T h e P u r d u e PR Meetings

Review
Wednesdays
8:00 pm
BRNG 1222
.com
A JOURNAL OF CONSERVATIVE THOUGHT AND OPINION purduereview

w w w.purduerev i ew. co m
On the Inside

SMOKING 3 PR Editorial
Apparantely WE are the
racists now.

BAN 8 Affirmative Action

Didn’t MLK Jr. dream
about people NOT being
judged by color?

11 Jesus, a Socialist?
Michael Moore’s com-
ments have just gone
Biblical.

Purdue Officials Consider A

Campus Wide Ban On Smoking
How will it affect you? | pg. 10 12 Media War
It’s Barry versus Glenn
as the administration
tries to blacklist Fox
News

15 Diversions
Fun things for your not
so fun classes! Don’t
get caught with a lame
costume this year.
Volume 7, Issue 2 October, 2009
2 October, 2009 The Purdue ReviewThe Pur

Letter From the Managing Editor

Join The Purdue Review It is a dangerous time to be known as a conservative. The White House
has waged a holy war on Fox News decrying them as “opinion journal-
The Purdue Review is looking for staff writers, columnists, ism masquerading as news”. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel
photographers, section editors, copy editors, layout editors, and clearly stated that conservatives in the media and entertainment (radio
web designers. entertainment) want nothing but to see America fail. Press Secretary Rob-
ert Gibbs went further by calling on media outlets to join the administra-
All Majors Welcome tion in declaring that Fox is “not a news organization.” Rush Limbaugh has
If you’re interested in joining the Purdue Review, please con- been denied a personal bid to own the St. Louis Rams on the grounds that
he is too “divisive” (or openly conservative) to be a part of a private enter-
tact the Editor in Chief, Jay Wood at editor@purduereview.com.
tainment industry. Legendary radio host and conservative patriot Michael
Savage was placed on Britain’s permanent ban list with several murders
and killer simply for expressing his conservative values.
Conservatives are being attacked from every which direction simply
T h e P u r d u e

Review
because of their views. We’ve come appallingly close to being denied the
right to freedom of press, the entitlement to pursue personal careers, and
the ability to even travel across the Atlantic. We must not stand idly by
while individuals are being persecuted and singled out because they be-
lieve in the conservative values that this country was founded on.
Jay Wood, Editor in Chief We at The Purdue Review understand the threat that is posed. We know
Scott Sowers, Publisher that we have allies in freedom of speech, and opponents in policy. Never
the less, we will continue to serve as the voice of freedom and conserva-
Rohan Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Managing Editor tism on our campus. We will not be “stomped out”, nor will we sacrifice
Aaron Anspaugh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Features Editor
Chris Ellison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State/Local Editor your freedom of speech. May our voice be that of logic and good judgment
Jordan Hebbe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . National Politics Editor so that we will remain confident in our cause, and steadfast in our effort.
Dave Siukola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Layout Editor
Amanda Thayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editor at Large Rohan Johnson
Jennifer Haywood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer
Tyler Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer
Bhuvi Nirudhoddi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer
Morgan Ikerd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer editor@purduereview.com
Kristin Patras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff Writer
Ashley Hobbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant Publisher
Dirk Schmidt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant Publisher
Supriya Dabholkar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PR Director Subscribe to the Purdue Review
Stewart Simpson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic Artist
Rebecca Dirkse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic Artist
Andrew Nguyen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Photographer The Purdue Review is funded completely by donations and
Greg McCoy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Photographer advertisements. We receive no funding from Purdue University,
Lauren Trancik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Photographer the Republican Party, or any political organization for that mat-
Sean Horoho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Copy Editor
ter. Without the generous donations from readers like you, the
Anne Charlton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Copy Editor
Purdue Review would not be possible.

