Opinions - The Spectrum

OPINION

NFL: Never Fear the Law

By Andrew Wiktor | Apr. 20, 2010

Roger Goodell, commissioner of the National Football League, has done just about everything he can to better the NFL. Maybe he needs to start kicking players out of the league to set an example for the rest of the knuckleheads who we religiously watch on Sundays for seven months of the year. Or maybe we should just stop looking at professional athletes as role models. I'm not sure what it is, but recently something has gone terribly wrong with NFL players. Every week there seems to be another meathead familiarizing himself with the justice system. I'm convinced that either (1) the police are out to get all professional football players (2) playing with pigskin makes you innately dumber (3) NFL stars see that concussions pose a serious threat and they want to familiarize themselves with the law in case they have to make a career change or (4) these super-rich athletes just don't care about their role as community figures anymore. I know that scenario one can't be the case. I wrote an entire column on how Donte Stallworth killed a man and only served 24 days in jail and that's not to mention that the recent Ben Roethlisberger debacle proves that some police officers would rather buddy-up with pro athletes than do their job. Option two – playing football lowers your IQ – doesn't seem too plausible, but we can't entirely rule it out. Many NFL players spend three-to-four years in college, and although they probably don't take the most rigorous courses, they do receive some sort of education. Plus, according to a Sports Illustrated survey, offensive tackles, centers, quarterbacks, guards and tight ends all have IQs higher than 100. Sure, the NFL may not be home to the next Albert Einstein, but at least we know there is some brainpower in the league. Still, football is a hard-hitting game and too many shots to the head may finally be catching up to some of these players. With all of the concussions that have plagued the league recently, having a back-up profession would seem like a good idea. Going to jail, however, is probably not the wisest way to familiarize one's self with the judicial process. They have law school for that. Option three, therefore, is completely implausible. This leaves us with choice four – selfish athletes ignore their young fans and arrogantly live above the law. This has to be the case. It's almost embarrassing how many NFL players have had run-ins with the law lately. Roethlisberger has been accused of rape and all signs – plaintiff's testimony, resignation of the police officer who was at the bar and Big Ben's less-than genuine apology – lead me to believe he's guilty. Oh yeah, and the quarterback from Miami (Ohio) was previously sacked with a sexual assault lawsuit in Nevada. Weird. Santonio Holmes will be missing the first four games of the season without pay for violating the leagues substance abuse policy. It's a good thing the Jets stacked their roster in the offseason and can do without the 2009 Super Bowl MVP for a quarter of the season. Defensive tackle Shaun Rogers tried to sneak a loaded gun through an airport. Linebacker Joey Porter was recently suspected of driving under the influence. Wide receiver Marvin Harrison may be involved in setting up a murder. Across the board, NFL athletes are flat-out screwing up. They either can't keep it in their pants, don't know what a designated driver is, or assault their wife/ girlfriend/ baby's mama/ or random guy at the club. It's the same sad story and I'm sick of it. Most recently, Indianapolis Colts defensive lineman Eric Foster allegedly committed a sexual assault in the team's hotel in the early morning before the AFC Championship game. It's good to know players take their jobs seriously. What more can Goodell do? Do players need to be kicked off teams, or worse, out of the league? I think the answer is simpler. Instead of holding professional athletes to higher standards because they're celebrity figures, we should lower our expectations and assume every pro will screw up. This way, when a Peyton Manning comes along, we really have some one to look up to. E-mail: andrew.wiktor@ubspectrum.com

