The
Purdue Review
Vol. 6 - Issue 5 A journal of conservative thought and opinion | www.purduereview.com
What is His Agenda?
By Joshua Teasdale
josht@purduereview.com
In order to accomplish anything in
government, a politician must be able
to convince a large swath of people
to believe some common truth. Our
system of government is structured to
pit contrasting interests against each
other, so in order to come to agree-
ment on something we often have to
boil issues down to generalities. This
means we often talk about issues in a
way that misses much of the real con-
troversy involved. Frequently, poli-
ticians will be accused of mislead-
ing the American public by talking
in generalities instead of specifics.
Although to some extent this is in-
evitable, as politicians rarely have the
motivation to delve into the specifics
of policy for fear of alienating groups
On the Inside
of people.
So far, President Obama’s ad-
ministration has been dominated by
misdirection. He has been pushing a
stimulus package and other spending
which will explode the deficit, yet he
vows to halve the deficit by the end
of his first term. This is an incredible
contradiction. Putting aside the reali-
ty that US budgets rarely shrink, only
expand or explode, the President is
pushing the hard part of his promise,
balancing the budget, back to some
other year when the economic situ-
ation might be rosier. If the pace of
spending increases in the next 4 years
by even a fraction of the increase of
the last month, there is no hope for
a responsible budget. This is also be-
fore proposals for universal health
care and a scheme to regulate virtu-
ally every aspect of the economy with
Affirmative Action
Bakesale
»» Page 5
carbon emission restrictions.
In his address to Congress on Feb-
ruary 24th, President Obama stated
that without reforms to health care,
education, and new sources of ener-
gy, our economy will not be able to
recover from its current state of dis-
tress. This statement goes beyond the
normal spin of politicians. It is, in-
stead, an attempt to take advantage of
a crisis to push through policy which
would have little chance of success
under normal circumstances. Before
even taking office, then President-
Elect Obama’s choice to be White
House Chief of Staff stated the new
administration must not waste the
current crisis and should use it to
push through new reforms. This is
now the mantra of the Obama Ad-
»»See “Misdirection...” - pg. 4
Barack Obama is the
President of the US! OMG!
»» Page 9
“Quidquid latine
dictum sit, altum
viditur.”
March, 2009
Speech
Codes Limit
Free Speech
By Rohan Johnson
rohanj@purduereview.com
Voltaire once said, “I disapprove
of what you say, but I will defend to
the death your right to say it.” Vol-
taire’s attitude was admirable, and
our university should embrace his
spirit of tolerance.
Purdue, as a university that cham-
pions freedom of thought and ex-
pression as the “lifeblood of our aca-
demic community,” ought to have a
free flow of ideas and expressions, no
matter their potential offensiveness
or alternative meanings. “Speech
codes” have been created at several
other universities. These “anti-ha-
rassment” policies, as the administra-
tion prefers to call them, often limit
free speech and free expression that
do not conform to various orthodox-
ies of a campus.
A university campus, such as
ours, is considered a “marketplace of
ideas.” Rather than fearing punish-
ment for free expression, a student
ought to be able to dissent whenever
and wherever he wishes. Accord-
ing to the Dean of Students Rights
and Responsibilities, Trae Mitten III,
the University and its administration
try to foster this freedom of thought
while maintaining a friendly environ-
ment for people of all walks of life.
“Our goal is to allow everyone in our
community to express their opinion,
while keeping the peace and harmo-
ny that Purdue University is known
for,” said Dean Mitten. While these
two goals may seem contradictory,
»»See “Codes...” - pg. 11
Cartoons, Crosswords,
Sudokus and more
»» Page 15
THE PURDUE REVIEW March, 2009 Page 2THE PU

Letter From the Editor

Join The Purdue Review I received an E-mail from one of my mentors several weeks back
that made a prediction about our economy. The message had likely been
forwarded on thousands of times and I have no idea who the original
The Purdue Review is looking for staff writers, columnists, author was, but it was straightforward. It simply stated, “There are two
photographers, section editors, copy editors, layout editors, and kinds of people in America: those who remember what the Jimmy Carter
years were like, and those who are about to find out.”
web designers. The American people are about to find out what “Hope” and “Change”
really mean. The President and Congress are pushing forward with
No experience is necessary to join. an extreme leftist agenda which was sold as moderate and a fix to the
failed “conservative” policies of the past. Press Secretary Gibbs and the
mainstream media are using boogey men and straw men to distract the
If you’re interested in joining the Purdue Review, please con- American public from what is really going down in Washington. This
tact the Editor in Chief, Scott Sowers at ssowers@purdue.edu. political sleight of hand will work for a while, but eventually the American
public will see behind the illusion. When they do, it may not be pretty. To
paraphrase Ricky Ricardo, they’re going to have some ‘splainin’ to do.
The Purdue Review meets every Wednesday at 8 pm in
To quote another fictional character, Mrs. Lovett (Sweeney Todd), “No
Krannert G021. denying, times is hard.” But as hard as we have it here, the rest of the world
(most notably socialistic Europe) arguably has it much worse. If the more
www.purduereview.com socialized countries of the world are doing much worse than we are, we
must ask ourselves and our leaders, “Why would we want to become more
editor@purduereview.com like Europe?”
It is our job to stay informed and hold Washington’s feet to the
fire. We must study history, question everything, and try to cut through
the political BS. If we allow the policies of President Obama and the
Democratic Congress to succeed, we will not only find out what the Jimmy
Carter years were like, but also the Hoover and pre-WWII Roosevelt years.

PURDUE
The
REVIEW Regards,
Scott Sowers, Editor in Chief
Scott Sowers, Editor in Chief
Jay Wood, Managing Editor Publication Schedule:
Feb. 11th Mar. 11th Apr. 15th
Aaron Anspaugh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Features Editor
Dave Siukola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Layout Editor
Abbie Knigga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Copy Editor
Josh Teasdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Senior Staff Writer
Jordan Hebbe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer
Subscribe to the Purdue Review
Rohan Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer
Paul Nann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer The Purdue Review is funded completely by donations and
Sarah Perkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer advertisements. We receive no funding from Purdue University,
Sean Harding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer the Republican Party, or any political organization for that mat-
Dirk Schmidt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant Publisher
Matt Lunsford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PR Director ter. Without the generous donations from readers like you, the
Stewart Simpson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic Artist Purdue Review would not be able to fight liberalism and other
Lauren Trancik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Photographer forms of lunacy at Purdue and in the Lafayette community.
Amanda Thayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contributing Editor

Board of Directors: Nathan Arnold, Chair If you are interested in supporting The Purdue Review and
Chase Slaughter, Adam Rusch, Jeff Schultz, Mary Sparks, our cause, please consider making a financial donation. Dona-
David Bridges tions can be mailed or made online. Checks should be made
Mission Statment: The editorial staff at The Purdue Review will utilize the medium
out to the Purdue Review. Mail subscriptions are free and can
of print to entertain, educate and enlighten the student body at Purdue University be ordered on our website by contacting the Editor in Chief.
as well as the entire Greater Lafayette community.