If you are interested in supporting The Purdue Review and

Board of Directors: Nathan Arnold, Chair our cause, please consider making a financial donation. Dona-
Chase Slaughter, Adam Rusch, Jeff Schultz, Mary Sparks,
David Bridges, Jan Payne, Vicki Burch tions can be mailed or made online. Checks should be made
out to the Purdue Review. Mail subscriptions are free and can
Mission Statment: The editorial staff at The Purdue Review will utilize the medium be ordered on our website by contacting the Publisher.
of print to entertain, educate and enlighten the student body at Purdue University
as well as the entire Greater Lafayette community.
www.purduereview.com
Disclaimer: The views expressed within these pages are the views held express-
ly by each respective writer. The opinions of these writers do not necessarily publisher@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- PO Box 931
sity Conservative Action Network (U-CAN). The first copy of this issue is free, at
distribution sites. For additional copies, contact the Publisher, Scott Sowers at Lafayette, IN 47902
editor@purduereview.com
ReviewThe Purdue Review October, 2009 3

Editorial – We are not racists!

Last month, former President Jimmy Carter announced “I think an overwhelming portion of the intense-
ly demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that
he’s African-American.” He claimed to have a special viewpoint on this anti-Obama racism since he is from
the South. President Carter’s statements reflect a general media assumption that always appears in stories:
conservatives are racist.
From the very beginning of Obama’s campaign for President, the media constantly brought race into
the picture. They went well beyond the usual “he could be the first black President” template, moving to
a viewpoint of “anyone who is against Obama is a racist.” Before the election even occurred, the media ar-
gued that if Obama didn’t win, it would prove America was a racist country. As the polls tightened close to
the election, a stunned Jack Cafferty of CNN stated, “Yet the polls remain close. Doesn’t make sense…unless
it’s race.”
As conservatives attempted to warn America about the extremist viewpoints of Barack Obama, even
attempts at rational persuasion were claimed to be racism. By definition, Obama is a socialist, that is, he
supports the government takeover and ownership of many vital industries. But even before the election,
the word “socialist” was said to be racist. Lewis Diuguid, of the Kansas City Star, attempted to tie the social-
ist label to anti-Civil Rights era politics, calling it “an old code word for black.” Never mind the fact that the
founder of the socialist theory was white, or that the first socialist/communist countries were in Europe
and then Asia, or that almost all socialist countries today are in Europe or Central America. Forget all of
that. Here is the template: Obama is black, and conservatives are racist, therefore “socialist” MUST be a
racist word.
This media viewpoint is applied to any and all news stories where a minority is involved. Conservatives
oppose Sonia Sotameyer for the Supreme Court because she believes the court should legislate from the
bench? They are racists. White cop arrests a black professor for unruly conduct? Must be racism. People
across the world are shocked that Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize for doing absolutely nothing? Clearly,
they are racists. No matter what the issue, as long as it involves a representative from any currently or
previously disadvantaged racial group, this old template is dusted off, reapplied, and sold to the public like
Christmas gifts from Goodwill.
Some media reporters are so good at the thought-crime detection that they can find racism even in
a mere 2 words. When Congressman Joe Wilson yelled out “You lie!” in opposition to Obama’s magical
healthcare speech, it did not matter that there were lies and inconsistencies strewn throughout Obama’s
message. Joe Wilson could not have been talking about the issues, according to Maureen Dowd. After the
outburst, she wrote “But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!” She does
admit that her assumption might not be fair, but her article went on to describe exactly why Joe Wilson is
a racist and isn’t just opposed to Obama on ideological grounds.
In his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke these famous words: “I have a
dream that 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.” Has this dream come true? As far as conservatives are con-
cerned, this dream is a reality. We have been looking past Obama’s race from Day 1 to see his dishonest,
power-hungry, and Marxist character. By continually bringing race into every single issue, it is the media
who is actually judging based on the color of skin, rather than the content of character.
HOPE
4 October, 2009