OPINION

Ashy delays

Apr. 20, 2010

What event can shutdown thousands of commercial flights over Europe and even make the President of the United States avoid air travel? Eyjafjallajökull. This isn't gibberish but rather a volcano in the southern part of Iceland. The skies over Europe have been absent airplanes since late last week. Plumes of volcanic ash have billowed into the sky and many commercial flights have been cancelled since March 16th. The scary part is that on Monday, a group of European airlines asked the European Union for compensation for losses suffered because of the cancellation of 22,000 flights, according to Bloomberg News. The airlines cite that because the EU didn't consult with them about closing down the air space, they feel that they have the right to be compensated. It almost seems that the airlines wanted to fly into dangerous ash, risking the lives of thousands of paying customers. Here is a crazy thought, how about if the airlines knew how much dangerous volcanic ash there is? Currently the European Aviation Safety Agency doesn't have a clue. And if flights were to occur and crash there would be a lot more damage done than just flowers going bad. Many carriers, such as British Airways, Lufthansa and Air France, have reportedly lost close to $200 million a day. But airlines aren't the only groups losing money as a result of the no fly zone. Kenya has had to destroy 400 tons of flowers to be sold in England. Pharmaceutical companies have had to dispose of medications that have a very short self-life due to the restrictions in shipping. The reason why this volcanic ash is so dangerous is because the eruption took place under a glacier. The cold water from the melting ice cooled the lava down too quickly, causing the water to fragment into very small pieces of glass and ash that was sent into the atmosphere. The particles disrupt a jet engine's turbine from spinning, causing engine failure. Ships, rather than airfreight, transport 98 percent of the world's goods. Many of the airlines are citing the United States government bailout of its airlines after 9/11. And it is a pretty safe bet that cargo ships are available because of the global downturn. It seems like a money grab by the airlines. Things haven't been going well for the airline industry. After all, when companies need to start charging for pillows and blankets things cannot be good. The major issue at play here is that neither the governments nor airlines had any idea of what to do in case a scenario should occur. Not much else is known about how to deal with such situations. Only theories. The last big eruption from Eyjafjallajokull, in 1821, spewed ash for over a year. But the bigger problem may be Kalta, Eyjafjallaokull's neighbor volcano, which could erupt as well. Archeological evidence shows that Kalta has been even more destructive. The impact of the eruption has been small, except for its effect on the airlines and travelers. But if a prolonged shutdown occurs, Europe's economy will slowly grind to a halt. Tourists will fail to arrive, business meetings will be delayed and supplies will dwindle since airfreight cannot arrive. Airlines have been struggling for years, due to mismanagement and poor business models. Not because of events like this.

OPINION

"Right idea, wrong implementation"

Apr. 20, 2010

The recent Supreme Court rulings are starting to become troubling. On Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court annulled a federal law that made it a crime to create or profit from dog fighting videos and other animal cruelty acts by a vote of 8 to 1. The Supreme Court has gotten it all wrong yet again. First, it was corporations have rights as everyday citizens, and now videos of dog fighting aren't illegal. What a country America is. The case comes from the prosecution of Robert J. Stevens, an author and film producer who presented himself as an expert on pit bulls. Although he maintains that he never participated in dogfights, he did compile and sell videotapes showing dog fighting. Isn't that still participation? It would be like saying that the guy who is driving the getaway car during a bank robbery didn't rob the bank. The federal law bans all profiting from dog fighting. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, "The law created a criminal prohibition of alarming breadth … the government's defense of the law was both startling and dangerous." The assumption is that the United States Congress would pass a law with a more focused scope that would be allowed under the Constitution. But with Congress seeming more like a traffic jam on Interstate 290 everyday, that is a pretty big assumption. The government argued that such depictions are of minimal social worth and that they receive no First Amendment protection. The rulings of the Supreme Court are troubling. The chief justice, during his vetting by the United States Senate, called himself merely an umpire of the law. The umpire is blowing the game. Dog fighting and other forms of animal cruelty are illegal in all 50 states. The law applies to any recording where a living animal is intentionally maimed, harmed or tortured. The intent of the law is pretty clear, regardless of what role the accused had in the video, if it depicted illegal cruelty. The government even tried to make the analogy that animal cruelty is similar to child pornography, which gets no First Amendment protection as ruled by the Supreme Court in 1982. The chief justice responded that child pornography is a "special case because the underlying market is intrinsically related to underlying abuse." But animal cruelty videos are related to underlying abuse. This Supreme Court has been making horrible decisions recently. A few months ago, the Court ruled that corporations have the same rights and privileges as ordinary citizens. The only dissenter is Justice Samuel Alito, writing the minority opinion, "The majority's opinion was filled with hypotheticals and serves to protect depraved entertainment." The First Amendment was created to allow the free exchange of ideas, not promote depraved acts. The scope of the federal law is not too broad; in fact, it's pretty explicit. The majority in this case is plain wrong.