Disclaimer: The views expressed within these pages are the views held express- www.purduereview.com
ly by each respective writer. The opinions of these writers do not necessarily editor@purduereview.com
reflect the opinions of any of the other writers in this publication nor by Purdue
University. This paper is in not affiliated with Purdue University; however, the staff The Purdue Review
is comprised entirely of Purdue students. This paper is distributed by the Univer-
sity Conservative Action Network (U-CAN). The first copy of this issue is free, at PO Box 931
distribution sites. For additional copies, contact the Editor in Chief, Scott Sowers
at editor@purduereview.com
Lafayette, IN 47902
Page 2THE PURDUE REVIEW
Letter to the Editor
Editor’s Note: This Letter has
been edited for length. The full Letter,
in it’s entirety, can be found at http://
www.purduereview.com
I am writing this letter to reflect
the feelings of several of the Hous-
ing and Food Service employees who
would like to refute many of claims
presented in the article about how the
dining courts do not satisfy. We have
found discrepancies with the idea of
the summer selection, gaining the
“Freshman 15”, our hours, students
getting sick from the dining hall food,
and our lack of healthy options. Fur-
thermore, we disagree with the en-
tirety of the article and would like to
voice the facts, not just our opinions.
Starting with the disappointment
regarding the difference between the
summer selection and our school year
selection, the dining courts were tar-
geting their food selection more for
the summer camps that they were
serving. The dining courts that are
open during the summer depend on
these camps, not only to fund stu-
dent employment for those who need
it over the summer, but also to raise
money for the University. Since most
of these camps are sports, fitness,
health related, and/or are funded by
the state, they pay a higher price for
a better selection of food. This would
explain why they have a better selec-
tion. These camps pay a much higher
price to have a more specific diet. If
you would like to pay an extra three
or four dollars per meal to have a
higher quality food, convince the rest
of campus to also pay the same three
or four extra dollars.
Although we do serve “lower
quality” food during the semester to
keep the price within an affordable
range for students who pay their own
tuition, gaining the “Freshman 15” is
a personal choice. The dining courts
are all you care to eat; however, we
do not force you to get three or four
plates of food for every meal. Over
the years, we have watched students
come in and get plates filled with just
fries and cheese on them, or sit down
with numerous plates of food. We
also do not force you into not mak-
ing enough time to work out, taking
the bus rather than walking to class,
or taking the lazy way out of doing
every day things in general. Try tak-
ing the stairs rather than the elevator.
I believe in taking personal responsi-
bility for my health.
As for the accusation that our
hours are insufficient compared to
other universities, a little research
would have been helpful in support-
March, 2009
In Response to the Article in Issue 4 Concerning the Dining Courts
ing this argument. Looking at the IU
website, it shows that there are only
three cafes open until 2 AM. As for
dining courts being open until 10
AM, we found only two. The din-
ing locations that stay open from 7
AM until midnight are often market
places, not dining courts. You state
that Ball State always has one dining
court open until midnight; however,
none of the three operations that are
open until midnight are dining courts.
Two are market places, and one is an
emporium. The other operations at
Ball State close by 10 PM Monday
through Thursday, and close at 7:30
PM or earlier Friday through Sun-
day.
To cite a few more universities in
Indiana, Butler University closes a
half hour earlier for lunch and an hour
earlier for dinner than we do. ISU is
open a half hour less for breakfast and
lunch, and an hour less for dinner. At
IUPUI, only one dining operation
stays open until 7:30 PM; everything
else closes at or before 6 PM.
At Purdue, we have three OTG’s
(On the Go’s) at Earhart, Ford, and
Windsor which are open from 7 AM
until 4 PM. Therefore, if you can-
not make it during the normal dining
court hours you can always make a
quick stop there and eat on your way
to/from class/other activities. Purdue
also has the Cary Knight Spot and
Harrison Grille which are open until
2 AM, and are the equivalent to many
of the market places found at IU and
Ball State. We also have the Tark
Mart and Boiler Crossing, which are
both open until 11 PM. Purdue actu-
ally has many dining options.
As Purdue students, we understand
a busy schedule. However, staffing a
dining court that would be open until
10 PM or later would be very diffi-
cult, given that most Housing and
Food Service employees are students
themselves. Keep in mind, a dining
court closes at 10 PM, 12 AM, or 2
AM, would have a clean-up shift that
would not get done until two hours
after the closing time (12 AM, 2 AM,
4 AM). Staffing the evening shifts,
especially on weekends, is already
tough for many of the dining courts.
Would you like to volunteer to work
a 2-4 AM shift?
Another reason the University
may have thought not to keep the din-
ing courts open after 8:30PM is the
cost compared to the profit that they
would make. Even though we are
open until 8:30PM, we rarely have
more than 25-50 students come in
during that last half an hour.
As for “having to use your dining
dollars,” I am unsure of why you are
upset about this. When you buy a meal
plan, which is required by all students
living in the residence halls, you are
given a specific amount of dining dol-
lars which you have already paid for.
If you enjoy throwing away money, I
suppose you would not want to spend
these. Are you keeping them as sou-
venirs? Although I realize that the
new Union rule is kind of absurd, this
is still advancement from last year (if
you do not remember, we could not
use ANY dining dollars at the Union).
With the renovation of the Union still
being new, and the advancement that
Purdue has already shown, it is appar-
ent that they are trying to find more
student-friendly spending options.
Please be patient, for complaining
without offering any solutions does
not solve anything.
Let’s talk about our sick custom-
ers. While I cannot vouch for the
amount of time it takes food poison-
ing to set in (anywhere from 30 min-
utes to two days), can I ask why only
one person is falling ill when eating
out of a pan which has 20 or so serv-
ings in it? As for the students who fell
ill after eating the Wiley double swipe
steak, their steak was made cook to
order. All students are advised on the
Housing and Food Services website
that ordering and eating undercooked
meat may cause food illnesses. If they
would like to state that they ordered
it well-done and it was not prepared
correctly, they should have returned
the food and asked for it to be cooked
properly. Employees in the dining
court do take time and care to prepare
everything we serve to ensure that the
food is not going to cause any sort of
sickness.
I am uncertain what you mean by
the “weak” salad bar that is offered
by the dining courts. Looking specifi-
cally at Earhart, I do not know what
else you are looking for on a salad
bar. If you cannot find it there, you
can walk toward the Deli, Italian, or
Gallery areas where we have an as-
sortment of other fresh vegetables. As
for complaining about having only
apples, bananas, and oranges at the
end of the salad bar, when we have a
fruit bar in Deli, apples and oranges
seem to go the fastest.
Where does it say all of our vegan/
vegetarian options are healthy op-
tions? No one said that Windsor is
the “healthy option.” We are only
stating that Windsor is catering to the
vegetarians and the vegans. If you are
trying to eat “healthy” (we put this in
quotes because we are not too sure
you are aware of what healthy con-
Page 3
sists of), and you are not a vegetarian,
then do not eat the vegetarian food.
These selections have been cooked
with plenty of other things added in
order for vegetarians to get the nu-
trients needed since they are not get-
ting it from meats, etc. If we can be
Earhart specific again, we offer deli
sandwiches, soup, MYO stir-fry and
pasta (which can be healthy if pre-
pared smartly), an expansive salad
bar, and healthy cereal daily. We
would also like to state that every-
thing else served in the dining court
is not necessarily bad for you if eaten
in moderation and combined with ex-
ercise. With that being said, too much
of any sort of food, “healthy” or not,
is not good for you.
We would also like to touch on
the fact that you are upset about how
complicated our dishes are. If you
would prefer, we could always have
the same five or six dishes every
meal, and make sure they are pre-
pared the healthiest way. However,
we are currently on a four-week ro-
tation and have quite a few students
who complain that there is not a wide
enough variety. As for your comment
about how fruit and chicken should
never ever be prepared together, that
is a personal opinion, and is one that
is not widely held within the Univer-
sity.
Your comments about appreciating
a fresh fruit bar present quite a few
problems for us. Firstly, is fresh fruit
always in season? While it would be
possible for us to ship away for fresh
fruits and vegetables, it is not feasi-
ble. The amount of money it would
cost to special order the fruit, ship the
fruit, keep the fruit stored and cooled
correctly, and to have the staff avail-
able to prepare the fruit properly,
would cause the price of your meals
to go up significantly. Even though
Purdue’s meal plans are significantly
lower than IU’s, we highly doubt the
student body would be supportive of
a meal plan that would cost more than
it currently does.
Finally, we would like to point out
that eating healthy does not equal eat-
ing only fruit. Please consider these
facts before write another article
bashing the dining court system that
we employees work very hard to keep
running smoothly so the rest of cam-
pus can enjoy a meal that they do not
have to prepare or clean up.
Sincerely,
Caleigh Olszewski
Student Supervisor
Earhart Dining Court
THE PURDUE REVIEW
Misdirection...
From Page 1
ministration.
It is ironic, however, that a candi-
date who owes his initial success in
the Democratic primaries to his op-
position to the war in Iraq, is now de-
termined to take advantage of an eco-
nomic crisis to enact a far left liberal
agenda which has had nothing to do
with our current economic problems.
The War in Iraq is often described by
those on the left as a war of choice,
that it was completely unrelated to
the 9/11 terrorist attacks and was
trumpeted up and illegitimately
linked to 9/11 to sell the war to the
American people. President Obama’s
attempt to link universal health care
and green technologies to our current
economic crisis is far more deceitful
than the far left claimed President
Bush’s arguments for the Iraqi war
were. The cause of our current eco-
nomic crisis was not people’s lack of
health insurance; it was, in most part,
caused by a housing crisis brought on
by banks giving out loans to people
who couldn’t afford them.
One of the great promises made
by candidate Obama during his
campaign was to change the tone of
Washington. This promise, like many
similar promises of successful candi-
dates in the past, has quickly fallen
into question. During the debate
over the stimulus package in the first
weeks of the Obama administration,
“Indeed, the Obama administration is working
overtime to squeeze every drop of panic out
of the economy, holding tight to their mantra
‘You never want a crisis to go to waste.’”
the President went to great lengths to
appear to reach out to Republicans,
even while doing nothing substantial
to gain bipartisan support. When re-