Peace Prizes Come Cheap These Days
By JAY WOOD
On October 9th, the Norwegian
Nobel Committee announced that
President Barack Obama was the
selection for this year’s Nobel Peace
Prize. The nomination process
ended February 1st, just 12 days
after the inauguration. Obama’s
selection for the award came as a
tremendous shock to many people.
According to the Nobel Committee,
Obama was chosen “for his extraor-
dinary efforts to strengthen inter-
national diplomacy and coopera-
tion between peoples.”
What did Obama accomplish to
be worthy of such praise? Did he
have any notable accomplishments
in the realm of international diplo-
macy as a community organizer or
as a state legislator? What were his
major achievements on the world
stage during his two active years
in the U.S. Senate or during the two
years he spent on the campaign
trail? What outstanding global
progress did he make during his
first 12 days as President?
In short, what did Obama do to
deserve this award? Why limit that
question to simply the Nobel Peace
Prize though? What did Obama do
to deserve the Presidency? The
answer to both of those questions
is nothing. How, out of 205 nomi-
nees, Barack Obama was the most
deserving of all will forever remain
a mystery. The names of the other
nominees remain a secret for 50
years. Certainly there were people
more deserving than Obama. What
about Rev. Rick Warren, Dr. Gordon
Klatt (the man who started Relay
for Life), and Tony Dungy? Are they
(and others like them) not more
deserving than Obama?
To be clear, the fact that Obama
is the third Democrat President or
Vice President to win the Nobel
Peace Prize this decade is not the
issue. This is not a matter of party
politics, nor is it an advocacy that
any particular conservative(s)
win the award. The simple fact is:
Barack Obama (in 2009) is unwor-
thy of that prize.
When the nomination process
concluded in February, the So-
“Awards are not meant to
be anticipatory. They are
supposed to be recognitions of
accomplishments already made.”
mali pirate incident had not yet
occurred. Captain Phillips’ rescue
by the Navy SEALS (no thanks to
Obama) didn’t happen until April.
When the nomination process con-
cluded, the North Korean hostage
incident had not yet occurred ei-
ther. It was in August that FORMER
President Bill Clinton secured the
release of the two American jour-
nalists (also no thanks to Obama).
What accomplishments did
Obama make on the world stage
before his nomination for the No-
bel Peace Prize? I remember two
in particular. During the campaign,
he drew a large crowd to hear him
speak at the Berlin Wall. That was a
big story. Also, his very first act as
President was to reverse the Global
Gag Rule, so that some of our tax
dollars are sent to pay for abor-
tions and abortion-related services
in foreign countries. Do either of
those make him a worthy of win-
ning the Nobel Peace Prize? No.
Obama has not ended the War
in Iraq, nor has he made major ef-
forts to help end the genocide in
Darfur. The man is presiding over
two wars and he does not appear
to be actively engaged in peace ef-
forts elsewhere. Since Obama has
no great diplomatic accomplish-
ments to speak of, it is likely that
his nomination for the Nobel Peace
Prize was made with the assump-
tion that by the time the award was
given, he would have something to
show for. That assumption did not
come true. This is not to say, how-
ever, that the President will be un-
worthy of the prize in the future.
Fast-forward to the end of the
Obama Presidency. Pretend that
Barack has ended the War in Iraq
and that conditions are stable
there; he has facilitated significant
ground being gained for peace be-
tween Israel and Palestine; he has
made efforts to improve relations
The Purdue ReviewThe Pur
between India and Pakistan; and
he has worked to denuclearize Iran
and North Korea. Pretend Obama
has done even one or two of those
things by the end of his tenure. If
he accomplished that, I would hand
him the award myself. In 2009,
however, President Obama has
done nothing to deserve the Nobel
Peace Prize.
Also, notice that he did not win
the Prize for Economic Sciences.
Although it is not officially a ‘Nobel’
Prize, a Prize for Economic Scienc-
es is awarded by Sveriges Riksbank
(Sweden’s central bank) in Alfred
Nobel’s memory. Obama is argu-
ably less qualified to win this award
than he is to win the Nobel Peace
Prize, which is saying something.
Seven months after the Obama
stimulus was enacted, 49 out of 50
states have lost jobs. The President
told us that the program would cre-
ate 3.5 million jobs. Instead, 2.7
million jobs have been lost (not
the change Americans hoped for).
Obama was only off by 6.2 mil-
lion. He did inherit the economic
mess, but by making it worse, it is
no wonder that he did not win the
Economic Sciences award!
Awards are not meant to be
anticipatory. They are supposed