OPINION

"The true meaning of ""Happy Birthday"""

By Joe Paterno | Apr. 20, 2010

Lay down the red carpet and hold the doors open for me. Bow down to the ground I walk upon and treat me like a king because today is my day. Today is my birthday. Clear you schedules and meet me at the bar. Line up the food platters, buy me drinks and feed me cake. I expect to be treated like President Simpson and be loved like Dennis Black. While most 22 year olds automatically tune into this egotistical mindset when the clock strikes midnight on their birthday, I have a different frame of mind. To be honest, I could care less that it's my birthday. Today symbolizes nothing more than that I've successfully made it through the last 365 days, thus leaving me with one less year to live. The only thing that makes today special for me is that I share it with my dad – who ironically was born on the same day 30 years prior to my existence. Happy Birthday, Dad. Birthdays give your most despised enemies a reason to wish you an insincere wish. They give old friends a reason to say hello and strangers a reason to post on your Facebook wall. They give ex-girlfriends a reason to remember why she hates you so much and new girlfriends a reason to shower you in gifts and get you in bed. Damn, it's too bad I'm single. So what does a birthday really mean? From the hospital to the cemetery, I introduce to you the true meaning of the birthday. The Past Day of birth: Congratulations, you've made it to life's starting line. It's the happiest day in your family's life as you exit your mother's womb and receive your very own birth certificate. For the next few months, your annoyance of crying, puking and pooping will make mom and dad regret that fateful day they failed to use protection. Age 1: You made it through your first 12 months and are no longer considered an infant. You're on your way to taking your first steps and speaking a few small words, but you continue to puke and poop freely. The best part of it all is that you have absolutely no recollection of your first few years on Earth. Age 4: Say goodbye to life inside the confines of your home because it's time to go to school. Shove your face full of cake and have fun with your latest toy, but at the end of the day, kindergarten is calling your name. Get use to the feeling of imprisonment because for the next 12-plus years, the classroom is your holding cell. Enjoy. Ages 5-12: For the next eight years you don't have a worry in the world. Make some friends and learn life's basics. Be a kid. It's that easy. Age 13: Here we go, let the rebellion begin – you're a teenager. Time to ignore the rules, disobey your parents and cause some ruckus. Let the hormones run wild because you're about to discover the opposite sex. Pitch your first tent and if you just so happen to wake up in the middle of the night to a wet, sticky mess – don't fret. It's natural. Age 16: You've made it to the life's first true milestone. Make your way to the DMV, get your permit and be rewarded with a license shortly thereafter. It's time to take control of the wheel and hit the open road. It's not all fun and games, however. Grab a dictionary and look up the meaning of "responsibility." For the first time in your life, it's time you take it into your own hands. Age 17: Hit the snooze button. There's not much to be excited for. Age 18: You're a legal American and it's time to experience the beginnings of adulthood. Remember when you turned 13 and immature was your middle name? Not anymore. It's time to grow up. Age 19: Oh Canada, your new best friend. For those living along the border of our friends to the north, it's time to cross the border and get crazy. Order your first legal beer and take a stroll into your first strip club. For those without access to Canada, hit snooze. The Present

OPINION

Pay your way to a higher GPA?

By Rachel Lamb | Apr. 20, 2010

On Monday, the New York Times released an article based on a study that stated that students who go to a private college receive a higher GPA. According to the article, the study tested 160 private and public schools and found that their 80-year historical data claimed an average of a 3.3 GPA at private schools, compared to an average of a 3.0 at public schools. Although I don't doubt these numbers, I find them to be misleading. One point to consider is the class sizes at colleges. For example, public schools, such as UB, have a current undergraduate student enrollment of 19,022, while Canisius, a nearby private university, has a student enrollment of 3,196. Everyone affiliated with UB knows that lectures, which students are required to take at least a few times here, can go up to almost 500 students. Canisius's average class size is 17, as confirmed by the Office of Student Records at Canisius College. It's much easier for students in a class size of 17 to get a better grade than in a class size of over 600. First of all, the professor actually knows your name. Secondly, I'm sure that it's much easier to get an appointment with your professor if you need help when the professor has a few hundred less students to deal with. The admissions requirements for incoming freshmen are lower for Canisius than UB: Canisius's scores are an 87-94 GPA, 1020-1220 SAT score and 22-27 ACT score, whereas UB's are 89-95, 1100-1240 and 24-28, respectively, according to each college's website. Even assuming that the article's statistics are correct, it's a fact that private schools charge much more money to attend than public schools do. For example Canisius charges $29,512 for one semester. UB charges $4,970 for in-state students and $12,870 for out-of-state students. Therefore, UB students are assumedly more intelligent when they enter the university (based on GPA and SAT scores), but pay far less to go to a public school. I fully believe that students can have an equally high GPA and get the same quality of education if they attend a public school than if they attend a private one. Maybe the greatest example of this is Rutgers University. Many people know that Rutgers is the public state university of New Jersey. What many people do not know is that the school turned down an invitation to join the Ivy League. Twice. In an article by Rutger's official student newspaper The Daily Targum, the school was most likely in negotiations to join the League, but turned it down because Rutgers wanted to remain an outstanding, yet cheap and accessible school for college students. That being said, students applying to Rutgers University are expected to have an 1130-1360 SAT score, and according to the college website, more than one-third of students are ranked in the top 10 percent of their high school graduating classes. This statistic is far higher than Canisius's records. Furthermore, both Rutgers and UB are members of the Association of American Universities, which rank the top U.S. research universities. Harvard, Yale and Princeton are also in this list, but out of the colleges listed on the official AAU website, 34 are public universities, whereas 26 are private. In short, although the study says otherwise, there is no need for students to spend more money to go to a private school when they can get the same quality, or better, education at a public school. UB is the flagship university of the SUNY system, with incredible research labs and a very bright student population, plus a next-to-nothing tuition. Take advantage of all that this public school has to offer at a fraction of the price. E-mail: rachel.lamb@ubspectrum.com