sponding to criticisms made by Re-
publicans, he has chided them for not
looking after the best interests of their
constituents. So far, this incredible
bait-and-switch has been successful
in allowing the President to continue
March, 2009
to blame Republicans for the prob-
lems of the country while absolving
himself and his party of any short-
term responsibility.
Underlying so many of the prem-
ises presented by the President in his
public remarks, including his address
to Congress, is the notion that that
Republicans and conservatives have
caused our country’s current econom-
ic crisis, and that only government
The Master of Misdirection at His Best
can fix the economy. Even if the no-
tion that limited government created
the housing crisis were true, the Pres-
ident only uses that notion when it is
convenient. No conservative would
consider the deficit spending of the
Bush years to be in compliance with
the conservative ideals. However, it
is telling that, when facing criticism
about the prospect of a $1.5 trillion
dollar deficit, the President blames it
on the past administration. Apparent-
ly “conservatives” spending money
which doesn’t exist validates a liberal
ratcheting up the deficit even more.
Instead of dealing with the major
problems facing our economy such as
the lack of flowing credit, a housing
bubble, and the failure of the current
banking system, the President seems
content to repackage his liberal agen-
da and ignore the real problems. In
the first month and a half in office,
the Obama administration has yet to
articulate a coherent policy to deal
with the banking system. This lack of
leadership on the real problems fac-
ing our economy has led to decreas-
ing levels of confidence in the Ameri-
can economy. While this has the
effect of putting countless American
families in peril, it is also just the cri-
sis Obama needs to continue to ram
his agenda through Congress. Indeed,
the Obama administration is work-
ing overtime to squeeze every drop
of panic out of the economy, holding
tight to their mantra “You never want
a crisis to go to waste.”
The President’s agenda doesn’t
just seek to abrogate conservatives.
Indeed, many of his promises on
liberal agenda items have also been
sidetracked or forgotten since Inau-
guration Day. The President’s prom-
ise to close the Guantanamo Bay
prison camp has been regulated to a
yearlong study to determine its effect
and how to go about such an endeav-
or. His promise to end the War in Iraq
has slowly eroded. Now he promises
to have all troops out of Iraq by next
year, except 50,000 troops which
many be necessary to assist the Iraqi
government. A promise to end “don’t
ask, don’t tell” was also regulated to
a yearlong study. It is interesting that
as the President pushes an economic
agenda, he is hedging on other liberal
issues.
With his presidency so saturated
in contradiction, it is difficult to even
place Obama on the ideological spec-
trum. So far, on economic issues, he
Page 4THE PU
has been far left in his support for the
economic bailout plan and the budget.
He also has issued several executive
orders which indicate a far left stance
on abortion issues. His hedging on
several other liberal issues, however,
brings into doubt his true allegiance
to the left. It is important to note that,
at least on the stimulus bill, the Presi-
dent ceded leadership to the Demo-
cratic leadership in Congress.
With all the misdirection and rhet-
oric coming out of the White House,
it is tempting to believe that, with all
of his natural talent, the President is
masterminding a plan to execute a
far left agenda. Although Obama is
certainly talented, there is the pos-
sibility that out of inexperience, he
has no idea what needs to be done on
the national stage. Instead of leading
on national issues in order to gather
a consensus, he has ceded leadership
to the Democrats in Congress and has
relegated himself to party cheerlead-
er. This would seem to be supported
by the fact that, on issues where Con-
gress has led, the result has been a
far left agenda, such as the stimulus
package. On the other hand, on issues
where the White House has led, such
as the Iraq War and Guantanamo, the
result has mostly been a middle-of-
the-road approach.
In the coming months, we will see
how the President matures and deals
with other issues. Perhaps he could
swing to the middle or to the far left,
but it is difficult to tell. We can, how-
ever, be assured that no matter what
position the White House takes, they
will use every opportunity to sell it.
The policies the American people
end up with, however, may look radi-
cally different than what they thought
they were purchasing. Health care
reform and green technology will not
lift the economy out of its funk, and
they could very well make matters
worse. In his address to Congress,
the President took care to point out
that on April 1st all Americans will
start to see more money from their
paycheck as a payroll tax credit takes
effect. The significance of this day
is important; the first portion of the
President’s agenda takes effect on
April Fool’s day. Despite his rhetoric,
it remains to be seen who will end up
the fool.
Page 4THE PURDUE REVIEW
Baked Goods: 75 Cents for White Females
By Jay Wood
jay.wood@purduereview.com
Last month, to demonstrate their
opposition to affirmative action, the
Conservative Coalition for American
Values (CCAV) had an Affirmative
Action Bake Sale. They sold baked
goods (of comparable worth) at stag-
gered prices, based on race and gen-
der. Their prices were as follows:
Asian/Pacific Islander Males $1.50,
Asian/Pacific Islander Females $1.25,
Caucasian Males $1.00, Caucasian
Females 75 cents, African American
and Hispanic Males 50 cents, Afri-
can American and Hispanic Females
25 cents, and all Native Americans
FREE.
This staggered price system repre-
sented the preferential treatment giv-
en to women and certain minorities as
part of affirmative action. The point
of the bake sale was not profit, but
rather to expose the discriminatory
effects of affirmative action. Money
earned from the sale went to benefit
the Coalition on Urban Renewal and
Education (CURE). This organiza-
tion was founded by Star Parker, a
guest speaker that CCAV brought to
campus last month.
The sale, overall, was received
rather well by the student and faculty
passer-bys. Many students were re-
ceptive to the CCAV’s message. The
provocative price sign caught several
eyes. Not everyone was sympathetic
to the cause, however. One black
student said, “[Affirmative action] is
what got me here” and then stormed
off.
The most entertaining confronta-
tion came from a student who initially
asked why “Atheist” was not included
on the price list. CCAV members ex-
plained to him that affirmative action
was targeting women and minorities.
He replied that Atheists are minori-
ties. CCAV members explained that
affirmative action was about race and
gender, not religion. The student con-
tinued pressing about Atheism and
how Atheists are a minority.
After a few minutes, his argument
somehow shifted from Atheists as mi-
norities to “George Bush is an idiot”
to the current financial crisis to teach-
ers unions. As the argument carried
March, 2009
on, it became clear that this particular
student did not understand the dis-
criminatory effects which result from
the practice of affirmative action.
A Recipe for Racial Discrimination
When Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
delivered his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech
on August 28th, 1963, he said, “I have
a dream that one day my four little
children will one day live in a nation
where they will not be judged by the
color of their skin, but by the content
of their character.” It would make
sense then, that in order to achieve a
society of racial equality, college and
job applications should not be judged
based on race (or gender).
Sadly, this is not the case at many
universities and places of employ-
ment which practice affirmative ac-
tion. Some institutions have even set
up quotas. For example, a business
might require that 40% of its employ-
ees are female, 20% are black, 9%
Hispanic, etc. That being the case,
there could be an instance where two
equally-qualified applicants submit
their résumés. One applicant is a
white male; the other is a Hispanic
male. If that company was failing to
meet their Hispanic quota, they would
feel inclined to hire the Hispanic male
simply to meet their numbers.
Worse yet, there could be a situ-
ation where a highly qualified black
male and a much lesser qualified black
female were applying for the same
job. The less-qualified black female
might receive preferential treatment,
because not only does she help fill the
female quota, but she also helps fill
the black quota. The company, then,
loses out on a highly qualified appli-
cant, simply because he did not pro-
vide the greatest quota benefit.
Other institutions, such as Purdue,
have group targets. Page 9, Section B
“The University wants to be ‘free of bias
and discrimination based on race,’ so they
adopt an affirmative action program?
That doesn’t add up.”
of Purdue’s Affirmative Action Plan
explains further:
“This process requires an analysis
of the present quantity and quality
of employment of women and mi-
norities within the University to de-
termine if there are areas where the
number of incumbent women and
minorities is less when compared to
the number that would be reason-
ably expected of women and minor-
ity employment candidates available
in the recruitment area. If it is found
Page 5
that the number of women and mi-
norities employed at the University is
less than the expected availability in
the relevant labor market, the Univer-
sity must use its best efforts, in good-
faith, to develop and implement pro-
cedures that are designed to increase
the number of qualified women and
minority candidates in the applicant
pool, which will lead to the establish-
ment of placement goals for women
and minorities in areas where they are
needed.”
The very next sentence is the kick-
er. It says, “A complete affirmative
action program also includes mecha-
nisms that enable the University to
continually monitor and evaluate its
employment practices to ensure that
they are free of bias and discrimina-
tion based on race, religion, color,
sex, age, national origin, ancestry,
disability, or veteran status.”
HOLD THE PHONE! The Uni-
versity wants to be “free of bias and
discrimination based on race”, so they
adopt an affirmative action program?
That doesn’t add up. What CCAV
(and other opponents of affirmative
action) argues is that no one (be they
female, minority, or whoever) should
receive any preferential treatment in
an application process. Institutions
should accept applicants based solely
on merit, not gender or race. Affirma-
tive action, while it may have been
created with good intentions, does not
end discriminatory actions. By distin-
guishing race and gender, as well as
offering preferential treatment to cer-
tain groups deemed “disadvantaged”,
affirmative action policies might pre-
vent institutional bigotry, but they in
no way end racial or gender discrimi-
nation. Rather, they encourage it.
THE PURDUE REVIEW
Welcome To the Freak Show
Congress’ Attempt to Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine and Silence Conservative Talk Radio and Blogs
By Rohan Johnson
rohanj@purduereview.com
You are a freak. That’s right. You’re
a freak, and your opinion is your only
talent. Back in the day there was only
one place for a freak: a freak show.
A freak like you would stay amongst
other freaks, all of whom are there for
the same reason. Your goal is to make
your boss money, and to have an ap-
parently normal use for your talent
with a purpose of some sort.
Doesn’t that sound great? Okay
you’re right, but believe it or not
that’s exactly what’s going on in the
media today. And something ought to
When They Talk about The Fairness Doctrine, They Mean Rush Limbaugh
be done to stop it. The FCC’s answer