to be recognitions of accomplish-
ments already made. What if sports
leagues gave out awards to people
who were only anticipated to suc-
ceed, but who did not actually de-
liver? Take the NFL for instance.
What if the NFL gave out awards
in this manner? The Super Bowl
See “Nobel...” on Pg. 5
ReviewThe Purdue Review
review of Capitalism: A Love Story
By KRISTIN PATRAS
With a mouthful of sarcasm and Surprisingly enough, the film actu-
both fists flying in the air, Michael ally has the potential to appeal to
Moore is on quite the rampage in more than just the typical Michael
his new film, Capitalism: A Love Moore super fan.
Story. Moore gleefully goes after Although Moore is infamous
any and all CEOs, corporations, pol- for having extremely liberal view-
iticians, judges, and media outlets points, Capitalism: A Love Story
that may have rubbed h i m exposes issues which could make
the wrong way anyone feel uneasy despite their
while simul- political alignment. Tax cheat Tim
taneously at- Geithner, Democrat Senator Chris
tempting to Dodd, Judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr.,
obliterate the and Judge Michael T. Conahan are
reputation of all front and center in Moore’s line
capital- of fire due to their completely
ism. unethical and frankly revolt-
ing actions. In addition,
Moore spends an exasper-
ating amount of time ex-
posing Bank of America,
American Express, AT&T,
and Walmart for their con-
niving attempts to rip us
off.
Moore also takes it upon
himself to aggravate the cor-
porations which recently re-
ceived billions in taxpayer
dollars for being epic fail-
ures. In one of the funniest
scenes of the entire film,
Moore makes his way to
Goldman Sachs, AIG, and
Citibank demanding the tax-
payer money they received
be returned. Whether he
was attempting to make a
citizen’s arrest of the board
of directors of AIG or tell-
ing them to drop the mon-
ey out the windows so
he could catch it, Moore
managed to slightly ir-
ritate the corporations
while, in return, giving
the entire audience a
little bit of satisfac-
tion.
Still, there are
plenty of reasons for
Moore’s stereotypi-
cal super fans to cel-
ebrate. Through-
out the film,
Moore managed to utter plenty of
outrageous statements about the
evils of capitalism, how one can’t
be a Christian and support capital-
ism, how the Constitution is actu-
ally anti-capitalist, and how virtu-
ally every problem in the world is
capitalism’s fault. Moore also man-
ages to make Ronald Reagan look
like the devil, and Barack Obama
like –for lack of a better term- God.
In addition, personal responsi-
bility was thrown out the window
and FDR’s “second bill of rights”
was praised. That bill states that
everyone has the right to a job,
food, clothing, recreation, a decent
home, adequate medical care, pro-
tection from economic fears, a good
education, and the right to be free
from unfair competition. In other
words, the government will take
care of you since you can’t take care
of yourself. It came across slightly
bizarre that Moore would choose
straight up socialism as the solu-
tion considering he just spent over
an hour convincing the audience
that the government was corrupt
and in bed with big businesses
Even with its socialist implica-
tions, Capitalism: A Love Story con-
Nobel...
From Pg 4
Champion for the 2009-2010 sea-
son could be the Tennessee Titans.
They were supposed to be good,
but have they actually shown that
this year? No! With the same token,
Jim Zorn could be the Coach of the
Year, Michael Crabtree could be the
Rookie of the Year, and superstar
Brady Quinn could be the MVP.
The fact that Obama was select-
ed as the winner of the Nobel Peace
Prize is degrading to past winners
who actually deserve the award.
It is one thing to give the prize to
people like Martin Luther King Jr.,
Eli Wiesel, and Mother Theresa.
Those past winners are almost uni-
versally recognized as being wor-
October, 2009 5
tains a vast amount of revealing in-
formation that individuals on both
sides of the aisle could appreciate.
The movie is shockingly a must see
– as long as you go with a clear (and
correct) understanding of what
capitalism truly is and what it is
not.
Michael Moore
asks a Wall Street
professional, “Do
you have any sug-
gestions for me?”
The Wall Street
Professional re-
torts, “Don’t make
any more movies.”
thy of the honor bestowed them.
However, we now live in a world
where Barack Obama is a Nobel
Peace Prize winner and Mohandas
Gandhi is not.
Despite being nominated five
times, Gandhi never received the
award (posthumous awards are
prohibited by the statues). In 1948,
following Gandhi’s death, the com-
mittee opted not to give out the
award that year, stating that “there
was no suitable living candidate”.
Apparently, this year’s committee
found Barack Obama to be a suit-
able candidate. The mentality be-
hind such a decision will forever