OPINION

Defining moments

By Jessica Brant | Apr. 19, 2010

It takes a few of us a little longer to discover how we want to be defined.

OPINION

Fallen star

By Matthew Parrino | Apr. 19, 2010

I took a ride in my mental time machine over the weekend and lamented a basketball player that I grew up watching.

OPINION

The state of the SA

Apr. 19, 2010

As the 2009-10 academic year comes to a close, the editorial board at The Spectrum felt it was necessary to take a look at the performance of the Student Association in the past eight months and offer ways in which everyone can help it improve.

OPINION

Looking backward

Apr. 19, 2010

Like people of many other cultures, Americans love to celebrate their history. They should. Observing common traditions and remembering the great accomplishments of the past establishes national pride, reinforcing important bonds between citizens.

OPINION

"""Artist"" is a little generous "

By BRENDON BOCHACKI | Apr. 19, 2010

I have respect for nearly every kind of music, with maybe a few exceptions.

OPINION

UB 2020 goes downtown

Apr. 16, 2010

UB 2020 may be reeling, but it's not dead yet. The State Legislature has the power to save President John B. Simpson's ambitious plan, despite the current budget crisis. To advance its goals, UB is not looking for funding but is instead asking for policy reforms to the state's public university system. The state government can easily grant UB its wish, so long as politicians are willing to cooperate. If passed, these policy reforms would give the university important new powers, including the ability to enter into partnerships with private sectors. UB would use this power to expand its three campuses, most notably its fledgling downtown campus. Plans are already in the works. UB has offered approximately $15 million to the St. John the Baptist Church Fruit Belt Community Development Corporation to buy a plot of land currently occupied by McCarley Gardens, a federally subsidized, low-income housing development. For years, families have lived safely in the tight-knit community, which is in an otherwise destitute part of the city. McCarley Gardens is conveniently located near the current Downtown Campus, and its proximity to the Roswell Park Cancer Institute and a host of other medical institutions make it an ideal candidate for the relocation of UB's medical facilities from South Campus. Though the current residents of McCarley Gardens have a right to be worried about their futures, UB and the Fruit Belt's development organization have promised to provide for them if they are forced out of their homes. Plus, the huge economic influx that an expanded Downtown Campus promises to provide would be extremely beneficial to the neighborhood and community at large. UB's project would create 6,700 jobs at the school in addition to over 20,000 construction jobs, not to mention the estimated $2 billion that would be pumped into the area's economy as a result of the expansion. The university has repeatedly maintained that the UB 2020 plan would not only be beneficial to the university but to the entire Buffalo-Niagara area. That's the way it should work—if the state legislature grants the school additional privileges, the school has a responsibility to use those privileges to better the city for which it is named. It remains to be seen whether the McCarley Gardens project will reflect that vision, or whether it will simply thrive on its own as the surrounding community continues to suffer. There's a way, however, for the university to prove once and for all that it actually cares about improving the city of Buffalo. The Statler Tower is one of the most historic buildings in Buffalo. Originally the Statler Hotel in 1907, the building's success sparked a chain of similar Statler Hotels around the nation in cities like New York, Detroit, and St. Louis. The building was converted to office space in 1984 and continued to give the city character by playing host to many events and banquets. The building closed recently after going bankrupt and now one of the city's landmarks is being boarded up. However, Congressman Brian Higgins has proposed a way in which UB can solve the problem. Higgins has suggested that the university move its law school into the Statler, where it would be extremely close to the city's legal establishments, including the federal court building. The same logic of putting the medical campus near Roswell Park applies here. The university, law students, the Statler and the downtown economy in general would all greatly benefit from Higgins' proposal. If the state passes the legislation that UB needs to proceed with UB 2020, the school needs to prove, whether by moving into the Statler or in some other way, that it does indeed want to improve the city of Buffalo in addition to pursuing its specific interests.

