connection between the speaker and his generosity to Tufts. Another problem is that the speakers of this sort have the potential to become incredibly boring. If anyone has ever seen or been in a business meeting, you know they aren't very exciting. So if every year we have a businessman or a heavy donor deliver the address, the audience is going to fall asleep. So, how should the administration pick the speaker for next year? We need a formula. So in the spirit of Pierre Omidyar and the Tufts administration, the best way to decide who gives the speech is to auction it off on eBay.Daniel Lang is a junior majoring in quantities economics.

---

News

The future of activism

March 31

Cohen was filled to capacity this past weekend for The Vagina Monologues, which was an unequivocal success. Director Zoe Hastings and the cast should be applauded for tackling the daunting text without the slightest shred of self-consciousness or uncertainty, either of which would have doomed the production. At its essence, The Vagina Monologues was an activist event as well as a theater production, and it is proof that an important political agenda can be conveyed passionately in an accessible and constructive manner. This is the second year it has been performed on campus, and it has the energy and momentum to become an annual tradition. All campus activists should take note of this tremendous effort. It opened just about a week after University President Larry Bacow e-mailed the community calling for a higher level of "civility and discourse," which was followed by students' misguided efforts to embarrass him in front of Trustees at the Dewick luncheon. John Dowling wrote a Viewpoint last week, properly censuring some of the luncheon's more vocal participants, and mentioning the jarring statistic that nearly a third of the $582 million raised during John DiBiaggio's capitol campaign came from Trustees. It's slightly ironic that some students who are advocating for changes that require money would offend those who are most likely to provide it; at its worst, the incident could have cost the University millions in potential donations. And the activists could lose their dwindling threads of respectability by arguing that if money does not goto their causes, the school might as well not receive it. The trustees won't be back until May, but administrators will continue to be confronted by activists on a regular basis. For that activism to be meaningful - as demonstrated by The Vagina Monologues - rather than irrational will demand considerable thought and a concerted effort. The Tufts community is undeniably and understandably becoming less sympathetic to activists as they act rashly and irresponsibly on their whims. Administrators are concerned about diversity, but activists can play a crucial role in adding a greater sense of urgency. If that is to happen they must work with the system rather than by senselessly berating it. Tufts has a strong activist tradition, but its headingtowards virtual irrelevance, fast and furiously. The Vagina Monologues was a weekends respite, and hopefully an example which could reverse the trend.

---

News

O'Rourke urges students to get rich

March 31

Renowned conservative political satirist P.J. O'Rourke poked fun at politics and imparted wisdom to Tufts students in his lecture at Barnum Hall on Wednesday evening. "You can't make fun of the government in times of national crisis," O'Rourke said. "But it's okay, because there are plenty of people overseas doing it for us. Globalization is wonderful." This, as well as the bottles of gin and tonic left on the podium, set the tone for O'Rourke's speech. He poked fun of everything from Al Gore's beard and George Bush's "dyslexia" to airlines and Enron. Amidst the jokes he slipped in some historical evidence, and managed to address serious political issues without ceasing to entertain. O'Rourke spoke on the relationship between politics and business, especially pertaining to the recent national crisis. He admitted that while college students may be in the "sex and beer business" right now, eventually they will have to enter the real world and deal with such issues. His speech focused particularly on the role and size of the government. "Times of crisis lead to extended government policies" he said, using Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, and Roosevelt as examples. "But really we should turn to the government in bad times only as we'd turn to a gin bottle. While it's nice to have it there, we shouldn't rely on it," O'Rourke said that the political and economic systems send contradictory messages. The economic system encourages people to make as much money as possible, while the political system focuses on closing the unfair economic gap. He finds serious error in the political viewpoint, as he thinks an unfair gap is a necessary part of the economy. "What if the beauty gap was eliminated and every woman looked likeMargaret Thatcher?" he said. He cited the Tenth Commandment of the Old Testament, "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house," as support of his belief that economic fairness is a sin. O'Rourke translated this as "Don't whine about what others have, go out and get your own." Wealth is not zero-sum and we need more in the economy whether it widens the economic gap or not, he said. O'Rourke's final argument for more wealth was that in general, "rich democracies don't fight each other." He said many problems would be solved if everyone would fulfill his duty "to become fat, happy, self-indulgent and terribly overscheduled." He urged Tufts students to "go out, get a job, and make heaps and piles of money." The Lecture Series, which has been working to host O'Rourke for the past three years, were pleased with his appearance. "He is a funny speaker, and he makes fun of everyone," says Lecture Series Co-Chair Benjamin Rouda, "I don't think I agreed with a single thing he said but it's nice to provide a different viewpoint." O'Rourke marked the year's first fully sponsored event by the Tufts Lecture Series. But Junior Sam Dangremond, Editor-in-Chief of The Primary Source found himself in agreement with much of O'Rourke's politics. He said O'Rourke was "a high-profile political analyst with great wit and a keen understanding of world events." O'Rourke also seemed to enjoy himself, and said he was glad to have a break from his usual business lectures. He also said he was pleased with the questions he received in the Q&A session at the end. One student asked if, with all his insight and criticism, he would ever run for office. "Never ever," O'Rourke replied, as he fixed himself a drink.

---

News

Duke unanimous number one after solid week

March 31

In the most recent USA Today/ESPN Coaches poll, the Blue Devils received all 30 first place votes - they remain the nation's top team. It was a good week for the squad from Durham, North Carolina, which scored convincing victories over in-state rival North Carolina and ACC opponent Clemson. Kansas and Maryland remained the nation's second and third ranked programs respectively, each tallying two victories last week. The Jay Hawks' offense had a stellar week, blowing out Colorado and 24th-ranked Missouri by a combined score of 205-146. Drew Gooden, a sure-fire All-American, continued his torrid season, scoring 26 points and recording 11 rebounds against Missouri, and 20 points and 11 boards against Colorado. Led by star guard Juan Dixon, Maryland erased a nine-point deficit with only 3:22 left to beat ACC rival Virginia. Success from the charity stripe is a must for teams hoping to reach the final four, and Maryland converted 25-26 free throws in the game. The Terps had an easier time with North Carolina State, defeating the Wolfpack 89-73. The game of the week: tenth ranked Kentucky Wildcats traveled to Gainseville, FL, to take on fifth-ranked Florida. With time winding down, Kentucky's star Teyshawn Prince hit on a floating jumper from the baseline to give the Wildcats the lead. As time expired, Florida's Brett Nelson missed a jumper that would have tied the game, and Kentucky secured a 70-68 victory. Leading Kentucky to win, Prince recorded a double-double with 19 points and ten rebounds, and Keith Bogans scored 20 off the bench. Freshman Chuck Hayes also made significant contributions in the win in his first start of the season, scoring ten points and pulling down seven boards. The teams that made the most progress last week were Gonzaga and Marquette. Gonzaga improved its overall mark to 20-13, defeating Portland twice, 102-67 and 94-80. The Zags, with their two convincing victories, jumped from 14 to ten in the rankings. Marquette, which stands at 19-3 overall and 8-1 in conference USA, seized the #23 rank, after not holding a ranking all season. Led by Dwayne Wayne and his 18.5 points per game, Marquette defeated Tulane 68-66 and overpowered the fourth ranked Cincinnati Bearcats 74-60. Virginia and Illinois were the week's big losers. The Cavaliers fell from five to eight in the polls after dropping two tough games to Maryland and out-of-conference opponent Missouri. They will look to regain their winning ways in two tough ACC games this week against Clemson and North Carolina State. The Fighting Illini continued what has surely been the most disappointing season in college hoops this year. Pre-season expectations dubbed Illinois as one of the nation's five best squads, and many regarded the Illini's reaching the final four as a foregone conclusion. Yet it has been a rocky road. Illinois, after two bad defeats at the hands of Ohio State and Michigan State, fell to 15-7 overall and an inflated #14 ranking. A huge setback occurred during the loss to Michigan State when the team's second leading rebounder, senior Damir Krupalija, was lost for the season after re-injuring his left foot. While he only averaged 18 minutes per game, Krupalija was averaging eight points and six boards - production that will undoubtedly be sorely missed for the remainder of Illinois' schedule. Though its reputation won it a stellar ranking, Illinois owns a meager 4-5 conference mark and must start to play better all around basketball to realize any of its vast potential.