remain a mystery.
 6 October, 2009
Not Evil, Just Wrong
The True Cost of Global Warming Hysteria
Al Gore and his posse of environ-
mental extremist thugs would like
nothing more than for you to fall
for their alarmist notion that hu-
mankind is the cause of all natural
disasters, and ultimately the reason
for all woes that one may experi-
ence. In contrast, Phellim McAleer
and Ann McElhinney would like
nothing more than to prove to you
that Al Gore is wrong, and they will
prove it to you through a similar
means of communication: a docu-
mentary.
“Not Evil, Just Wrong” is a doc-
umentary created by the two re-
nowned producers as a means
of exposing the flawed science
and “sky-is-falling” rhetoric of Al
Gore’s documentary “An Inconve-
nient Truth”. The documentary fo-
cuses on the numerous errors in
Gore’s facts which are being spread
throughout class rooms across the
country. Such facts include the in-
famous “hockey stick” graph that
attributed a supposedly unique
burst of growth in the 20th century.
The documentary also rebukes the
myth that 1998 and 2006 were the
hottest years in the United States –
stating boldly and factually that the
hottest year was 1934, and the hot-
test decade was the 1930’s – when
By ROHAN JOHNSON
there were half as many people, and
there were no SUV’s. Some of you
agriculture majors may remember
hearing about some devastating
droughts in the 1930’s throughout
the United States. Oh yeah, those
who don’t buy into global warming
can also use science.
“Not Evil Just Wrong” ad-
dresses many issues that concern
Indiana families and students of
Purdue University. The documen-
tary warns that several industries
that rely on fossil fuels will be de-
stroyed if the government imposes
extensive regulations on industries
that Al Gore claims are single hand-
edly destroying our world. The
film breaks down the schism and
explains how small towns like Ve-
vay, Indiana could become bastions
of unemployment. Not only is “Not
Evil, Just Wrong” factual and re-
vealing, but it is also very relevant
to our lives here in Indiana. In the
midst of a time of economic toil and
recession, environmentalists are
trying to push policies that would
stick a decisive knife in the back
of American industry. McAleer
and McElhinney are not diffident
in their expression of such facts.
“On the global warming alarmist’s
side, the so called ‘solution’ means
those who can least afford it will
have to pay more for their energy
needs. It will increase costs for
business driving more jobs out of
America during one of the biggest
recessions in living memory. The
wealthy will not suffer. They can
afford to pay more for their energy.
But the poor in the developed and
developing world will suffer enor-
mous damage.”
The directors also bring up an
extremely fascinating point con-
cerning the formerly heated debate
of DDT. DDT (dichlorodiphenyltri-
chloroethane) is a synthetic pesti-
cide which had been used on crops
for nearly a century. The pesticide
greatly helped control the mosqui-
The Purdue ReviewThe Pur
to population as well as the growth
of other invasive species of insects.
Thus, the pesticide played a major
role in culling the spread of Malaria
and other diseases carried by said
insects. In 1970, the U.S. National
Academy of Sciences estimated
that DDT saved more than 500 mil-
lion lives during the time it was
widely used. Sounds like a great
chemical! So why did we stop using
it? The environmentalists decided
that it was having too much of a
negative impact on the plants and
wildlife, specifically birds. Thanks
to similar use of scare tactics as
Al Gore’s, Rachel Carson in a book
entitled “Silent Spring” was able to
scare the public into banning the
use of DDT. It is speculated that this
ban has led to massive spread of
Malaria throughout much of Africa
leading to the deaths of millions of
African children. The World Health
Organization states that the num-
ber of Malaria related deaths have
increased by 400%.
Phellim McAleer and Ann McEl-
hinney point out shocking similari-
ties between the two environmen-
talist campaigns inevitably leading
up to a comparison of what a ban of
fossil fuels will do to society. In this
shocking, but true documentary,
the directors spare no fact allowing
you to decide for yourself which
“inconvenient truth” to believe.
You could have probably guessed
that Hollywood would not take too
kindly to such a documentary be-
ing shown through their screens.
As a means of overcoming this bar-
rier to distributing the truth, “Not
Evil, Just Wrong” is being shown
through several hundred public
viewing parties and community
viewings. “Not Evil, Just Wrong”
will be brought to you by The Pur-
due Review in the month of Decem-
ber. For more information on this
documentary, and the truth that it
brings, stay tuned and look on cam-
pus for a date and place.
ReviewThe Purdue Review October, 2009 7