OPINION

Dignity on the streets

By AMANDA WOODS | Apr. 16, 2010

A homeless man in New York City once told me that he'd rather sleep on the trash-littered cement sidewalks than in a homeless shelter where he would be forced to sleep in a folding chair all night.

OPINION

Revitalizing the East Side

Apr. 16, 2010

Many long-time Buffalo residents will tell you that decision makers for the city made three enormous mistakes throughout the 20th century: They put Ralph Wilson Stadium in Orchard Park, they put UB's new campus in Amherst, and they built the Kensington Expressway, more colloquially known as the "33." It doesn't look like much can be done about those first two mistakes, but plans are in the works to do something about the third. The Kensington Expressway conveniently allows drivers to get from the Buffalo-Niagara International Airport, near Interstate 90 in Cheektowaga, to the Buffalo-Niagara Medical Campus in downtown Buffalo in about 10 minutes or less on a day without a lot of traffic. There's no need for drivers to have to deal with the treacheries of the ever-deteriorating East Side. The irony is that much of the deterioration has been caused by the expressway itself. East Side businesses and neighborhoods have suffered greatly since the expressway's construction. Commuters have stopped driving through the city's old business strips, leaving local establishments unattended. Perhaps even worse is the expressway's design. The high-speed road is in a deep trench far below the original street's gridline, tearing a hole in Humboldt Parkway, which was originally designed by Frederick Law Olmsted – the man responsible for designing Delaware Park and New York City's Central Park. The good news is that plans have been proposed to fix the once-thriving East Side parkway. Three plans currently exist for remodeling the system. Two of these plans are both very similar and very expensive. In essence, they propose to convert a large portion of the Kensington Expressway into a tunnel. Humboldt would retain two lanes of traffic on each side, and a park would be built on top of the tunnel. The third plan, while a lot more drastic, is a lot less expensive and holds the most promise. Mayor Byron Brown has proposed completely burying the expressway and converting Humboldt Parkway into a modern, eight-lane urban boulevard with a lower speed. The new road would both restore Olmsted's vision and bring commuters back to the East Side, which would hopefully revitalize an area in desperate need of some help. If the city is going to pursue this project at all, it might as well go big – and cheap – and decide on the third option. While the first two would keep commuters happy in the short-term, the third would make the East Side both visually and economically appealing. If the expressway were simply converted into a tunnel, the big problem wouldn't be solved, as commuters would still bypass the area. The fix is not so simple, however. Though urban boulevards like Brooklyn's Ocean Parkway – upon which Brown's proposal is modeled – have been extremely successful in other cities, things aren't going to improve overnight. If this project were undertaken, local planners and businesses would have to join in the efforts and invest in the area surrounding Humboldt Parkway. An improved public transportation system along the route would also quiet the potential complaints of commuters. Other cities have proven that urban expressways do more to hurt local economies than they do to improve traffic congestion. Buffalo needs learn from such mistakes. Better late than never.

