Vote YES on the ASM Constitution

Believe it or not, there is an election today. A student election. About everyone's "favorite" topic: ASM. I know, I know. They did a terrible job (once again) of letting the student body know that there was even an issue, let alone an election. But that is neither here nor there. The fact of the matter is: you have to vote today and you have to vote YES for the new ASM constitution. Here's why:

Voting YES for the new ASM constitution does the following:

Gives conservatives a better chance of holding prominent positions in the student government through a student body presidency

Makes it harder for liberals to raise segregates fees beyond fiscally responsible levels

Allows student government to better focus its resources on campaigns and issues that are actually relevant to students

There is a group at the UW who would have you believe that the New ASM Constitution is bad for the university. What do they mean? They mean that the new constitution allows room for a president and they're afraid that someone more moderate or conservative than they are would be elected to the position. This group is a band of far-left organizations and students, ranging from the Campus Anti-War Network to the International Socialist Organization. The group is headed by the typical leftist front kids Kyle Szarzynski and Chynna Haas. Everyone else supports it (Badger Herald and Daily Cardinal included), and YOU SHOULD TOO!

Need to know how to vote? It's really not that hard. Here's how:

1) CLICK HERE
2) VOTE YES
3) punch in your STUDENT ID
4) pat yourself on the back because you just voted!

That's all--happy voting! Remember the online voting through ASM is up from this morning until tomorrow night but please, please, please vote early so you don't forget! And remind your friends to do the same!

For a nitty-gritty look at the new constitution, what it does, and who supports it and doesn't check out the latest post on the Critical Badger.

I hate to do this to you again, BH...

Okay. For the most part, this was a great article was really good. Non-partisan. Got to the point. Think it could have been placed better than the 3rd page, but I'm not complaining. What I am complaining about is this:

Reps. Bill Kramer, R-Waukesha, Rich Zipperer, R-Pewaukee, Leah Vukmir, R-Wauwatosa, and Brett David, R-Oregon, introduced the proposals at a press conference Tuesday morning.

Brett David? Who is that? I know a Brett Davis, R-Oregon...

I told the EIC around noon today about the mistake and it still hasn't been fixed online. Way to go, Badger Herald. Maybe the copy edit team should learn the names of prominent state representatives. And the news reporters, too, for that matter.

best city for bikers just got better!

Madison has already been named the best city in America for those who ride a bike. We've got more bike trails than we know what to do with, for goodness sake! Now, in an effort to keep bikers safe from evil motorists, we have this. I like the first two comments on the article. Is this seriously necessary? This is common sense. If you open your car door without looking and hurt some innocent biker, you're an idiot. If you open your car door without looking and some guy comes and clips it off as he drives past you, you're an idiot. It's as simple as that. This is right on par with wanting to ban drive-thrus and plastic bags, as appeared on Drudge this summer.

Madison, Wisconsin... what can I say?

What I Learned In Class Today

Today in my comm arts 262 class we were talking about how visuals are used rhetorically to provide for arguments. We discussed, among other things, two of these such visuals. One, we were told stands for "eternal American optimism and hope" and gives a sense of happiness to all who see it; "everyone knows that's what it means" we were told. Here's what that visual looks like:

The next visual we were lectured on we were told "alone stands for nothing" and that's it only holds any meaning because it mimics a posed photograph from WWII. That visual looks like this:


Please tell me I'm not the only one who senses something wrong with that.

To be told that the Obama "O" signifies the hope and eternal optimism of the American people but that seeing firefighters raising our nation's pride and glory unharmed out of the rubble that resulted from the worst attack on our country's soil is meaningless is, in my humble opinion, a boldfaced lie.

To me, the Obama "O" symbolizes a narcissist who is really good at saying what you want to hear but not following through on his promises to "reach across the aisle". The second photograph symbolizes hope and eternal optimism. Thoughts?

Press One for English

I came across this video and could relate with most of the video. Good lyrics, but I personally didn't feel for the musical talent and the video was a little cheesy.

1 part "Anti-Bush," + 1 part "terrible journalism" = Requirement to be published in the Badger Herald

Its amusing every time I flip to the editorial section of the badger herald and scan the titles I am guaranteed to find at least two anti-Bush diatribes, one love session on President Obama, and every now and then one piece on how Republicans lost their way. Scanning through Thursday of Fridays edition I came across this gem of a title "Fixing America's torture debacle" and just had to read more. "Twenty-five is the number of detainees left in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba" AHNNNNN. I don't know which is more inaccurate, my attempted spelling of the buzzer sound, or the opening line and basis of this piece which probably should have been in the comics section. So the basis of the article, "over 95 percent of the supposed worst of the worst were in fact innocent...." lets dig a little bit deeper, and do a bit of actual fact checking which I believe some people in the world call actual journalism. 420 of 775 have been released, being released certainly did not mean these people were innocent, but rather not enough evidence or they were too low value to charge and keep. Some of these people, their home countries refused to allow them back, why is that you ask....oh because they don't want to take back dangerous terrorists. 270 to 200 remain at gitmo, the rest were sent back to their home country to be jailed, they were not sent out of gitmo because they were innocent. Also interesting how you fail to mention once in your piece the number of "innocent" prisoners freed who have returned to terrorism, I guess that number isn't very important... you say in your comment on the piece that the figure was disputed so you held it out, how about the oh-so innocent Abu Sayyaf al-Shihri. He was in gitmo than released, lets send him an apology letter, should I mail it to his house or the al qaeda HQ in Yemen which HE NOW RUNS.

I was curious as to why there was no retraction or at least change of the "only 25 left" figure on the online version, and then it dawned on me: that was the basis of the argument, without it, there could be no argument and surely the piece would fall apart. It is interesting to note that the author in the comment section on the online version states he got this number from an AP article.....A) I don't believe you, the AP has far higher journalistic standards than we do here. And B) If you followed Gitmo in the least bit you would surely know there are more than 25 terrorists being held there. So Badger Herald, time to take this piece off the website, actually know what leave it, it is a great show of the standards you guys hold yourself to.

Never forgotten

It's really too bad that the second G.W. stepped into his helicopter and flew away that he was instantly shoved out of Washington by the media...I don't know about you guys but I feel like that really says a lot about the level of respect our nation is willing to dish out.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2009/01/alone-among-net.html