is the Fairness Doctrine.
The Fairness Doctrine was a pol-
icy of the Federal Communications
Commission. It required the hold-
ers of broadcasting licenses to pres-
ent political issues in a way that was
“balanced”. The Fairness Doctrine
would allow government regulatory
bureaucracies to enforce the balance.
The Fairness Doctrine was revoked
during the Reagan Administration in
1985. The FCC Chairman at the time,
Mark S. Fowler emphasized that the
doctrine hurt public interest and vio-
lated the free speech rights granted
by the First Amendment. Some poli-
ticians are now pushing for it to be
March, 2009
put back into place.
It should not be within the power
of a federal commission to determine
the press/media to which an individ-
ual has access. The Fairness Doctrine
is not fair at all. It is a doctrine that
punishes the honest and rewards the
subtly and deceptively biased.
Back when freak shows were a
common occurrence during the early
1900’s and late 1800’s, the major
freak shows would hire various re-
cruiters to travel around and bring
freaks from across the country to live
and work with the freak show. There
were two specific types of recruiters
who would take this job upon their
shoulders: one known as the schiller,
and one known as the talker.
The first type of recruiter, and
the most common was known as the
schiller. The schiller, would travel the
country visiting rumored freaks at
their places of residence. As you can
probably imagine, it’s no easy task
to simply convince an individual to
move in with a bunch of human odd-
balls. The schillers would try to blend
in with the crowd, and coax individu-
als into joining the freak show by
manipulating them. Often times, this
meant discretely lying and telling the
targeted “freak” whatever he or she
wanted to hear to get them to join the
show. This is precisely the type of re-
cruiter that we see in the mainstream
media today.
Members of the privately owned
mainstream media will tell you ab-
solutely anything to get you to con-
form to their ideas and join their
freak show. They will subtly convey
their views in order to cajole you into
thinking that their ideas are not only
the best solution, but also the sole so-
lution. This scheme of thought often
includes scare tactics or feel-good
stories that always point you in the
direction of the freak show. This sub-
tle propaganda is extremely prevalent
on television news stations, and even
television entertainment programs.
News commentators and television
script writers coast under the guise
of “fair” news presentation and enter-
tainment, all while maneuvering sto-
ries to whatever suits their will.
The second type of recruiter, the
talker, would openly recruit those
who were considered freaks by di-
rectly displaying the idea of joining
the freak show. They were honest and
presented the facts rather than always
presenting what the freak would want
to hear. Talkers were far less com-
mon. They were also seen in a dim-
mer light because they were honest
about their position and what their
goal was.
Although there are far less talkers
in the media than there are schillers,
talkers still play a very important role.
The talkers in the media openly align
themselves with views and are not
reserved in expression. Those who
are well informed often follow these
talkers, and they can often identify a
schiller when they see them.
The Fairness Doctrine penalizes
the talkers as their views and opin-
ions are identifiably out in the open.
Inversely, the schillers in the main-
stream media are rewarded for being
deceptive and discretely opinionated.
Rather than creating balance, the
Fairness Doctrine does the exact op-
posite, providing the schillers with a
definite advantage over the talkers.
The theory that the analogy of
the talker and the schiller insinuates
is not a novel idea to experts in po-
litical sciences. “Our massive strat-
egy was to use the Fairness Doctrine
Page 6THE PU
to challenge and harass right-wing
broadcasters and hope the challenges
would be so costly to them that they
would be inhibited and decide it was
too expensive to continue”, said Bill
Ruder, Secretary of the Treasury un-
der John F. Kennedy.
With the rise of conservative talk
radio, those affected negatively by it
desire to use the Fairness Doctrine to
silence it in whatever way possible.
Democratic Committee Chairman
Chuck Schumer even went to so far
as to compare honestly opinionated
entertainers to pornography when he
stated, “The very same people who
don’t want the Fairness Doctrine
want the FCC to limit pornography
on the air”. Really, Chuck? Compar-
ing obscene acts of sex on the air to
freedom of speech? This seems a bit
desperate to me.
Rather than punishing the talkers,
we ought to do the opposite. If we
strengthen and multiply the amount
of talkers in the media, we can in-
crease the amount of citizens who are
informed. By creating a system allow-
ing consumers to see what the views
of their television reporter are, people
can more fairly assess how accurate
the information they are receiving is.
If we were to openly display the views
of the individuals writing or display-
ing information then every newscast-
er would be a talker. A simple “Very
Conservative, Conservative, Moder-
ate Conservative, Moderate Liberal,
Liberal, and Very Liberal” attached
to an individual’s name would best
create balance. If we can make this a
norm, then there is no reason that the
average educated American would
not be more informed.
For now, you as a freak have a
choice. You can listen to the schillers,
whose lies you hear or read every day,
or you could choose to be informed
and find the talkers, who will be hon-
est with you and tell you the facts. Of
course, if (or when) the Fairness Doc-
trine is put in place, you don’t really
have much of a choice. You are going
to the freak show.
Page 6THE PURDUE REVIEW
Star Parker on “Leaving the Poverty Plantation”
By Jay Wood
jay.wood@purduereview.com
Last month, the Conservative Co-
alition for American Values (CCAV)
brought another guest speaker to
campus. This time, they brought Star
Parker, a middle-aged black woman
with a riveting message of how she
“left the poverty plantation”--her
journey from welfare to independent
success.
Star Parker shared her story with
the audience gathered in Mathews
Hall. She spoke of how she had four
abortions in a three year span--each
at the taxpayer’s expense. Three
months after her fourth abortion,
Star became pregnant again. This
time, however, she decided to bring
the child to term. “There has to be
something wrong with killing your
offspring,” she explained.
After her daughter, Angel, was
born, Star went on welfare. Dur-
ing that time, she continued living
a self-destructive lifestyle of drug
use and promiscuity. This all came
to a screeching halt when Star went
through a religious conversion, start-
ed following Christ, and recognized
the destructive path on which she had
been traveling. She then got off wel-
fare and entered the workforce. Since
that time, Star has founded the Coali-
tion on Urban Renewal and Educa-
tion (CURE). She has authored three
books and has made numerous guest
appearances, including an episode of
ABC’s The View (Elizabeth Hassel-
beck, the show’s lone conservative,
finally got some backup). After Star
got off of welfare, she “left the pov-
erty plantation” and is now living a
happy and successful life.
Beyond sharing her own experi-
ences, Star commented on welfare at
large, particularly as it relates to the
black family unit, saying “Socialism
doesn’t work for poor people. The
heavy hand of government is de-
stroying the black family… It began
in the New Deal and got on steroids
in the War on Poverty… When we
March, 2009
decide that some people can’t man-
age their lives we’re setting them up
for failure.”
Star explained that welfare has
promoted the practice of not working,
not saving, and not getting married.
She added that many in poverty have
children outside of wedlock, no job
and no education--the difference be-
tween bad choices and being respon-
sible--and that many of these people
like to blame it on someone else. She
said that during her own struggles,
she felt that her problems were not
her own and that she needed (and
thus became dependent) on taxpayer
money. Star said, “The first step out
of poverty is self-governing.” She
Star Parker will be a tought act to follow for CCAV
mentioned that her grandfather (who
was one generation out of slavery)
used to say, “If you want to stay free,
you need property and a gun”.
She went on to mention that poor
people are not realizing that trickle-
down economics works and that it
is beneficial for everyone if the rich
are able to stay rich. To illustrate that
benefit, she said, “If the rich don’t
have a limo service, there won’t be
any limo drivers or anyone to clean
the limo.” She noted that the more
successful you are, the more you
won’t want government taking from
you.
After concluding her prepared
statements, Star asked for questions
from the audience. The first question
she fielded was, “Is it tough being
a black conservative woman?” She
responded saying, “It is, especially
now [with Obama]. Obama’s part of
the hard left and he has melanin in
his skin.” She discussed not wanting
to talk politics in her personal life,
because all of her relatives lean to
the left.
After sharing political conflicts
that had occurred in her family, she
talked about the ups and downs of
being a conservative during the last
eight years with George W. Bush.
“I knew we were in trouble when
President Bush started talking about
‘compassionate conservatism’. I’m
happy that 25 million people can
now taste freedom. I’m happy with
the selections of Sam Alito and John
Roberts to the Supreme Court and I
was happy with the partial birth abor-
tion ban.” Star joked that, for Obama,
Page 7
lifting the partial birth abortion ban
probably wouldn’t be “above his pay
grade”.
Another question Star fielded was,
“Where does the Republican Party go
from here?” She stated that the party
needs to define who it will be and
what it will stand for. She went on
to say, “We have to be ‘and people’
and let voters be ‘or people’. What
she meant by that was that voters
can lean to the right on certain issues
and not on others, but the Republi-
can Party platform needs to embrace
conservatism on all major issue cat-
egories. She explained this saying,
“We need leaders that have ‘all four’
[traditional values, limited govern-
ment, free markets, and strong na-
tional defense].” She also expressed
concern that the Republican Party
was not moving towards unity and
that the divide between libertarians/
fiscal conservatives and the social
conservatives could cause one group
to leave the party.
The final question asked was re-
garding women and minorities in
relation to the Republican Party. Star
said that the women’s vote gener-
ally breaks down on the married or
unmarried line. She explained that it
is not easy to live free and indepen-
dent, and that single women aging
alone often move toward govern-
ment protection. She expressed the
importance of single women needing
to understand that government is not
the solution to their problem(s). She
laughed, saying. “When I heard that
the Republican Party was the ‘the
party of the rich’, I said, ‘Sign me up
for that, I want to join’.”
After her closing response, Star
received a standing ovation from
the audience. The event was a great
success for the CCAV and students
will be keeping their eyes open for
whichever speaker this group brings
to campus next.
THE PURDUE REVIEW
Political Correctness on TV Kills Classic Nick Shows
By Aaron Anspaugh
aarona@purduereview.com
As I flip through the channels, try-
ing to find something to watch while
devouring my ramen noodles and sal-
tine crackers, I am usually dismayed
by the lack of entertaining content
on the TV. Sports are okay, but con-
stant highlight reels are not my thing.
News is also somewhat entertaining,
but that is what keeps me busy during