---

---

News

Terrorists' bombs and Arafat's bombast: A recipe for failure

March 31

The violence in Israel goes on, as does the debate over the fate of Palestinians. It was with great interest that I read Reem Assil's response to my viewpoint regarding Palestinian-Israeli violence. First off, I'd like to applaud the measured and well-thought response. Far too often on this campus, debate is replaced by self-righteous mud-slinging, and the only thing proven is that yes, there is a lot of mud to go around. Ms. Assil correctly identifies that with a "vibrant, intelligent, and genuine Palestinian leader" the Palestinians could make progress in their dream of having a modern functioning state. I couldn't agree more. And I also agree that Israeli action has retarded rather than promoted Palestinian economic and social progress. Israeli policy often hurts the average Palestinian no more than it does the terrorists themselves. The task of accurately targeting terrorists and guerilla fighters in an urban setting is a very difficult one, and often Israeli blockades do more to impede honest salesmen than brain-washed terrorists. Assil also raises the issue of Yasir Arafat's power, or rather the lack of it. It must be remembered that Israel has done more than any other nation, including Syria, Egypt, and Jordan, to increase Arafat's power. After all, he was supposed to be able to rein in the terrorists. The Israelis gave him money, guns, and the mandate to round up all suspected terrorists. When he failed to do so (the task may have been an impossible one, more on that later) the Israelis accepted, somewhat gleefully, that he was, after all, useless and that there was no further reason to deal with him. This is why Sharon now refers to Arafat as "irrelevant." Thousands of Palestinians now gather outside his bunker to demonstrate that Arafat, to them, is far from irrelevant. But that misses the issue. Israelis only have one simple goal: they want the terror to stop. And terrorists have an even simpler goal: they want to kill. Certainly, they may have or think they have higher motives, but a suicide bomber is more an enemy of Arafat and the Palestinians than he is an enemy of Sharon and the Israelis. When time passes and no terror occurs, the Israelis give territory. Remember: the Israelis want nothing more complex than security. It's what they have achieved with Egypt, Syria, and Jordan through winning wars and making peace. If Arafat cannot stop terror, then he has literally nothing to offer the Israelis. If he has nothing to offer them, then why should anyone negotiate with him? He becomes an impediment to the peace process. Arafat himself acknowledges that terror does not help the Palestinian cause. In one short year the Palestinian Authority went from world sympathy and the White House lawn to a cold shoulder and a few demolished police stations. Despite Sharon's urging, George Bush is unwilling to abandon Arafat because there is no alternative Palestinian leader. Arafat will not step down from his position of authority. His attitude has become clear: There is no Palestinian state without Arafat in charge. He will delay and hold on to power as long as possible, as Israel elects one Prime Minister after another. The Israelis, thoroughly disgusted with his lack of progress against terror and his arms deals with Iran, will not speak to him. In the meantime, Israelis and Palestinians die in ever increasing numbers. Who then is holding up the creation of the Palestinian state? Is it Sharon, who has actually said he supports the idea and has advocated the creation of a Palestinian state since the '80s? Is it Bush, who wants a Palestinian state so he can score political points at home and abroad? Or, as it is clear, is it Arafat himself? If Arafat valued the creation of a state more than his own skin, he would have stepped down long ago, and given the Palestinians the "vibrant, intelligent, and genuine Palestinian leader" that Assil and all the Palestinians desire and desperately need. He wrongs the Palestinians, he wrongs the Arab nation as a whole, by refusing to face his own failures and to step down as the discredited would-be-statesman that he is.Tal Dibner is a senior majoring in history and political science.

---

News

High rolling in the Middle East

March 31

July, 2002. The US has launched an invasion of Iraq and is attacking Saddam's air defense network and major ground targets. In the absence of UN inspections (which were never that effective in the first place), Saddam has had several years to build up his stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons. Feeling he has nothing to lose, he launches these weapons against Israel - a sort of suicide bombing on a grand scale.As a consequence, Israel retaliates with a major offensive against Iraq. This inspires other Arab countries to attack Israel, resulting in a major war in the Middle East. The US, unable to obtain the support of any of its allies, faces a huge regional conflict alone.However, none of this will happen if you believe the hawks who are whispering in Mr. Bush's ear. According to them, the Iraqi people, seeing the security of their leader threatened, will rise up and overthrow him, embracing the Americans as liberators. Recently, this view has come more and more into the mainstream.This strategy is fraught with extreme risk. Most of the invasion plans are predicated on the assumption that the Iraqi people, along with other Arab nations, will rise up against Saddam Hussein when a credible threat to his regime is presented. What happens if this assumption is wrong? First, though ousting Saddam is desirable, it would not be easy. The Iraqi ruling regime is criminal, brutal and dangerous - that has been well documented. Most, if not all, of Iraq's neighbors would be overjoyed if Saddam keeled over, but cannot express this publicly for fear of appearing to kowtow to America. Even if Israel was somehow persuaded not to retaliate against an almost inevitable Scud attack, the Arab nations would be incensed against further US activity in the region. Supporting the US without clear and overwhelming justification for an invasion would be political suicide for the Arab leaders.Iraq has been stockpiling weapons of mass destruction and presents an increasing threat both regionally and globally: regionally to Israel and US forces, globally in the form of terrorism. However, overthrowing Saddam is easier said than done. He is a dictator accustomed to staying in power and ruthlessly suppressing his opponents. The Iraqi National Congress, which is neither national nor a congress nor an effective fighting force, is not a viable regime to install in Saddam's place. They are far from the popular "freedom fighters" that many hawks seem to believe. Their leader, Ahmad Chalabi, is by no means universally respected. The Kurds in the North, though more than happy to help oust Saddam, are grossly outgunned and have proven ineffective as a military counter to Baghdad. Second, an invasion would be extremely costly in every way. The example of Afghanistan could lure us into the fool's paradise of believing a sustained and careful air strike can effectively overthrow any regime. Do not be fooled - attacking Iraq would likely involve a major ground operation. If Saddam feels his life is at stake, he will not hesitate to use weapons of mass destruction. He has a history of such brazen calculations.The US is already hated in the region and it is unlikely that the Arab people would view America as a liberator so much as an imperialist if Iraq were invaded. So far, the Bush administration has been unable to line up support for an Iraqi invasion - even the UK will not back us on this one. Before a real calming of tensions in Israel, it is likely neighboring Arab nations would actively oppose an invasion. That would make a full-scale operation very difficult. Third, once we overthrow Saddam, then what? There has been remarkably little discussion about this. Who do we install? Chalabi? The Iraqi people, who have suffered under sanctions for over a decade, will not be exceedingly happy to see us. The pressures to use a broken Iraq for cheap oil will be immense, and political support for rebuilding will fade rapidly once the direct threat is nullified. Put simply, an invasion of Iraq is extremely risky and could very well have disastrous consequences. Once military force is used, a line is crossed that cannot be easily regained. The US is already massing troops in the region and a growing number of voices both inside and out of the administration are calling for action.What is most frightening about these plans is how closely they echo the debacles of the Cold War. The enemy then was communism and the enemy today is terrorism. Yet just as our track-record was so abominable then, do we really expect it to be better now? In Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Latin America and Iraq itself, the US tried to fight the specter of communism by installing friendly but brutal regimes or engaging in costly and ineffective military operations.In short, invading Iraq is extremely dangerous: the risks are huge and the payoffs far from certain. The US would have to act alone, it would be forced into yet another indefinite deployment and it would face further destabilization of this already tumultuous region. But it would be so easy, the hawks say, just start a carefully coordinated air strike and the Iraqi people will overthrow Saddam. Everything seems so deterministic and simple. Unfortunately, the world of international relations is a dangerous, unpredictable business and is never simple. Those who succeed are those who are prudent.