OPINION

A worldwide effort

Apr. 14, 2010

For many Americans, the world changed on September 11, 2001. Perhaps more than anything, it made people realize that in the 21st century, the nature of our enemies has drastically changed. In the 20th century, our enemies were very well defined and easily visualized, as they were entire nations. Though the leaders of these rival nations could do a fair amount of damage with their power and self-interests, they were also responsible for the protection of huge populations. Today, we are not fighting against a nation that can be pointed out on a map. We are fighting against invisible terrorist groups that have little regard for human life, whether it is their own or somebody else's. These groups are also not responsible for the protection or well being of anybody else, as a government is, which makes them much more dangerous and harder to predict. Experts believe there is enough nuclear material (mostly uranium and plutonium) floating around the world to make some 120,000 nuclear bombs. In this day and age, nobody can afford this material falling into the wrong hands. It is not an issue that solely pertains to the United States —it is one that applies to the entire world. President Obama has realized this, and admits that the United States has not done nearly enough to try to solve the problem since 2001. While campaigning, Obama pledged to lock up all loose nuclear material in the world during his first four years in office. Though experts say he is not currently on pace to do so, the landmark summit he held in Washington on Monday and Tuesday is a huge step in the right direction. Leaders from 47 different nations assembled over two days to address the issue – which was the largest gathering of heads of state since the foundation of the United Nations in 1945. Progress has already been made. Last week, the United States signed a treaty with Russia that requires both nations to begin reducing their stockpiles of nuclear weapons. In the past few days, the United States has reached agreements with Canada and Mexico to make a research reactor less dangerous and to send used nuclear fuel back to the U.S. Additionally, both Ukraine and Chile announced that they will give up their stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, which can be used to make a dangerous weapon. These announcements are all good signs, but leaders need to show the world more than handshakes and photo opportunities. Real deadlines and stipulations need to be enforced, and each nation must be required to follow up on the promises it makes. Leaders can begin to prove their dedication to taking real action by uniting together and reaching out to nations like Iran and North Korea. North Korea has made efforts to build a nuclear weapon, and Iran is suspected of trying to do so as well. Both nations, however, were not invited to Obama's summit. Perhaps Obama should have extended a welcoming hand to these nations. What good will further alienation of these two nations do for anybody? The snub may provide Iran and North Korea with leverage for not cooperating. The rest of the world needs to figure out a way to effectively reach out and communicate with them. Finally, there needs to be complete transparency regarding the nuclear issue. People have a right to be scared during times like these, and many are asking why addressing this problem has suddenly become so important. Overall, Obama should be applauded for undertaking such an ambitious effort. He has shown that all of the people of the world have a common problem and he has put the United States at the forefront of the problem's solution.

OPINION

What is wrong with Pappe's argument?

By Letter to the editor | Apr. 14, 2010

To the editor,

OPINION

A hot Carl

By David Sanchirico | Apr. 14, 2010

Republican gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino was starting a movement. He stood at the Ellicott Square Building last Monday and announced his candidacy for New York governor in front of an emphatic Buffalo crowd waving orange and red banners. Paladino, a wealthy Buffalo businessman, talked about being the only conservative with true right wing views while voicing his disappointment with how Albany was running the state. "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore," Paladino said. But no amount of Network quotes will save the 63-year-old tea partier's campaign now. On Monday, WNYmedia.net gained access to a plethora of Paladino e-mails sent to his listserv of political buddies and business associates. The digital messages included racist messages and raunchy e-mails, including a bestiality video involving a female and a stallion. Talk about halting momentum. Despite possessing a large fortune that was going to fund his campaign, Paladino was viewed as an underdog to former congressman Rick Lazio, among others. A poll, released on Tuesday, that surveyed New York republicans showed Lazio as the overwhelming favorite. The Quinnipiac University poll, which questioned voters from April 6-11 (before the e-mails hit the Internet), showed that 34 percent of respondents favored Lazio, while 11 percent supported Paladino. Forty percent of respondents were undecided. And unless those in doubt are into e-mails containing a video of an African tribal dance with the caption "Obama inauguration rehearsal," many won't be electing Paladino in the Republican primary, much less in November's election. Those supporting the man who calls his own campaign a "crusade" say that New Yorkers shouldn't pay attention to private e-mails while the state hemorrhages money and jobs. I wonder how you can turn a blind eye to such blatant acts of racism, among other things. Personally, I won't ignore these actions by a man vying to lead my state. Ignore the controversial views for a moment. Obviously many are turned off by Paladino's anti-abortion, anti-same sex and pro-gun stances. This is more about irresponsibility and immaturity than anything else. Sure, we all sometimes share risqué videos and photos with each other, but we don't need a governor who is like all of us. There are important issues that need to be settled, and I don't want my governor sharing racist photos when he should be signing SUNY bills. Paladino is going to need the $10 million he plans to spend on his campaign if he wants to resurrect his chance in the race. Right now, Paladino and associates are already trying to spin this to show that he is the victim. "It figures that members of the party who brought us record taxes, record spending and a record debt would want to change the topic from reform to having sex with horses and S&M parlors," said Michael Caputo, Paladino's campaign manager. Maybe Paladino could have prevented the switch in discussion by possibly not sending bestiality videos and racist photos: most New Yorkers don't exactly trust a governor with these kinds of tendencies to lift the state out of a deep hole. E-mail: david.sanchirico@ubspectrum.com