class (along with Sudoku). What I re-
ally enjoy watching are shows that I
watched while growing up. These
shows, many of which were featured
on the children’s network Nickel-
odeon in the early 90’s, help me to
reminisce about simpler times. Most
of these shows, however, are not fea-
tured on any normal cable network,
even in reruns. The loss of my favor-
ite shows can, I believe, be contrib-
uted to the wave of political correct-
ness that has swept across television
in recent years.
One of my favorite shows of all
time, The Adventures of Pete & Pete,
featured brothers both named Pete,
who lived with a cast of unusual
friends, family, and neighbors. This
show combined elements of normal
life from both a child’s perspective
(Little Pete) and a teenager’s perspec-
tive (Big Pete). One of the main recur-
ring characters was Artie, strongest
man in the world, a local superhero
whose flamboyant outfit and bizarre
behavior would never pass TV cen-
sors today. This show, while probably
not deemed completely “diverse” and
“kid-safe”, was entertaining in the
early 90’s and is still entertaining to
me today. Sadly, however, this show
was canceled in 1996 and aside from
a few short stints of reruns, it has not
returned to mainstream airwaves.
Not all shows died suddenly,
never to be heard from again. Some
shows were slowly sucked into the
black hole of political correctness
and changed their style and format to
accommodate this new standard. One
such show was Rugrats. This simple
show, developed in 1991, originally
showed the world through the eyes of
toddlers. These young children (Tom-
my, Chucky, Phil & Lil, and some-
times Angelica) would go through
completely normal experiences but
would see them as exciting adven-
March, 2009 Page 8THE PU
tures. Oftentimes, the show would ness standards and restore their initial Since this is what the parents expect,
only feature a few of the babies in magic, are all that is left. the network didn’t disappoint them,
major roles. The plots were simple, One might make the argument that making sure to slowly weed out any
the characters were simple, and the cartoons on cable used to be obscene shows that expressed individual-
show was good. and perverted. In many cases, those ity, inappropriateness, or the lack of
Fast forward a decade. The once- people would indeed be right. Shows physical diversity. In their places, the
simple show has had turned into an such as Rocko’s Modern Life and network began running mind-numb-
ideological playground, full of diver- Ren & Stimpy aired on a television ing drivel. These shows are ethnically
sity of every kind, lacking nothing… channel for children, yet occasionally diverse, politically correct, and com-
except the simplicity and humor that had very adult content. The argument pletely appropriate, but they suck as
had once made the show great. In that this perverts children, however, entertainment.
order to facilitate diversity and po- is not really true. I am only now, after A recurring theme in this new
litical correctness, new characters going back and watching the shows I generation of shows is that of the em-
were added, including an African- watched as a child, understanding all powerment of children over adults.
American (Susie), an Asian-Amer- of the hidden innuendos and double Shows once had given the mes-
ican (Kimi), and even a mentally- entendres. Even live-action shows sage that parents, while they might
handicapped baby (Dil). There were on Nick tended to have a bit of adult be mean and strict, really only had
humor. I remember the children’s best interests at heart.
specifically one Now, through shows like the Fairly
episode of Salute OddParents and Jimmy Neutron, par-
Your Shorts where ents are portrayed as imbeciles who
the character Don- only impede the child’s fun. Usually
key Lips remarks they are side-characters, occasionally
about finding a bal- antagonists, and the children usu-
loon dispenser in ally end up saving the hapless parents
a gas-station bath- from certain doom. Other shows, such
room, followed as Dora the Explorer, don’t even fea-
by the same char- ture adults whatsoever. Dora makes
acter “giving half sure to spread the message that it is
a peace sign to a okay to wander around on adventures
cop,” resulting in without adult supervision and talk
their school bus be- to strangers (Swiper), as long as the
ing pulled over. child is multicultural and diverse in
While there in- the process.
Diversity is the Ramp Made to Jump that Shark deed was some “in- This is not an overtly political is-
appropriate” mate- sue. No matter what your political be-
holiday specials galore, starting with rial on Nickelodeon, there is a no way liefs, I would hope you can recognize
a traditional Christmas episode, but a young child would be able to un- a good show when you see one. The
eventually having Rugrats Hanukkah derstand the dark humor hidden be- encroachment of political correctness
and Rugrats Kwanzaa episodes as neath the massive amount of simple and diversity, either mandatory or vol-
well. While there is absolutely noth- jokes and plot devices that were actu- untary, is severely limiting children’s
ing wrong with these cultural themes, ally aimed at the children (since these television from what it could poten-
nor the physical diversity of the char- were technically children’s shows). tially be. The only show on Nick to-
acters, these constant attempts to be Personally, I was much more pervert- day that is close to the classics, in my
politically correct have taken away ed by some unusually-low-shelved opinion, is Spongebob Squarepants.
almost everything that initially made medical books at the public library, as It captures the essence of simplicity
me love the show. The plot devices well as the 4th grade sex talk (includ- and absurdity, appeals to adults with
of the show only got more complex ing a video that surprisingly featured innuendos (Sandy Cheeks and Mr.
as the cast multiplied. Gone were the the actor who played Sponge in the Krabs in Bikini Bottom), and is an
days of unhooking the playpen with show Salute Your Shorts). overall funny show to people of all
a screwdriver from the diaper. Now, Even if there was some hidden ages. Perhaps this is a light that might
a herd of 8 ethnically diverse babies perversion in Nickelodeon shows, show others that adopting the rubric
is able to wander around Paris, oper- children were not forced to watch of political correctness only detracts
ate a large mechanical dinosaur, and them. Any parent could simply turn from what might be an otherwise de-
safely make it back to their families. off the TV, and nowadays, can even cent show. Or, maybe Spongebob is
They manage to do this while avoid- block specific shows. At some point a dinosaur who survived the ice age,
ing kidnappers and the police, as well in the last couple decades, some a remnant from a distant time that
as keeping their hapless parents in the parents decided that Nickelodeon is soon to die off. Either way, my
dark about the whole thing. The sim- is translated as “electronic babysit- noodles are now cold, and I still have
ple show is gone. A bunch of writers, ter” and just slap their kids down in found nothing decent to watch.
trying to both meet political correct- front of it whenever they are at home.
Page 8THE PURDUE REVIEW
All Hail the Messiah, Savior of the Universe
By Jordan Hebbe
jordanh@purduereview.com
Disclaimer: This article is purely
satirical and is meant to provide a few
good laughs for the reader. While it is
possible that not all Democrats hold
such radical beliefs, I am quite sure
that several of the liberal politicians
in Washington do. It is from their per-
spective that I am writing this.
It’s about time we got our way…
we finally regained control of the
entire country in order to set it back
on course for its demise. Because
the Holy One obeys our every com-
mand, we have already reached our
pre-Bush level of anti-Americanism.
Had those darned Republicans played
fair and let Gore take what was his
in 2000, we would probably have al-
ready succeeded in making this hor-
“After that, we will be pushing
through a renamed version of the
Fairness Doctrine to shut up that
bloated bigot, Rush Limbaugh,
once and for all.”
rid country a first class replica of the
Soviet Union and/or China. As things
stand now, we are back on track and
things are running ahead of schedule.
We have set the American people
into a state of complete panic about
the economy, which has made our
economic problems even worse. De-
spite convincing Americans that our
economy is failing and we have no
money, Comrade Obama’s second
move as King was to send precious
taxpayer money to foreign countries
to aid in their abortion programs.
Whenever they got upset about the
stimulus, all He had to do was remind
them that we were in the worst eco-
nomic downturn since the Great De-
pression. Even though it’s really only
the worst economy since good ole’
March, 2009 Page 9
Jimmy Carter was in office, the pub- any of us thought. Whatever Nancy system that will allow us to regulate
lic is clueless. What they don’t know Pelosi or Harry Reid asks of Him, he the people even more. After that, we
won’t hurt them. They are all too stu- does. They say sign this bill that will will be pushing through a renamed
pid to do some research on their own; spend $999,999,999,999,999,999.00 version of the Fairness Doctrine to
that’s why we have to do their think- of the taxpayers’ dollars, and he says, shut up that bloated bigot, Rush Lim-
ing for them. We intellectuals know “I thought you’d never ask.” baugh, once and for all. We are really
what is best for the nation. It is amazing that He was able to sick of him taking our voters away. If
For so many years now, the Re- fool the American people into think- we rename it, most Americans won’t
publicans have been scolding us ing he would lower their taxes and even notice it, especially if we tell the
whenever we try to call them rac- change America for the better. So media to keep it on the down low.
ist. They have been able to fight off far, all he has done is approved more Overall, we are having a success-
our accusations by reminding us that spending, which is going to raise their ful year. With a heavy majority in the
THEY were the ones who freed the taxes (shhh… don’t tell them, they’ll House and Senate, coupled with such
slaves, and claim that Martin Lu- never know), and cut spending for a progressive President, everything
ther King, Jr. was one of them. They silly things like the military. we have ever dreamed is possible.
bring up the fact that WE were the The next item on the agenda will Can we socialize America? Yes We
ones who instituted the Jim Crow be a new, taxpayer-funded healthcare Can!
laws, and that WE were the ones who
fought the hardest to prevent desegre-
gation. While true… those things are
not fair to bring up, because that hap-
Photo of the Month
pened a really long time ago. Now,
we finally get to
call THEM rac-
ists because they
didn’t vote for
His Majesty, nor
do they support
his agenda. And
since we elected
him, we no longer
have to feel bad
for all those ter-
rible actions we
took against Af-
rican-Americans;
we’re absolved!
Lord Obama has forgiven us and has
washed away our sins! And what
makes things even better is that Re-
publicans can’t say anything negative
about him, because if they do, we get
to accuse them of being racist (and
just plain mean).
Perhaps the most exciting part of
our new President is that, while we
were all scheming his way into the of-
fice, none of us realized just how very
progressive he actually was. He had
the American people (and most of us
for that matter) completely convinced
that he was a middle-of-the-road Dem-
ocrat. After Bush, we were content
with that. But since He has been in-
augurated… well, let’s just say we’ve
been tickled to death with Him. He
is even more liberal and pliable than
THE PURDUE REVIEW March, 2009 Page 10THE PU