---

News

Misconceptions about supporting Amendment III

March 31

Opposing views about Amendment III are prevalent throughout campus. While this amendment will take away the vote from the four existing culture representatives, it will allow for an unlimited number of culture groups to have representatives who are officially recognized by the Senate and who can speak at meetings. I find it great that there is finally an issue which a lot of students care about. In fact, it's terrific. However, I have been a bit troubled by some of the tactics being used to defeat this amendment. What bothers me is how those encouraging its defeat have been so quick to judge those supporting the amendment as being "blatantly fueled by prejudice against gays and people of color," to quote Ariana Flores from her Viewpoint yesterday. I saw this as a direct attack on those who are in support of this amendment rather than of the amendment itself, which is unacceptable. The tactics used by opponents of the amendment are brilliant. To the uninformed voter, it makes sense to fail the amendment because, let's face it, who wants to be associated with racists? Or homophobes? However, to what extent are the culture reps really informing their constituents of the true issue, all of the points of the amendment? Or are they simply focusing on losing their voting power? I am concerned that voters are only getting part of the entire story, the part that says, "these atrocious human beings want to take away our votes, therefore they are racist and/or homophobic." But how is it possible that there is suddenly such an epidemic of homophobia and racism on this campus which is purportedly fueling this amendment? This campus is being manipulated and bullied. I resent being called racist just because I disagree with the culture representatives' views that only four cultures should be officially recognized on campus by the Senate. I understand that while more representatives can be officially recognized by the Senate, the process for this is long and may even discourage groups from even trying. Furthermore, once this process is even initiated, a minimum of 20 percent of the student body must vote on this issue. Based on the voter apathy of this campus, how likely would this be to occur? And even if this were to somewhat miraculously happen, on a regular basis even, how many votes outside of the Senate seats are we willing to create before the situation becomes ridiculous? Ten seats? 20? There are only 28 senators. They should not be outnumbered by voting culture representatives. Additionally, I find it grossly ironic that those who are fighting the hardest to eliminate racism and homophobia from campus are the ones creating it by instilling fear in those who don't know any better. They are inhibiting far more people's representation than they are enabling. This form of voter manipulation, assisted by the omnipresence of ignorance, is a threat to campus democracy. Admittedly, while certain groups of people do still suffer from discrimination on campus, the passage of this amendment will certainly not silence those groups. Should the culture representatives and any other members of the groups not supporting this amendment bother to clearly explain the true purpose of the amendment, they will realize that maybe they are the ones being racist, sexist, or just plain ignorant. After all, did anyone ever stop to think about the Muslims on this campus after 9/11? What about the women? These groups have both had discrimination problems on campus this year. What about the Jews? Or even the handicapped? Are these cultural groups privileged to be represented with culture representatives on this campus? Do they have an extra voice? No, they do not. The opponents of this amendment are merely concerned with keeping their own votes for their own self-interests, unwilling to lose a little of their power so that other minority groups can gain the right to speak during Senate meetings as provided through Amendment III. While this amendment is by no stretch of the imagination perfect, it will help to level the playing field by allowing more minority voices on campus to speak. By supporting this amendment, you are not perpetuating homophobia or racism on this campus. You just want to give others a chance. Is that racist?Amy Spindel is a sophomore majoring in psychology & sociology.

---

News

Gore visit rescheduled

March 31

The long-awaited arrival of former Vice President Al Gore to the Tufts campus will become a reality next Friday. Gore, who will speak about "family-centered community building" and lead a symposium on the same topic, canceled his original Sept. 14 trip to Tufts after he was stranded in Austria due to flight delays in wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. President Larry Bacow was "delighted" when he heard that Gore would reschedule the event. According to Bacow, Gore's topic "transcends politics," and will be well received by the larger Tufts community. Prior to the former vice president's expected visit this fall, controversy arose among students concerned by the limited number of participants. Deborah Bobek - managing director of the Applied Developmental Science Institute, which co-sponsored Gore's visit - said that adjustments have been made to appease student concern. According to Bobek, the initial 150 student invitations from last September are still valid, but another 25-50 participants will be included next week. In order to accommodate greater numbers, the event was moved from the Balch Arena Theatre to the larger ASEAN auditorium in the Cabot Intercultural Center. All students attending the event were recommended by department chairs and handpicked by a group of faculty members that included Child Development Professor Richard Lerner, who co-taught with Gore at Middle Tennessee State and Fisk Universities. Students were chosen according both to classes they had taken in the child development and psychology departments at Tufts and to other interests in the area of Gore's topic. Students will join the symposium in the afternoon and sit in the front of the auditorium, Bobek explained, while everyone else will be seated in the rear. Gore will speak along with a panel of youth leaders, and the participants will have the chance to ask questions afterwards. The discussion with Gore is designed to help with his work on the subject of family-centered community building for youth. Gore hopes to generate ideas for his new masters program on the subject. "Gore is a superb lecturer and a masterful moderator and facilitator of discussions," Lerner said. "His efforts and leadership will be greatly appreciated by the participants in the conference." The original Gore visit in September was to be followed the next day by a discussion among leading experts in the field. The new schedule, while including more symposium participants, will only last a single day. But the symposium's objectives will still be met and students will still benefit from the experience thanks to creative reorganization of the schedule, according to Lerner. He identified some of these objectives, guaranteeing that, "participants in the symposium will learn a great deal about the research, policy, and programs dimensions of promoting positive youth development through family-centered community building." Originally, Tufts was only one of 19 stops for Gore, who had hoped to visit other universities such as Cornell and Columbia in a national tour to develop a curriculum for a class he hoped to teach. It is now uncertain as to whether the rest of his tour is to continue as expected or whether any changes have been made to Gore's plans. Lerner is certain that University programs will benefit from Gore's visit. He said there will be "greater visibility for the leadership of Tufts University in merging scholarship with the values and interests of communities. In particular, the contributions of the Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Development and of the University College for Citizenship and Public Service... will gain greater recognition locally and throughout the state and nation."