OPINION

Stay in school

By JACOB LAURENTI | Apr. 14, 2010

Tracy McGrady, Rashard Lewis, Kevin Garnett, Jermaine O'Neal and Kobe Bryant all have something in common. They entered the NBA straight out of high school and though they are still young, they seem a lot older on the basketball court. When these players controversially declared for the NBA Draft in the mid-'90s, general managers and fans alike wondered if they would have extra-long careers, or if every NBA player is limited to the same amount of years. We are now starting to learn the answer to this question. Have you seen Tracy McGrady or Jermaine O'Neal play lately? They are 30 and 31, respectively, but they look more like 40-year-old veterans out on the court. Former all-star Kevin Garnett is only 33, but is currently breaking down before our eyes, while Rashard Lewis' numbers have dropped in each of the last three seasons. Maybe David Stern was right to create an age limit for the NBA. Maybe kids coming out of high school need a couple of years in college to develop and prepare for the pros. College players play between 30 and 40 games a season compared to 82 in the NBA. While college players were practicing less, playing less games and taking classes, teens that went straight to the pros immediately subjected their bodies to the rigors of the NBA. Take Jason Kidd and Steve Nash for example. These two star NBA point guards continue to produce after long careers. Kidd, who is in his 21st season, is currently gearing up for a playoff run with the Dallas Mavericks. Nash, at 36, is the undisputed leader of the Phoenix Suns and is averaging 16.6 points and 11 assists per game this season. Oh, and did I mention the most important part? Kidd played two years at the University of California and Nash had a four-year college career at Santa Clara. Is it a coincidence that players like Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, and Andrew Bynum continually suffer injuries at their young ages? Some people may argue that Kobe Bryant's (31) work ethic could have him five or six years of great basketball left in him. However, Bryant, who is arguably the best player ever to come directly out of high school, may not be as invincible as we think he is. Bryant has suffered from numerous injuries this year, signs of an aging body that has gone through 13 grueling NBA seasons. Kobe has played in 1,178 NBA games through March, and though he hasn't experienced a substantial drop off, doesn't seem to have the same quickness in his first step or the same lift in his jump shot that he once did. It seems as if it isn't the age of these prep-to-pro stars that matters, but rather how long they have played in the NBA. Which list will Kobe join: The list of Michael Jordan, Reggie Miller, and Julius Erving who thrived in their mid-thirties, or the list of Jermaine O'Neal, Tracy McGrady, and Kevin Garnett, who suffered a severe decline once they hit the age of thirty? If the fate of his fellow prep-to-pro stars is any indication, then it seems that Kobe will be part of the latter. More importantly, what does this mean for the last group of high school stars gone pro? At age 25, Lebron James may not have as long as people think he does to win a championship. He has played 592 games in his seven seasons, 324 more than Jordan played when he was 25. Will LeBron age in basketball years, or prove to be the exception to the rule? E-mail: laurenti@buffalo.edu

OPINION

The cost of depth

By Vanessa Frith | Apr. 14, 2010

The cost of depthBy VANESSA FRITHAsst. Arts Editor3D ? it's the new "must" in the movie industry, guaranteed to help you rake in that box office money.