CPAC 2009: The Conservative Underground

By Brian Whittaker
bwhittak@purdue.edu
What better way to revive the spir-
it of the conservative movement than
to bring our nation’s most respected
conservatives under one roof? The
Conservative Political Action Con-
ference (CPAC) flooded the Omni-
Shoreham Hotel beyond capacity
with more than 8,700 conservatives
from around the world. Yes, even Eu-
ropeans flew across the Atlantic be-
cause they couldn’t miss out on the
opportunity to soak up the excitement
in the air in Washington, DC.
From Tom Tancredo and Ron
Paul to Mitt Romney and Newt Gin-
grich, the list of political speakers
was enough to make even the most
passive conservative giddy as a gov-
ernment welfare leech at an Obama
speech. Where else could you strike
up a conversation with Bay Buch-
anan and then sneak a “hello” to Ron
Paul?
Not to be outdone, the leaders of
the conservative movement who don’t
hold public office drew the largest
crowds at the conference. Attendees
waited for hours, either in line or in
the seats they snagged hours earlier,
to listen to the motivating and force-
ful words of conservative greats like
Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin.
On Saturday, February 28 at 5:40
pm, Rush Limbaugh was led onto the
stage by the song that intro’s his radio
show, “My City Was Gone” by the
Pretenders. Limbaugh stood in front
of a cheering – no – screaming audi-
ence of more than 8,000 people for
his “first address to the nation.”
Limbaugh’s words of optimism
and go-get-em-ness echoed through
the great halls of CPAC as though a
voice of the great American presi-
dents of the past was standing before
us.
From Rick Santelli’s Tea Parties to
the utter lack of Republican support
for the current administration’s poli-
cies, the conservative movement was,
at that moment, strapped to the tip of
a rocket ready to launch to unimagi-
nable heights.
But it was Rush Limbaugh who lit
the fuse. It was Rush Limbaugh who
spoke the final words that awoke the
sleeping giant of America, the silent
majority.
The self-proclaimed “All-know-
ing, all-seeing, all-everything, Maha
Rushie” broke the levy when he pro-
claimed, “I hope Obama fails,” to
more than 5.7 million TV viewers
watching his “first address to the na-
tion” from home.
As I exited Rush’s speech, I
stumbled into the emerging YouTube
powerhouse, Zo, better known as
MauchoSauce. MauchoSauce’s after-
CPAC video mentioned that he ran
into Michelle Malkin “and she was
like, ‘Hey Zo!’ and I was like ‘She
knows my name!’”
Besides his inability to stay cool
in front of Malkin, Zo’s comment
made me realize that there is no limit
to the potential of each person in this
patriotic, American and conservative
movement.
Even Obama’s attempts to run our
country into the ground are no match
for the power of ingenuity and pas-
sion for freedom that lies within each
of us. Now is the time to answer the
call to defend our liberty.