---

News

Football hopes to post back-to-back winning seasons

March 31

When the Tufts football team begins its season this year, there will be a few key faces missing. Gone will be Kevin Kelley and his 134.9 yards per game, his eight touchdowns, and his 1,079 thunderous yards of offense. Gone will be All-American offensive guard Mike Willey, who opened up the gaping holes that allowed Kelley and the rest of the offense to gain 227 rushing yards per game. But despite these losses, head coach Bill Samko's team hopes to put together another winning season. Repeating last year's season (6-2 records, third place in the NESCAC) may be difficult, but the returning players believe continued success is possible. "Kevin Kelley was obviously a great running back, but his offensive did a good amount of work," senior co-captain QB Scott Treacy said. "Even though [RB] Chuck McGraw has a different style of running, I feel he is just as good as Kevin Kelley." Despite visible losses on offense, the Tufts defense, which ranked fourth in the nation last year and allowed only 10.4 points per game, will return eight starters. The most notable of these starters may be senior cornerback Evan Zupancic. A pre-season All-American last year, Zupancic, has 13 career interceptions, just two shy of the school record. He recorded three picks last season, second on the team to another key defensive starter, junior free-safety Mark Tilki. Tilki grabbed four interceptions last season, including three on consecutive possessions at Colby last November. Though Tilki has excelled on defense, perhaps his greatest contributions come on special teams. His performance on special teams last year garnered him a first team All-NESCAC selection. Last season, Tilki recovered a fumble, blocked two punts, and averaged 23.2 yards on kickoff returns. Tilki will be joined by another first team All-NESCAC selection, junior defensive tackle Caleb Hudak. Hudak led the team with seven tackles for losses, including a team-high four sacks for 47 yards lost. He also forced a fumble, recovered a fumble, picked off a pass, and was fourth on the team with 41 tackles (27 solo). Junior Matt Keller will return as a starter in the middle of the defensive line, while senior Brian Burbank and juniors Reid Palmer and Jay Hirsh will return at defensive end. The group had six sacks and five interceptions last season, including a game saving interception by Palmer against Trinity with 1:23 left on the clock. The team has a hole to fill at linebacker, after losing senior co-captain, and second team All-NESCAC selection Scott Mittenthal to graduation. Mittenthal led the team with 59 tackles last season, and his presence will be missed. Senior linebacker Sean Kennedy should help ease this pain, however, as he will be returning for his second year as a starter. Kennedy led the team with 43 solo tackles last year. "We have a lot of players returning on defense and our speed and quickness will be our strength," said Zupancic, the senior co-captain. The offense will also return eight starters to the team. Although Willey is gone up front, second team All-NESCAC selection, junior tackle Adam Collette, will anchor the line, along with senior tackle Andy Dickerson, and junior center Justin Kelley. There will be a tremendous void to fill in the running back position after Kelley's torrid 2001 campaign. McGraw gained 449 yards last season backing up Kelley, and also matched his 4.7 yards per carry. He will be backed up by sophomore Steve Cincotta. Treacy will direct the offense from the quarterback position, as the team tries to balance its passing game with its rushing attack. While gaining 227 yards per game on the ground, the offense averaged only 75.8 yards passing. Treacy threw for 466 yards last year, with five touchdowns and seven interceptions. The passing game will be boosted by the return of junior wide receiver Matt Cerne, who missed six games last season due to a high ankle sprain. Senior Brian Pitko will return as a strong component as well. The receiver, who also competed nationally in the 110 meter hurdles, caught five balls last year for 129 yards. It is with these tools that the Jumbos will take the field this year. The team opens its schedule with a home game against Hamilton on Sept. 21. The last time Tufts squared off against Hamilton was in 1999, when the Jumbos came away with a 28-25 win. The team will then face Bates at Tufts homecoming on Sept. 28. The Jumbos defeated the Bobcats by a score of 41-12 last year. If Tufts comes away with a winning record this year, it will do so against the odds. Tufts has not posted back to back winning seasons since 1990-91. "Despite the loss of some integral players, I believe this years team will be very competitive in the NESCAC," Treacy said.

---

News

Men's baseball gearing for annual southern trip

March 31

Like their major league counterparts, members of the Tufts baseball team reported for their own version of spring training a few short weeks ago. The Jumbos are slightly more than a week away from actual game play, when their annual migration down south commences next Friday with a game against Lynchburg in Virginia. Coach John Casey was guardedly optimistic about the upcoming season. "We're doing okay," he said. "We're doing what we can, and we're fine. I don't think anyone's been spectacular, I don't think anyone's been awful. Everyone's doing what they're supposed to be doing. But we won't find anything out until we play."The Jumbos, fresh off a season in which they won the NESCAC East Division with a 10-2 mark and then advanced to the conference championship against Williams, will play ten games over the ten-day spring break trip to Virginia and North Carolina before returning to Medford to begin league play. And according to Casey, the competition will be much more than an easy "tune-up" for the upcoming season."The problem is all the games count; you can't duck that," Casey said. "Methodist is already 8-1, and Virgina Wesleyan, Lynchburg, UNC-Greensboro, they're all good teams. Our feeling is we want to go down there and find out if were any good or not. I don't worry about what our record is, I worry about how were playing."A year ago, Tufts compiled 2-4-1 record on its southern tour, only to come back home and win ten of its next 12 games."Last year, even though we came out with three losses, we played Methodist to a 5-5 tie and lost to Greensboro in extra innings," Casey said. "It's our goal to play well. But I think you wind up becoming a better team this way than if you go down there and beat the snot out of some team you already know you're better than. We learned how to play down there last year."The trip will also serve as an important part of the continuing early season assessment process for Casey and his staff, according to junior tri-captain and center fielder Evan Zupancic. "We'll see how things go on the trip down south," he said. "A lot of evaluation takes place down there."Specifically, the team is still searching for a new left fielder to replace former co-captain Todd Boutwell, who was lost to graduation along with the team's other captain, catcher Joe Surprenant. Greg Hinkley, a sophomore, will be the new catcher"Left field is pretty much up for grabs," Zupancic said. He said Hinkley has "great size, a lot of talent, and is still learning but coming along nicely. It's definitely tough to replace guys like [Surprenant]. It's more their leadership roles than anything."Overall, the Jumbos return 19 players, including tri-captains Zupancic, senior right fielder Dan Callahan, and senior pitcher Steve Lapham. Aside from Lapham, junior pitcher Jon Lee, last season's NESCAC pitcher of the year, sophomore Randy Newsom, and junior Dave Martin will all be back on the mound."I think we'll be competitive; our pitching is our strength," Casey said. "And our goal is to get in the playoffs somehow, but they only take four teams in baseball. In a three game series, strong pitching will really help us." Despite the difficult odds of making the playoffs, the team's expectations remain high. "I'd say we have high expectations for ourselves," Zupancic said. "We like to set the bar pretty high, and we want to meet those standards. We're looking for success."For now, Tufts will focus simply on getting ready for its season opener. "It's still kind of early, but I think our workouts have gone pretty well," Zupancic said. "We've been real efficient with practices. We're just looking to go up and up and peak when our games start." Casey agreed, saying he wasn't looking past the upcoming trip."I hope its 70 and sunny every day. Then it will be easy," he said.

---

News

A True Celebrity Deathmatch

March 31

All right folks, buckle your seatbelts. This could get messy. On Wednesday, Mar. 13th, Fox will air a boxing match between (get ready)..Tonya Harding and Paula Jones. This is not a joke. Do not adjust the levels on your TV screen. This is the real deal. The bout between the hubcap wielding figure skater and the nose-job sporting Jones will be followed by a match between Danny Bonaduce of the "Partridge Family" and Barry Williams from "The Brady Bunch". Once again, I repeat, this is not a joke. It's not claymation, it's not staged, it's not even WWF. This will be a real, honest to goodness boxing match. "This is legitimate. We'll have a real referee, a real doctor, real announcers. To all the world, this will be a real boxing match," Fox's alternative-programming chief Mike Darnell told USA Today. This will be the latest revolting attempt by the TV industry to lure viewers with "reality TV"; to tempt the public by appealing to their more morbid side and show them what they were afraid to ask for. In what will be Harding's first significant TV performance since that wedding night video, and Jones' biggest appearence since she was nose deep in a sex scandal involving Bill Clinton, the two "fighters" will don weighted gloves and protective headgear and have at it. The fight was originally slated to feature attempted murderer Amy Fisher, but Fisher backed out on sunday. Is it just me, or does this seem like a bad idea to anyone else? Whose brilliant idea was it to stick the two trailer park tinker bells in a boxing ring and try to get millions of people to watch? Maybe we should just make it interesting and throw them both in a box with two rabid hyenas. It blows me away to think that there are people who sink this low for TV ratings. Does nobody else think that this could be a potentially dangerous situation? Fisher has clearly proven that she would try to kill someone. Harding has shown that not only would she conspire to have someone clubbed with a crowbar, she has even gone so far as smash her own husband's face in with a hubcap. Just ask Mary Jo Buttafuco and Nancy Kerrigan about how violent these women can be. And now Jones has stepped in to take Harding's hubcap to the face. Though her biggest worry is her new nose-job - "I just got my nose done, and I don't want to mess it up," Jones told the Arkansas Democrat Gazette - she should consider concerning herself with somewhat greater bodily harms. Harding, though a disgrace to the Olympic community, is a trained athlete, and was often criticized by fellow figure skaters for being too muscular. Jones meanwhile has spent her time fixing her nose and posing for Penthouse. Should be a good match. Unfortunately for the world, this is what makes this "celebrity deathmatch" so enticing. What will these two bruisers do to each other when they're told it's OK to fight? Well on March 13th everyone will find out. This match serves absolutely no purpose, other than to lower the status of everyone involved, both directly and indirectly. Fox, which was finally beginning to establish itself as a legitimate network, with real sports coverage and even some quasi-interesting programs, throws itself back into the depths of television with a move like this. Just as people were beginning to forget "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?" the wizards at Fox come out with this gem and sink down to about one step above UPN. The boxing world loses with this fight, even though the IBF, WBC, and WBA have absolutely nothing to do with it. Boxing is a sport steeped with tradition and glory and countless unforgettable moments. To reduce it to nothing more than a grudge match between two trashy societal outcasts is nothing short of disgraceful. With the antics of Mike Tyson and the recent controversy surrounding his licensing, the last thing the boxing world needs is publicity like this. While boxing is a sport about heart, dedication, and endless training, fiascoes such as this serve to do little more than reduce it's respectability as a sport. Society as a whole suffers with fights like this as well. With each new "reality TV" program we take another step back toward the days of the gladiators. As each network tries to out-shock the public with what they're willing to show, the general public takes a step down. No, Tonya Harding vs. Paula Jones is not going to be the downfall of our civilization, but how long is it going to be before someone actually dies on one of these programs? Is it really necessary for everyone to see what happens when Harding and Fisher are put in a ring? Finally, the people in the fights lose more than anybody. Can these peoplereally be that strapped for cash that they would take part in such a circus act? Do they think that they'll look in some way respectable by doing this? None of the fighters ever really commanded any degree of respect in the first place, but this just sinks them all to a new low. I guess it's only natural for Fox to assume that this will draw an audience, especially after the amazing success of the XFL. The league, which lasted for all of one completely forgettable season, featured rules designed to make the game more violent, and awe inspiring efforts from players like "He Hate Me." But hey, if Fox wants to have its fun, let them. Maybe soon we'll get to see Marty McSorley and Carl Everett go at each other with Fungo bats. And if we're lucky enough, maybe somebody will show us John Rocker fighting a polar bear. After all, would it really be that much more ridiculous than Tonya Harding vs. Paula Jones?