OPINION

The appeal of alcohol

Apr. 14, 2010

Last Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that the alcohol regulatory board in the state of Virginia can ban alcohol-related advertisements in student newspapers. The 2-1 decision will cause two of the state's college newspapers- Virginia Tech's The Collegiate Times and the University of Virginia's The Cavalier Daily- to each lose approximately $30,000 in advertising revenue. What's $30,000 these days? Think of it this way—if The Spectrum lost that much money, you wouldn't be reading this right now. Initially, the publications successfully challenged the ban as a lower court found that it was in violation of the advertisers' and newspapers' First Amendment rights. The federal appeals court reversed that ruling, however, citing previous precedents that establish the First Amendment as not protecting advertisements that promote illegal activity. The illegal activity in this case is underage drinking. The court decided that there is a direct link between alcohol-related advertisements in college newspapers and the demand for alcohol amongst underage students, citing "alcohol vendors want to advertise in college student publications." According to the court, the college newspapers failed to produce evidence that specifically contradicts the link. The dissenting opinion, written by Judge Norman K. Moon, accused the link established by the majority opinion of being little more than "speculation and conjecture," which would not qualify it as enough to block the First Amendment rights of the advertisers and newspapers. Moon cited a similar case in Pennsylvania in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit blocked what was virtually the same dilemma as the current one in Virginia. The judges in the Pennsylvania case, which involved the student newspaper at the University of Pittsburgh, decided that banning alcohol-related advertisements in the newspaper would do little, if anything, to stop students from drinking. They realized that alcohol ads are everywhere—television, billboards, other newspapers, magazines and the radio. The author of the Pennsylvania case's decision, Samuel Alito, argued that there is not sufficient evidence to support the theory that removing alcohol-related ads from a student newspaper will reduce underage drinking. Alito has since been promoted to the Supreme Court. Long story short: College students are already blitzed with alcohol-related advertisements regardless of where they come from and a large portion of them are going to find a way to drink whether they saw it in their student newspaper or not. The court, along with the alcohol regulatory board, is also making it sound like the advertisements are specifically targeting students who are underage. Taking upperclassmen, graduate students, faculty and staff into account, it is safe to say that a significant portion (if not a significant majority) of a college newspaper's readership is indeed over the age of 21. In addition, even if an underage student is seduced by an alcohol-related ad, bars, restaurants and stores should be checking for proper identification, which would prevent the potential problem. The federal court got the ruling wrong. A decision that will do very little to hinder underage college students from drinking will in actuality hinder students from producing and reading their campus publications.

OPINION

Appealing to the English gods above

By SHANE FALLON | Apr. 11, 2010

I'm an English major. It is part personal choice, part lifestyle and part destiny. Since as long as I can remember, I have eaten, breathed and pooped books. If it were possible to have literature pumped into my veins, I would be first in line to do it. Since I arrived at UB in the fall of 2007, there was never any question of what my major would be. My working relationship with the English Department and its staff at the University at Buffalo has been second to none. I believe from the bottom of my soul that UB has one of the most distinguished and brilliant English staffs, which has inspired and showed me how to become the teacher and writer I want to be. That being said, here are a few constructive ideas and suggestions for the UB English department, for both the course selection and the major requirement itself. Number one: Make more English courses, especially prerequisites, exclusive to English majors. Right now, there is only one course that is solely available to those registered for the major: ENG 301, Criticism. The wide availability for any student, ranging in majors from communication to mechanical engineering, to register in upper-level English classes is silly. These classes are usually very small and required by English majors for graduation, and unnecessary lack of seat availability causes a lot of drama and panic every semester for those who want to graduate on time. Number two: Expand the infamous Earlier Literature and Author courses into two course sequences. At the moment, the only course offering a two-part sequence is Shakespeare, taught by the incomparable Barbara Bono. Many students cringe at the thought of having to take other literature courses before 1830 on authors such as Chaucer or Milton, due to the excessive amount of reading, which leaves people more resentful than appreciative of the material. Personally, I loved my Milton course with Professor Hammill, but would have appreciated the content a lot more if we had had more time to discuss the author's work over another semester. This same suggestion goes for author courses on such literary leviathans as James Joyce. A semester of Joyce's earlier work, followed by another semester focusing on solely Ulysses and Finnegans Wake, would be divine. Number three: Diversify the course offerings and the curriculum. Milton, Shakespeare, and the Bible are great, but what about the international lovelies and giants of literature? Where is The Tale of Genji, a Japanese work thought to be the world's first novel, in UB's whole English catalog? Where is a course on the fabulous Russian writers, with an author's course on Dostoyevsky or Tolstoy? What about the delightful Thousand and One Arabian Nights? the fairy tales of Hans Christan Andersen? the fables of Aesop? Number four: Please offer more creative writing classes. The creative writing workshops currently offered by UB, usually taught by husband-wife team Professors Milletti and Anastasopoulos, are fabulous, but they are offered once a week and usually in the evening. I took courses with them both and had a great time, but would have loved it if more writing courses were offered at different times and different days of the week. With that in mind, I'm ready to take the next step in both my personal and academic life. The last thing I hoped to do when I wrote this column was discourage anyone from pursuing an English degree; I'm simply offering my hopes to the department for future generations. E-mail: shane.fallon@ubspectrum.com