Rush Limbaugh
Brian & Macho Sauce “First address to the Nation”
Page 10THE PURDUE REVIEW
Codes...
From Page 1
Purdue University attempts to satisfy
both of these goals through means of
speech codes.
The Foundation for Individual
Rights and Education (FIRE) does ex-
tensive research on the speech codes
of various universities. The mission
of this organization is to “defend and
sustain individual rights at America’s
colleges and universities.” According
to FIRE’s Director of Speech Code
Research, Samantha Harris, Purdue
University does not uphold their stu-
dents’ First Amendment rights. “FIRE
gives Purdue a red-light rating, which
means that we believe the university
is prohibiting a substantial amount of
“According to FIRE’s Director of
Speech Code Research, Samantha
Harris, Purdue University does
not uphold their students’ First
Amendment rights.”
speech that is protected by the First
Amendment.” FIRE also gives red-
light ratings to many other public
universities, as well as most private
universities.
As a public university, Purdue is
legally obligated to uphold its stu-
dents’ First Amendment rights. Ac-
cording to Purdue’s Bill of Student
Rights, “It is the right of every stu-
dent to exercise freely full rights as a
citizen.” Purdue University must al-
low its students to voice their opinion
in whatever manner possible unless it
implicates a breach of a legal barrier.
The Purdue University administration
crosses a legal barrier of their own in
several crucial instances through their
various speech codes.
Through use of pseudo linguistic
loopholes, Purdue’s speech codes
directly violate student rights to free-
dom of speech and expression. Rath-
er than using legally defined terms, or
even terms defined by the university
itself, the speech code contains broad
words, which may be construed in
any way the University administra-
March, 2009 Page 11
tion may desire.
For example, Purdue’s student con-
“There isn’t really a science behind
the process”, admitted Dean Mitten.
Sale, similar to the one held by the
Conservative Coalition for American
duct regulation states that the govern- Samantha Harris pointed out the Values (CCAV) just recently. An Af-
ing body of the university “prohibits unconstitutionality in the process, firmative Action Bake Sale is a bake
any lewd, indecent, or obscene con- and explained why it ought to be sale in which the prices of the goods
duct or expression.” The only adjec- eradicated. “The reality is that most reflect the race of students. While
tive in this regulation, which contains degrading or demeaning speech-- Caucasian males are charged $1 for a
any legal meaning, is the word “ob- no matter how deplorable we may cookie, African American men would
scene.” Obscene has a specific legal find it--is still protected by the First be charged $.50. Price differences at
meaning, which does not fall into the Amendment.” Leaving a matter such the bake sale are set to reflect the in-
category of protected speech. That as free speech up to an administrative justice of Affirmative Action. Soon
particular definition however has official rather than the Constitution after the Northwestern’s bake sale
been defined by the Supreme Court as is a serious flaw. Purdue University opened, it was closed by the admin-
only those depictions of sexual con- has a moral and legal obligation to istration and condemned as a sale
duct that “taken as a whole, appeal protect our First Amendment rights. that “was offensive and spread anti-
to the prurient interest in sex, which While we may be in a better posi- minority propaganda.”
portray sexual conduct in a patently tion than many private universities, We can see clearly that what is
offensive way, and which, can be we still cannot become complacent. done in the name of civility and fair-
taken as a whole, do not have serious We must hold the administration ac- ness can often lead to injustice. While
literary, artistic, political, or scien- countable in its violation of our First the Purdue administration may have
tific value” (Miller V. California, 413 Amendment rights. the best intentions in mind whilst
U.S. 15 (1973)). Although it is apparent that the creating and enforcing their speech
In laymen terms, university does not completely up- codes, they must come back to earth
any use of public hold our first amendment rights to and remember that we are citizens
sex is legally con- free speech and expression, we can of the United States of America be-
sidered obscene. sigh with relief when looking at the fore we are Purdue students. Perhaps,
That being said, speech codes of other schools, even the reminder we send every football
either this clause in our own Big Ten. In November game isn’t enough. I Am An Ameri-
misuses the word 2003, the College Republicans of can. Try to find the intention behind
obscene, or it is Northwestern University decided that statement.
utterly redundant to hold an Affirmative Action Bake
in the additional
use of the words
“lewd” and “inde-
cent”.
Unlike ob-
scene, the words
“lewd” and “indecent” do not have
a specific legal definition. “Without
a legal or university definition, these
words can be construed to mean al-
most anything, including expression “
with significant social value”, said
Harris. There’s certainly something
to be said about the subjectivity that
is applied to the enforcement and ex-
ecution of said speech codes.
When asked what actions the “
administration would have taken
against the perpetrator of the “F**k
Obama” graffiti that appeared on the
tree outside the Class of 1950 Lec-
ture Hall in November, Dean Mitten
replied, “Well aside from vandalism,
we would have to look at the indi-
viduals’ intention. Intentions are im-
portant and they must be taken into
account. The student could genuinely
hate black people and had the intent
to show it. Or they could have had
the intention of expressing hatred for
President Obama.” If you’re read-
ing this and think that this process of
evaluating an action is subjective; I
would say you are absolutely correct.
THE PURDUE REVIEW
Jenga...
From Page 16
pendent on how well their company
performs.
Even assuming there is a situation
where a company on Main Street is
completely separate in every way
from Wall Street, the issue of incen-
tive for growth still exists. Every
single one of the big businesses on
Wall Street was, at one time, one or
more small businesses. These compa-
nies have passed the test of time and
succeeded where many others have
failed. They have grown to the point
where they are able to raise money by
selling a share of ownership in their
company. At this point, they are now
being called greedy for pursuing their
own interests. For many small busi-
nesses on Main Street, it would be a
dream-come-true should they grow
to this point. But the federal govern-
ment, while promoting the pursuit
of self-interest by Main Street, is
openly demonizing the same practice
by Wall Street. In going after the big
businesses and corporations on Wall
Street, the government is spreading a
dangerous message: there is a moral
March, 2009 Page 12THE PU
limit to success. Contrary to the President’s belief,
The foundations of free enterprise Main Street is built on Wall Street.
the bottom has been too greedy. He
is then trying to place these supports
are built on the ability to prosper by The fibers of commerce that flow on the upper levels (Main Street) to
those who work to do so. In the Dec- through our economy connect every- strengthen that area. In the process,
laration of Independence, Thomas one from the small business with three the foundation gets weak and shaky,
Jefferson referred to this God-given employees to the corporation that em- with gaping holes where there once
right as “the ploys thousands. was economic strength. The top
Pursuit of Hap- There is no way blocks are dependent on the base
piness.” This did “In the game, a collapse to stimulate one blocks, and with prosperity being
not mean that without helping taken away, the base cannot keep sup-
there should be porting the structure. And, just like in
no government
simply means the end the other, and no
way to punish any game of Jenga, there will be an
intervention one without hurt- eventual collapse if Obama continues
whatsoever in
of the game. In our ing the other. The on this path of redistributing wealth.
business. This The good news is that our econo-
profound state- economy, however, a President is act-
ing on his own my is not the actual game of Jenga. In
ment does, how- misguided beliefs that game, a tower is only rebuilt after
ever, mean that collapse could signal that the poor are a collapse. In our economy, however,
businesses any- oppressed by the we have the ability and the capac-
where (which are the beginning of a new rich, and they can ity to fill in the holes and strengthen
run by individu- only be helped the tower. The American people are
als) have every Great Depression, that by government resilient, and the American spirit
right to freely intervention. The is resourceful. As long as we have
pursue their own of the Era of Obama.” problem is that freedom, the American people will
prosperity. There he cannot punish rebuild the economy to everything
was no limita- Wall Street and it was before, and then some. This
tion on the pursuit of happiness in improve Main Street at the same time cannot happen, however, if people
the Declaration for Wall Street. The and is thus playing a game of Jenga are deceived into the class-warfare
Founders knew that freedom from with our economy. mentality of “Wall Street versus Main
governmental oppression was neces- President Obama is attempting to Street”.
sary for their idea of the pursuit of remove the base blocks (Wall Street)
happiness: capitalism. of this Jenga tower because he feels
Page 12THE PURDUE REVIEW March, 2009 Page 13
THE PURDUE REVIEW
Education Bubble Bobble
By Josh Teasdale
josht@purduereview.com
Over the last century, government
has grown to provide a dizzying ar-
ray of programs and services to the
American people. Welfare, Medicare,
Medicaid, Social Security, and dozens
of other programs seek to make better
the lives of millions, and increase op-
portunities and potential for individu-
als. Regardless of the effectiveness
or wisdom of government programs,
“Providing health care for ‘free’
may result in an increased strain
on the tax system, not to mention
the rationing of said care.”
there are always negative effects on
the free market when government be-
comes involved in providing a public
service. These effects vary greatly.
Mandating that employers pay their
employees more through the mini-
mum wage may result in employers
being forces to pay fewer employees.
Providing health care for “free” may
result in an increased strain on the tax
system, not to mention the rationing
of said care. Whether desirable or not,
true free markets have a tendency to
reach an equilibrium where services
and goods are provided in an efficient
way. dom of government programs which
Over the last 2 years, we have wit-
nessed the burst of a housing bubble
that has had such a drastic domino
effect that it has paralyzed our entire
economy. Housing prices grew much
faster than inflation, and became
overvalued. When people couldn’t
afford to pay their mortgages and
began to default on their payments,
banks were deprived of their capital
and insurance companies were forced
to pay out billions to cover losses.
There are many in the conservative
movement who believe this bubble
and burst sequence has been the re-
sult of too much government, not too
little. By subsidizing mortgages and
providing regulations which, at very
least, encourage banks to make loans
to less than credit-worthy individuals,
housing prices ballooned with the in-
March, 2009
crease in the number of buyers. This
was only sustainable for a limited
amount of time. As people defaulted,
housing prices dropped. The decrease
in payments on mortgages and the
sudden drop in housing prices have
rendered worthless the mortgage se-
curities held by investors. This story
is much more complex, however. As
many conservatives and economists
see it, the current economic crisis can
be boiled down to the collapse of a
government scheme to help people
get homes.
There are a
great number of
people who will
disagree with this
analysis. How-
ever, just as we
are seeing the col-
lapse of the hous-
ing market, there
is another bubble
burbling up. In the
United States, as
housing prices skyrocketed radically
faster than the pace of inflation, so
too has the price of higher education.
Student loans are even more heav-
ily subsidized than mortgages. It is
hard to attack government programs
which seek to send kids to college,
just as it is hard to attack government
programs which seek to get people
homes. However, the effect of both
of these efforts has been the same:
unsustainable increases in prices.
We don’t need to have a debate
over the housing crisis in the United
States to determine the long term wis-
attempt to make things “cheaper” for
people. Studying the higher educa-
tion system in the United States will
provide us with an answer. Despite
the cost of education, the increase
in lifetime earnings still makes up
for it. The value of a bachelor’s de-
gree, however, has been decreasing in
value steadily over the years, and es-
sentially now holds the worth of what
a high school diploma did several
decades ago. Soon a master’s degree
will replace a bachelor’s as the mini-
mum bar of what is required to get
a good job. Just as mortgage securi-
ties lost their value as housing prices
slumped, securities issued by banks
for student loans will lose their value
as the earning potential of gradates
decreases.
There has been little research done
to determine how student loan secu-
rities are distributed throughout our
economy. If they are packaged and
insured in a way similar to mortgage
based securities, it is easy to see how
an increase in defaults on student
loans could trigger a run similar to
the run on mortgage based securities
which we are seeing. This becomes
increasingly likely as students must
pay more for their education but make
less once they enter into “the real
world.” It is entirely possible we will
not have to wait long to see the effects
of this bubble. As the unemployment
rate increases, it will be new work-
ers and graduates who will be with-
out jobs. The effect of this economic
downturn on graduates with student
loans could be devastating. Just as a
lack of availability of credit has led
to a decrease in the value of homes, a
similar decrease will prevent students
from being able to afford college.
There is, however, a large differ-
ence between housing and education
in this context: education cannot be
foreclosed on and taken away. This
is, of course, good news for gradu-
ates but very bad news for companies
and investors who underwrite student
loans. While it may be hard to sympa-
“While tuition prices may very
well decrease if there is sudden
lack of credit for students, the
VALUE of a diploma will actually
increase as there are fewer people
graduating from college.”
thize with large investors, it is impos-
sible to deny that when investments
lose value on a large scale, many
more people are hurt than just a single
investor. When there is a decrease in
demand for housing, home price drop
and real estate looses value. While tu-
ition prices may very well decrease if
there is sudden lack of credit for stu-
dents, the VALUE of a diploma will
actually increase as there are fewer
people graduating from college. This
Page 14THE PU
difference between the demand for
a good and that goods value means
that it is unlikely a vicious cycle will
devolve in a theoretical education
bubble burst like we have seen in
housing.
For this reason, if government
remains uninvolved, an equilibrium
will develop following a crash in
student loans. Unfortunately, the cur-
rent administration has no intention
of staying on the sidelines. President
Obama is proposing universal fund-
ing for everyone who wishes to go to
college. While this sounds very nice,
it ignores the simple truth of educa-
tion: when everyone has it, it is worth
nothing. By giving everyone in the
United States a bachelor’s degree,
President Obama will essentially be
making the certificates worthless.
Equally worrisome is that current in-
vestments in higher education will be
wiped out. Such a crash in the value
of investments could easily trigger a
new credit crisis in America as col-
lege graduates make little more than
high school graduates, and are unable
to pay down the loans they entered
into while in school.
We need a more nuanced approach
to education in America than to sim-
ply send everyone
straight from high
school to college.
There are other
opportunities for
people which
can open up with
training in tech-
nical schools or
other opportuni-
ties. Sending ev-
eryone to college
will not help ev-
eryone get better
jobs, for there is
a limited supply
of jobs for people
with a bachelor’s
degree. More-
over, there are plenty of jobs which
need to be done which require educa-
tion that does not happen in a college
classroom. By ignoring these facts
and implementing a universal college
education policy, the US Government
would be hurting both the value of a
bachelor’s degree and perhaps even
the economy as a whole.
Page 14THE PURDUE REVIEW March, 2009 Page 15