---

News

Commercials, commercials...U2?

March 31

The E*Trade monkey has done it again. For that matter, so have the ad wizards at Bud Light. Despite media predictions that this year's reduced-budget Super Bowl commercials would lack luster due to the weak economy and the alluring alternate option of advertising during the coming Olympics, many of last night's commercials hit the mark. After an unmoving pregame show and a slow-moving first quarter, Super Bowl XXXVI's commercials helped make the experience more entertaining as a whole. Starting off the five-hour epic was a curious tribute to Abraham Lincoln. Famed politicians like Bill Clinton spoke the praises of Old Abe while flashes of the American flag and famous statues of Lincoln lit up the screen. Next, Julio Iglesias and Mary J. Blige co-sung "America the Beautiful" to the crowd's repeated chants of "USA!" Ex-Beatle Paul McCartney then joined the flag-waving celebrity talent show with a performance of "Freedom," an unabashed sing-along in which 95 percent of the lyrics are the word "freedom" itself. But when ex-president George Bush, Sr. was invited to flip the Super Bowl XXXVI coin (and pawned off the duty), things got down to business - literally. Mere seconds after the kickoff, the long-awaited ads were rolling. Investment firm Charles Schwab sponsored a hilarious ad in which slugger Barry Bonds is practicing his homerun hitting for the upcoming season in a baseball stadium. A mysterious voice broadcast over the stadium's loudspeakers beckons Bonds to give up his quest and retire. The camera reveals retired record-holder Hank Aaron in the press box, whispering into the microphone. Bud Light, sponsor of countless hilarious ads in the past, did not disappoint this year. In one spot, last year's ladies man, Cedric, returned. Cedric is at a bar, giving a young white friend tips on picking up women. His apprentice takes to repeating whatever Cedric says to him to a woman he is trying to befriend. Suddenly, the bartender slaps a Bud Light down in front of Cedric. Cedric asks the bartender how much he owes him, the apprentice asks his would-be date the same question, and tragedy ensues. In another spot, a woman tries to get her husband to come to bed with the offer of a revealing nightgown and satin sheets. The husband refuses to budge from his living room couch until his wife reveals she's also brought some Bud Light to bed. The husband then rushes up the stairs while tearing his clothes off, dives into the bed, and slides across the smooth satin sheets directly through the nearby window. In yet a third hilarious spot, Bud Light ad execs offered a parody of Comedy Central's Battle Bots, in which a fridge-like robot entices a much larger robot with a cold beer, then mercilessly pummels its opponent into the ground. The E*Trade monkey, star of Super Bowls past, was in full effect this year. Donning a metallic green suit and top hat with dollar sign emblazoned on its front, the monkey shamelessly conducted a troupe of female dancers who pulled up their long skirts to reveal stock-related messages. He rose up above them on a giant, phallic arrow not unlike those seen symbolizing stock market gains. Despite the commercial's hilarious dance sequence, its effect was cut short by its length and the pointless appearance of E*Trade's CEO. Xm.com, a satellite radio service, sponsored an ad in which Snoop Dogg falls from the sky into a suburban office building. When a very white employee who had been listening to the station stares confusedly at Mr. Dogg from his cubicle, the rapper responds, "What's up, foo?" Though one may wonder what compensation Snoop Dogg received for his brief appearance, the effect was hilarious. Staying within the boundaries of tasteful humor, Visa sponsored a few commercials in support of its new online verification service. In one, actor Kevin Bacon attempts to make a purchase, but has no valid identification. He brings in five people connected to him in some way, playing Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon himself. In another, Emmett Smith runs into the same problem. M-life, a new cellular service offered by AT&T Wireless, offered several annoying teaser ads that directed viewers to its website for answers. After halftime, a funny-yet-disturbing spot depicting a variety of navels - severed umbilical cords, of course - informed us that "we were all meant to be wireless." While critics were skeptical that many ads would show the alleged effects of September's terrorist attacks, few did - and those that did were well-done. Employment website monster.com sponsored a short speech by Rudy Giuliani in which the former New York City mayor thanked the nation for its support. Another tributary spot featured Budweiser's most recognizable corporate symbol: a team of Clydesdales leading a Budweiser wagon. The six horses travel from the American heartland to New York City, where they genuflect at ground zero. Despite the geographical inaccuracy of the horses crossing the Brooklyn Bridge and ending up in New Jersey, the spot was heartwarming. Not every commercial that aired last night was successful, and among them were the government's anti-terrorism ads. In an unprecedented event that marked the first time the federal government ever purchased Super Bowl airtime, two ads merged terrorism with the War on Drugs to create a semi-tangible enemy for America to rally against. One spot mimicked Visa's "priceless" commercials by showing a shopping list of all the expensive items necessary to create a terrorist attack. The other spot featured all types of people admitting to all types of heinous things - for example, a young boy admits, "I helped kill a policeman." Both ads reveal at their ends that if one purchases drugs, he or she is likely supporting terrorism fiscally - a hazy connection and an unwelcome, vigilance-inducing ad that did not fit the Super Bowl's otherwise-celebratory attitude. Other duds were far less controversial. For example, Lipton Iced Tea's puppet rebellion seemed more a hollow vehicle for Danny Devito and Al Roker, its two stars. Fox, which hosted the Super Bowl, shamelessly and endlessly promoted its upcoming NASCAR season. And Pepsi doled out more countless millions to brand-name singer/promoter Britney Spears to represent the often-scantily-clad Pepsi-drinking women of the last five decades. More worthwhile than any commercial, though, was Super Bowl XXXVI's amazing halftime show. Unlike last year's absurd rock/rap-off that featured Ja Rule, Aerosmith, Britney Spears, and N*SYNC (all at the same time), this year's show centered around one act: U2. The Irish rockers performed "Beautiful Day" on an enormous, heart-shaped stage in the center of the Louisiana Superdome. Then all lights went out, a gigantic black screen rose behind the stage, and guitarist The Edge launched into the opening riff of "Where The Streets Have No Name." As U2 played one of its most recognizable songs, the names of all those who died on September 11 were cast onto the screen, divided up by location: the Pentagon, the World Trade center, the four hijacked aircraft, and, of course, the PAPD, FDNY, and NYPD. The simplified tribute was stunning in its efficiency and sincerity; even as a piece of entertainment it far surpasses last year's pomp. Though the Patriots' victory would be challenged after halftime, U2's performance cemented together the themes that the night attempted to convey: patriotism, unity, and, of course, the importance of a good time.