CAMPUS DIVERSIONS - Is It Spring Break Yet?

Stickey Wicket by Stewart Simpson

Mallard Fillmore by Bruce Tinsley

Sudoku
Easy

Fiendish

Kakuro instructions: The object is to fill all empty

squares using numbers 1 to 9 so the sum of each horizon-
tal block equals the clue on its left, and the sum of each
vertical block equals the clue on its top. In addition, no
number may be used in the same block more than once.

Sudoku instructions: The object is to fill all empty

squares so that the numbers 1 to 9 appear exactly once in
Sudokus provided by http://www.sudokuoftheday.com each row, column and 3x3 box.
THE PURDUE REVIEW
Wall Street vs. Main Street - A Game of Economic Jenga
By Aaron Anspaugh
aarona@purduereview.com
The rules for the popular game
Jenga are very simple. Remove
blocks from the bottom, put them
on top, and try not to be the one who
makes the tower collapse. This game
involves skill and a bit of luck, but
it always ends with the pieces being
stacked again. Imagine, however, a
different scenario where the tower is
not a game. Imagine a once-strong
tower now riddled with holes. Imag-
ine panic as the tower swings and the
players try to get out of the game.
Now, imagine a new leader removing
blocks from the already shaky bottom
of the tower and attempting to place
them on the top.
As you may have guessed, this
new leader is the President, Barack
Obama, and the tower is our econ-
omy. This tower is built with a base
of strong, innovative corporations
and businesses which are willing to
take risks with big money. The upper
level is made up of small businesses
that depend on the foundation of the
base in order to survive. The bottom
could be described as “Wall Street”
and the top as “Main Street.” Presi-
dent Obama’s policies mandating
redistribution of wealth are attempt-
ing to take money from the “rich”
and give to the “poor”. Anyone who
has played Jenga before knows what
happens when the bottom blocks are
taken away and the structure gets
top-heavy. In the game, a collapse
simply means the end of the game.
In our economy, however, a collapse
could signal the beginning of a new
Great Depression, that of the Era of
Obama.
Many myths have been presented
by politicians that reinforce the idea
that our economy is constructed of
two separate and competing entities:
1.) the rich, greedy, big businesses
that are on Wall Street; and 2.) the
simple, hard-working businesses
on Main Street. These two areas of
the economy are treated completely
separately, with little or no effect on
one another. In fact, some politicians
have even promoted the idea that the
success of one street has a negative
impact on the other street, and vice
versa.
Throughout the course of the
recent elections, many candidates
spoke of the need to focus on helping
March, 2009
“Main Street” instead of Wall Street.
Not only are these politicians using
populism to gain support, but they
are attempting to create the non-ex-
istent camps of which they speak by
polarizing Americans. This attempt
at an “us-versus-them” mentality is
meant to both demonize the target
group and to eliminate individuality
of thought in those who are sucked
into the viewpoint. Everyone likes to
fit in, and there is no easier way to
sway massive amounts of people than
to focus on a common enemy. In this
case, the enemy is Wall Street.
President Obama has made it clear
that he loves Main Street. He has, on
several occasions, discussed how im-
portant Main Street is to the economy
of America. On March 3rd, President
Obama stated, while discussing the
trillion-dollar stimulus bill, that “al-
ready, its impact is being felt across
this nation. Hardworking families
can now worry a little less about next
month’s bills.” Clearly, the President
feels like he is really helping out
Main Street right now.
This can be contrasted with his
negative view of Wall Street. On
January 31st, a few weeks before the
stock market dropped to levels not
Page 16
seen since 1997, President Obama, in
reference to Wall Street, stated, “The
American people will not excuse or
tolerate such arrogance and greed.”
President Obama has made it very
clear that the ones responsible for the
current economic situation, other than
former President Bush, are those on
Wall Street. As of Friday, March 6th,
the Dow Jones Industrial Average
was at 6626.94, which is down more
than 30% from what it was on Elec-
tion Day (9326.04). There have been
consistent and significant drops as
President Obama has released more
of his plans (tax increases, national-
izing industries, deficit spending).
In this midst of these historic drops,
Obama is still more concerned with
“Main Street.”
The critical mistake in President
Obama’s view of the situation is his
lack of understanding of how the na-
tional economy works. There is no
elite group of rich, greedy, fat guys
that comprises an extremely evil seg-
ment of America called “Wall Street”.
There is no group of downtrodden,
hard-working, underdogs in America
called “Main Street.” There is no hor-
rendous oppression of “Main Street”
by “Wall Street”, and there is no
Bush-era government conspiracy to
promote “Wall Street” and discourage
“Main Street.” These misconceptions
have been spread by those attempting
to oversimplify a complex situation,
and to polarize people based on class
envy.
While there may be some good
in identifying “Wall Street” as those
companies who trade stock of their
company publicly, and identifying
“Main Street” as the small businesses
of America, the idea that these two
groups are separate and unconnected
is completely absurd. According to a
report of equity and bond ownership
in 2008 (conducted by the Securities
Industry and Financial Markets As-
sociation), 47% of American house-
holds have some sort of investments.
These are only the people who are
DIRECTLY involved with Wall
Street. This number does not include
those who might otherwise be by af-
fected by the success or failure of
these companies. Not all employees
who work for these businesses may
have healthcare or retirement in eq-
uities, but their jobs are certainly de-
»»See “Jenga...” - pg. 12