---

News

A Perfect 11' lives up to billing

March 31

Rarely do 400 Tufts students in a room on a Saturday get rowdy and excited without the aid of alcohol. But at this weekend's Tufts Dance Collective (TDC) spring show, subtitled A Perfect 11, the spirit of the dancers energized an already boisterous crowd. The result was a performance in Cohen Auditorium that was captivating, lively, and truly a perfect 11. The show began with two video clips explaining that 'A Perfect 11' meant turning the performance up a notch. And turning it up a notch was exactly what the TDC dancers did. The show had a more polished feel than in previous years when it was held in the informal Jackson Gym setting, and loud energetic music and superb lighting effects enhanced the great choreography. The show seemed like a competition between the dancers and the audience to see who had more enthusiasm. Even before the show began, the crowd was wild and screaming, and the loud music only caused students to get more excited. But once the house lights dimmed, the dancers took the spotlight, exhibiting a playful spirit that made the show seem like it was about just having fun with dancing and music. An early highlight was the fourth dance, "Colorblind," choreographed by Heather Barondess. Dancers dressed all in black with colorful scarves around their waists moved gracefully to the Counting Crows song with ballet-like movements. The expressionistic moves fit the music perfectly, and dance was well-executed, each person moving in sync with each other. Though "Colorblind" was meant to be mellow, the next dance, to Smashmouth's "I'm a Believer" was one of the most energetic numbers of the show. The dancers jumped on and off the stage, onto and around each other, and bounced around like they were just there to have fun. The dance moves, choreographed by Dave Friedman and Rachel Richards, went from looking like swing, to a do-si-do square dance, and concluding with a Rockette-style chorus line. The ninth dance, to Alicia Keys' "How Come You Don't Call me Anymore" was slower and more expressive than some of the hip hop numbers, but the passion exuded by the dancers made it one of the gems of the show. The dance captured audience members by beginning with five girls on stage in the dark, and by the time the lights went on and the rest of the 20 dancers came on stage, the audience was lost in their moves. Each of the dancers seemed inspired by the music, and they executed the moves so that every arm extension and leap was expressed perfectly. The ending with five dancers on stage in red light was a nice way to frame the piece. After the intermission, "Rhythm Nation" featured some of the most creative choreography of the show by Sean Bjerke and sophomore Carolyn Whitten. The number began to with "Dance of the Sugarplum Fairy" from The Nutcracker and featured pairs in which one person appeared to pull the other's marionette strings. The dance quickly switched to a Janet Jackson song, and karate-like moves were just one of the unique ways in which dancers bounced to the music. "Run to the Water," choreographed by Emily Dixon-Ryan and Frances Shafir, was a graceful dance to music by Live. The performer's costumes of black with shimmery teal skirts around their waists, and a large blue cloth across the stage to represent water set the mood for the piece. Waving the cloth over the dancers who rolled on the floor, and then higher in the air, added to the already expressive moves that made the audience feel captured by the aura of this dance. Though the entire performance was energetic, that spirit reached a peak with the final dance, "Walk this Way." The dance, choreographed by Kelly Dutton and Amanda Miller, featured performers with an attitude. They wore jeans, white shirts with red star designs, and red bandanas, and danced as if they owned the auditorium. One of the best part of the show was the variety of the dances. From a tap number without music to guest performances from Sarabande and TURBO, A Perfect 11 featured a wide array of techniques and styles, and the creativity with which each style was choreographed and executed was impressive. But each dance had one thing in common: the energy of the dancers. This was the aspect of the show that was most enjoyable, as no audience member could help but get revved up by the sense of excitement that pervaded the auditorium.

---

News

Bad Company,' 'Stitch,' and sequels

March 31

It was a summer of disappointments and surprises. It was a summer when pretty much every sequel landed, made $100 million and left town, which meant that everyone saw it - but then never saw it again. It was also a summer when a cult film director and Tobey Maguire released the season's biggest film, Spiderman, and when sure-fire moneymakers like Jerry Bruckheimer and Nicholas Cage choked shortly after opening weekend. And a poorly animated dog made $150 million. Here's a report of how the summer movies fared overall. Sadly for most, there is no curve.MayStar Wars II: D+What I said then: A few reasons this will be better than Phantom Menace: 1) George Lucas had someone work with him on the script, cutting out the sillier lines. 2) Samuel L. Jackson gets a fight scene. 3) Yoda gets a fight scene. 4) Ewan McGregor is more prominent. 5) Jar Jar Binks is only in the first five minutes. All of these things point towards a better movie.Final verdict: 1) George Lucas's silliness of Phantom Menace was replaced by overall dull, tone-deaf dialogue. 2) And? 3) Yes, these characters did have entertaining fight scenes. They were also in the movie simply because George Lucas ran out of ideas, and put in stuff just to please the fans. 4) Ewan McGregor was more prominent, but he was overshadowed by the mind numbing awfulness of Hayden Christianson, or young Anakin "Weenie" Skywalker. And though this intergalactic horse has already been beaten to death, again, Christianson's romance with Natalie Portman ranks as probably the saddest seduction of all time. The last twenty minutes of this movie, however, were solid excitement. It doesn't excuse the two hours of crap that preceded it. Here's the dirty little secret of the Star Wars films: George Lucas did not direct Episodes 5 or 6, and he only co-wrote them. Now that he's back at the helm and writing the words (and none of his producers or actors want to piss him off,) both of the new films have taken a turn for the worst. George Lucas, the screenwriter and director, is dead. Long live George Lucas, the digital creature/world creator. May his demo reels live long and prosper.Sum of All Fears: C+ What I said then: Jack Ryan movies range from classic to just watchable. Early reviews indicate that Ben Affleck doesn't screw it up and director Phil Alden Robinson does a good job of keeping the pace.Final verdict: Both of these factors were true, but they don't change the fact that the villains of this film were Nazis. Nazis, Nazis who are very articulate, love classical music and have platinum-blonde killer assistants. Nazis who apparently have a worldwide network that is able to remain silent and unknown. It's a shame that a movie with so much strength in the small details resorted to James Bond-style silly villains that undermined the gravity of the film. (Note: angry fans tell me that the villains are not Nazis in the book.)JuneScooby Doo: BWhat I said then: Pardon my sarcasm, but this movie smells bad. Tons of money spent to bring a dead concept to life. I hear good things about Matthew Lillard's Shaggy, but not much else. The fact that it's the guy that brought us Drew Barrymore's Never Been Kissed doesn't inspire much hope.Final verdict: Hello, my name is Taylor Shann. And I liked Scooby Doo. I realize this means that I can't show my face at this paper, this college, or this city ever again as a film reviewer. But as some famous dead white man once said, 'know thyself.' And I found myself genuinely amused by Scooby Doo. All Freddie Prinze Jr had to do as Fred was stand there and look stupid, and he did it quite well. I thought Matthew Lillard was hilarious, the chick playing Thelma was funny, and the badly animated Scooby was endearing. I don't know why. Admittedly, Sarah Michelle Gellar was miscast and mightily unfunny as Daphne, and Rowan Atkinson was wasted as the owner of 'Spooky Island.' However, the movie had a great laid-back feeling, an air of "Hey! They gave us $50 million! Let's make a movie!" While shallow corporate greed might have made this project come about, the cast and crew had fun making it, and that fun (while dumb) was infectious.Bad Company: C What I said then: This is the sort of movie you want to be good. Anthony Hopkins is an amazing actor. Chris Rock is an amazing comedian. I've got nothing against producer Jerry Bruckheimer (The Rock, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor) but it doesn't help that the director is Joel Schumacher, responsible for both Batman and Robin and 8mm. Why do they still give this man a job?Final verdict: The problem essentially came down to Jerry Bruckhemier forgetting how to put together a great action movie. The man really hasn't got his act together since the last collaboration with deceased partner Don Simpson, with whom he produced Top Gun, Crimson Tide, Beverly Hills Cop, Bad Boys and The Rock. While not as wrongheaded as Pearl Harbor or Gone in Sixty Seconds, this film is more along the lines of Pearl Harbor or Armageddon: solid action movies and epics undermined by unnecessary seriousness and sentimentality. While Chris Rock and Anthony Hopkins made a likeable enough team, there just wasn't that much reason to care about the infinite car chases and ticking bombs. Watchable, but not worth paying for.Lilo and Stitch: A What I said then: Disney movies have been spazzing out lately (the last few years have given us everything from Phil Collins singing to Tarzan to David Spade as a Llama), but the trailers for this movie look... good. Really funny, and in the spirit of The Emperor's New Groove, with the colors and animation of The Lion King. Disney needs a hit - let's hope they got it right. Final verdict: They did get it right. While not an epic blockbuster like Lion King, Lilo and Stitch was a charmer, filled with original characters and personalities, great voiceover work and wonderful animation. Stich, especially, was one of the best-animated anti-heroes I'm had the privilege to watch on the screen. Special mention also goes to Ving Rhames, and his memorable performance as the very, very serious social worker named Mr. Cobra Bubbles. I loved the film as a semi-adult, and the kids at the matinee loved it too.Minority Report: AWhat I said then: It's been a long time since Spielberg made a movie that was entertaining. (Yes, Saving Private Ryan was good. But I did not have a good time watching it.) The trailer for this movie looks good, but his last outing with sci-fi (Artificial Intelligence) sort of re-defined train wreck. I'm hoping, but not holding my breath.Final verdict: In spite of Tom Cruise's ego and Spielberg's penchant for indulging in sentimentality, they delivered some of their best work. Cruise was able to fully embrace the everyman personality of Detective Anderson, a hero who actually used both brains and brawn to barrel through some of the most eye-popping special effects this side of Star Wars. The difference is, I actually cared about what was going on. Watch for this film come Oscar time.Final Notes: I didn't have the heart to go see Mr. Deeds, although apparently Adam Sandler was back in form enough for the movie to bring in well over $100 million. Of course, so did Big Daddy... Bourne Identity was a very solid, well-done thriller, or at least the half that I downloaded on my computer was. I never saw the ending, so I didn't feel like I could review it accurately, but what I saw was surprisingly good... Sunshine State was an amazingly good movie about Florida that approximately five people in Boston saw, of which two were my mother and I. See it if you get the chance...meanwhile, Nicholas Cage sinks his career with Windtalkers, ultimately proving that no one wants to see him soul search anymore... and Spiderman goes on to be the biggest hit of the summer by far.Coming in Thursday's Daily: XXX, Signs, MIB II, Croc Hunter and more...@s:'Lilo and Stitch,' 'Minority Report' are two of summer's best

---

News

Omidyars to speak at 146th commencement

March 31

President Larry Bacow announced yesterday that Pierre (LA '88) and Pamela Omidyar (LA '89), philanthropists and founders of the online auction site eBay, would deliver a joint speech at this year's graduation ceremony. The announcement came after weeks of speculation about which prominent alumnus would headline the commencement ceremonies for the University's 150th graduating class. Former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright will speak at the Fletcher School's commencement ceremony, and humorist Roy Blount will address the graduating class at the veterinary school. Omidyar spokeswoman Michelle Goguen said yesterday that the couple will be "speaking from the heart" and that the mission of the University College of Citizenship and Public Service (UCCPS) will be among the topics discussed. Though the decision met with a lackluster response from students, Bacow said that those in attendance will find the Omidyars' speech memorable. It was speculated that Bacow was looking also looking at other prominent alumni, including former New York senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, former Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson, and New York Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, but the president said that the Omidyars were second to none. "They were my first choice, and the only speakers I approached," Bacow told the Daily yesterday. "They willingly and readily accepted the honor." Bacow said that he chose the Omidyars for their commitment to public service. "Pioneers and philanthropists, Pam and Pierre Omidyar have dedicated their lives to building and strengthening community through innovation, technology, and activism," the president said in a press release. Upon announcing in January that he had chosen the speaker, Bacow said he was "confident that the student body [would] be pleased." Yesterday, though, most students asked said they expected a more nationally-recognized figure to speak at commencement. And some undergraduates said that Albright would have been ideal for the undergraduate ceremony, because of her political prominence. "I am disappointed with this year's commencement choice," former Tufts Democrats president and senior Sarah Molenkamp said. "For Tufts' 150th, we should have some high powered politician or author." Senior Bailey Stoler said she was surprised the speaker was a relatively recent graduate. "I think the Omidyars are a decent choice - they certainly know and love Tufts, and there's no doubt that they're successful - but part of me would like to hear an older speaker, someone with more life experience," Stoler said. "I'm not so sure they can offer the wisdom that we graduates need to hear." Other students said that the Omidyars' recent $10 million donation to the UCCPS and last year's receipt of the University's Light on the Hill Award make the pair an all-too-familiar choice. "For the 150th anniversary, it would have been nice to have a bigger name than a business alum who has already spoken at Tufts and many of us have already seen," senior Jonathan Smith said. "Nobody can top Bill Cosby." Bacow said he believes Tufts has seen its fair share of more prominent figures this semester. "Between Al Gore and Bill Clinton, we have will have had a number of 'big names' on our campus this year," the president said. "Having listened to many commencement speeches in my life, I am confident that students will remember the substance of what Pierre and Pam have to say far longer than the speeches given by most 'big names.'" The Omidyars will join a number of other prominent Tufts graduates at the May 19 ceremonies, as well as such honorary degree recipients as Tufts graduates Roderick MacKinnon, Katherine Haley Will and Eugene Fama. Tufts president emeritus John DiBiaggio and the Rev. William Sinkford will also receive honorary degrees Pierre Omidyar was a computer science major who developed one of the most successful sites on the Internet, eBay. The idea has blossomed into a multi-million dollar corporation, making eBay the world's largest online marketplace.

---

News

Annual Fall Fest happening despite initial cancellation

March 31

An altered format will allow the tradition of Fall Fest to continue on Sept. 14, despite a budget cut passed by the Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate last year that threatened the annual live music event. A DJ and a variety of activities will replace the usual live music performances. But TCU President Melissa Carson said this year's event would uphold Fall Fest's original purpose: to welcome and reunite students.The festival will feature "The Trampoline Thing," which enables a person to bounce 20 feet in the air in a harness attached by bungee cords to 25-foot poles on either side of a trampoline. A rock wall, an inflatable obstacle course, a moonwalk, and free massages provided by Health Services will also be offered. The budget for this year's "Fall Festival," which had a slight name change to signify the different format, was eliminated as part of a TCU Senate initiative to lower the student activities fee. Therefore, this year's event depended solely on independent fundraising. Asking student groups for money would have defeated the purpose of the budget cut, Carson said, since student groups are financed by the Student Activities fund. TCU presidents frequently spend the summer on campus, primarily to plan Fall Fest. This summer, funds had to be gathered before planning could take place. Senate Executive Board members Benjamin Lee, Alison Clarke, and Andrew Potts worked with Carson throughout the process. During fundraising, Carson only approached sources that student organizations would not petition for money later in the year, so as not to drain student activities' resources. In keeping with the tradition of University president serving as Fall Fest cosponsor, President Larry Bacow, along with Dean of Engineering Ioannis Miaoulis and Dean of Arts and Sciences Susan Ernst, agreed to fund the event. "Without their money the event couldn't happen," Carson said. The three provided a budget of around $5,000, enough to organize a festival but short of the amount required to hire live performers. Last year's Fall Fest budget amounted to $20,000 and in 1999 it reached a high of $30,000. Both years featured multiple live acts, from rap, to hip-hop, to funk. Carson believes this year's event may draw a larger crowd with a wider variety of musical tastes than past events that have featured a single band or group. "The goal was to have a free event that would be a fun reunion and that would appeal to as many people as possible," she said. "This year the draw isn't a big name band, it's the chance to catch up with your friends and have a good time on campus," Carson said. This year's Fall Festival will be relocated to the Academic Quad after Fall Fest on the Residential Quad garnered noise complaints last year and drew the Medford Police. The quad acts like an amphitheater because it is enclosed by Olin, Houston, and Miller Halls, projecting sound into surrounding neighborhoods, Carson said. The Fall Festival will take place from 12 pm to 4 pm, and is free to all students. ID is necessary for the Dining Services lunch, and alcohol is not allowed in the quad. Cotton candy and snow cones will also be served.

---

News

Program leaders feel awareness raised

March 31

With newfound freedom, freshmen frequently are faced with new hazards and temptations that could potentially harm them before they really gets started in their college careers. To combat this, Tufts currently has three events planned for incoming freshmen this week. Although past student response to these programs has been mixed, organizers stand by their product. The University makes attendance at the "Why no means no" presentation, the "Many stories, One community" panel and the Tufts University Police Department's (TUPD) "Operation Awareness." Women Center Director Peggy Barrett is on the committee in charge of "Why no means no," a panel that teaches students to be aware of sexual dangers at college. Tthe information offered in the presentation, she says, is intended to lower "the risks that our students will be involved in a sexual assault in the first few weeks of college." Barrett said that she hears from many students that they had never before had this kind of education or program and that the program itself is important because freshmen are at risk. "There is a lot of denial about risk at Tufts," she said. "Denial is at work in our incoming students." TUPD Community Police Officer Linda MacKay feels much the same about her own program and its importance at the school. "If you improve people's awareness, you improve students safety," she said. But students sometimes feel that they take nothing away from the events. Junior Courtney Benson said that she did not consider herself any more aware once the sessions had ended. "They were required so I had to go," she said. "The only thing that was beneficial from them was that you got to get to know the people in your advising group more." Despite some reactions similar to Benson's, none of the groups are looking to make their events optional in the future. Latino Center Director Rub?©n Salinas Stern believes that students may not necessarily be aware of it at the time, but that the information that the events provide could be useful later. Salinas Stern is on the committee for "Many Stories, One Community" - which reveals many diverse views and problems at Tufts. "I think it's important that people hear this," he said. "It sticks with them... Somewhere along the line - maybe the next day, maybe the next year - some of that will click." The organizers do acknowledge that a forced audience is not the preferred situation. "I don't think it's the best learning environment," Barrett said. "Everyone needs to think about their safety... The risks are too great not to inform most." She believes that they "would be highly criticized by most if the program was not mandatory." Students also realize that required attendance is not going away anytime soon. "I can acknowledge that the program may be effective in creating awareness where there hadn't been any previously," sophomore Tim Wagner said. "It's very important that students go," MacKay said. "There are so many events going on in the first weeks, that they don't think about things like where the panic buttons are." There have been changes over the years in the different programs, as groups recognize that they must keep panels interesting to keep students attentive. All groups collect feedback and try to make improvements accordingly. It was this feedback which prompted the TUPD decision not to send out a large packet of ten pamphlets at the beginning of the year and made them opt instead for a more simple information card giving vital information for new students. "Because of all the info they get during the beginning of the year, the packets were thrown away," Captain Mark Keith said. "Why no means no" and "Many Stories, One community" have not changed their formats in the last few years, though, each saying that the current setup is successful. Over the past five years, Salinas said the evaluations of "Many Stories, One Community" "have generally been positive." Nevertheless, Stern admitted that the panel and its quality has changed from year to year. "Some panels are better than others," he said. "Why no means no" also undergoes a review with organizers discussing what worked and didn't in early September. The meeting, however, does not include any of the freshmen who attended. Barrett said that she gets feedback over the course of the year from students and listens for ideas on how to change the program. "We talk about doing completely different programs almost every year," she said. "No matter what you do, there are huge issues to face." The current format for "Why no means no" includes a skit which has caused some students to not take the event seriously. "I think 'No means no' is an important, but poorly constructed program. The groups are too large for the coordinators to connect with, so the whole becomes one gigantic campus inside joke," Wagner said. Barrett said that they have tried other methods in past years, including a film, but the current system works best. She said that Tufts is one of the most successful college programs, citing student feedback and comments. But she stressed that student entertainment was not a good measure of success. Instead, whether or not students are made aware of the issues is the key.

---

News

Accomplished individuals to grace 2002's graduation platform

March 31

Several distinguished speakers will be on campus today to participate in the commencement ceremonies for each of the Tufts' schools. The backgrounds of these individuals vary greatly, from business and philanthropy to politics and comedy. Pierre and Pamela Omidyar (LA '88 and LA '89, respectively), keynote speakers After months of secrecy and speculation, it was announced that the keynote speakers for the 146th commencement would be Tufts alumni and donors Pierre and Pamela Omidyar. They are known for their emphasis on philanthropy in their professional work and have been large contributors to Tufts since they graduated. Pierre Omidyar, who graduated with a degree in computer science, is best known as founder of eBay, an online trading community which he runs with his wife. eBay is the world's largest online marketplace, and includes 42.4 million registered users who conduct five billion dollars in transactions each year. Pierre and Pamela met while at Tufts. Pamela graduated in 1989 with a degree in biology. The couple, who also run the nonprofit eBay foundation, received the "Light on the Hill Award," given to outstanding alumni who have positively effected the world. In 2000, the Omidyars donated ten million dollars to Tufts to serve as the operating budget of the newly-founded University College of Citizenship and Public Service. The university-wide initiative is focused on ensuring that students graduate from Tufts prepared to be committed public citizens and leaders who take an active role in building stronger communities and societies. The college's signature program, the Omidyar Scholars, is named after its benefactors. The announcement of the Omidyars as keynote speakers was met by some dissatisfaction from students. Some students thought that Tufts' Sesquicentennial called for a "bigger name." Others speculated that the Omidyars' substantial financial contributions influenced President Bacow's choice of speaker. At the time of his announcement, President Lawrence S. Bacow praised the Omidyars in a press release. "Pioneers and philanthropists, Pam and Pierre Omidyar have dedicated their lives to building and strengthening community through innovation, technology and activism," he said. "At Tufts, we believe very strongly in these ideals and are proud to see how effectively graduates like the Omidyars have incorporated them into their personal and professional lives." The Omidyars will jointly deliver the speech.Fletcher School of Law and DiplomacyMadeleine Albright Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright will speak at the ceremony for the The Fletcher School of International Law and Diplomacy today. Albright was the highest-ranking woman in American politics from January 1997 to January 2001 when she served as the first female Secretary of State. Prior to her appointment to the Clinton cabinet, Albright was the second woman to serve as the United States' Permanent Representative to the United Nations. She also served as president of the Center for National Policy, a non-profit research organization formed in 1981 by representatives from government, industry, labor and education. Albright has also served as a research professor of international affairs and as director of Women in Foreign Service Program at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. In addition to teaching undergraduate and graduate students, she worked to implement programs designed to enhance women's professional opportunities in international affairs. School of Dental MedicineDr. Richard Valachovic Dr. Richard Valachovic, executive director of the American Dental Education Association (ADEA), will speak at the commencement for the Dental School. Valachovic, who specializes in pediatric dentistry, has held his current position since 1997. Prior to that, he served in the field of dental medicine and education for 20 years at Harvard University. Most recently, Dr. Valachovic was Chief of Dentistry of Harvard University Health Services and dental director of the Harvard University Health Group. He has previously served as associate professor of oral medicine and diagnostic sciences, associate dean for clinical affairs, associate dean for government and community affairs, and director of postdoctoral education at the School of Dental Medicine at Harvard.

---