Wake up Great Britain and Start Voting!!

By JENNIFER HAYWOOD
May 2005 was the United King- of 18 to 24 year olds voted, which pense allowances to pay for mean- to educate the young generation
dom’s last general election. Only actually proves the younger gen- ingless gardeners using taxpayers’ about politics and the policies of
61.3% of the total electorate both- eration is not voting anymore. This money. For example, in May 2009, different parties, so when they do
ered to turn up to the polling sta- is incredibly worrying because in Sir Generad Kaufman charged the vote, they truly understand who
tions and vote. This was a dismal twenty years time, this current taxpayer about £2000 for a rug they are voting for. Nonetheless,
turnout! Likewise, in 2001, only young generation will be the new from New York and tried to claim this growth in extremism explains
59.4% of the voting electorate vot- middle aged generation and if they £9000 for a television, Labour the rise of the British National
ed. Why are people in the UK not continue to not vote, how many politician David Chaytor claimed Party (BNP). There is a fear that,
voting anymore? On average 73% people will actually vote in the £13,000 for a mortgage that he in the 2010 election, a lot of people
of the electorate turned out to vote elections? had already repaid. Even Gordon wanting to vote against the Labour
in the elections between 1945 and As most people know, the La- Brown, Britain’s prime minister, the and conservatives will vote for the
1997. Why this sudden decline in bour party has been in power in the man who is meant to run the show, racist BNP just for revenge. We can
voting enthusiasm? The Brits can- United Kingdom since 1997. How- charged taxpayers £6,500 to pay thank Gordon Brown and his cor-
not be that apolitical! ever, the Labour party only won the for his brother’s cleaner! There- rupt politicians for this worry.
Many children graduating from 2005 election because of the lack of fore, while the majority of the Brit- The BNP is only a minority party
high school leave with a very lim- voters. Only one in five of the vot- ish public were working to make a that, although it has two seats in
ited knowledge of politics. Politics ing electorate actually voted for the living in this catastrophic economic the European parliament, does not
is not part of the national curricu- Labour party which secured them situation, the government had been yet have any seats in the British
lum in England, so unless students 55 seats in parliament. This was taking money from their wage slips parliament. However, if the BMP
choose to study politics as part of due to the fact that the electorate to pay for politicians’ cleaners! It is gain seats in this election, there is
their exams, the only knowledge turnout was so poor. Consequently, inexcusable! No wonder the British a possibility that that UK will be
they have of it is through their par- each voter had more power to de- population has lost faith in the MPs! removed from the European Union
ents and the media. However, in cide who won the election. This has If this story had not been leaked and an ethnic cleansing program
most cases students, particularly led to a government being in power out, who knows whether the public will be advocated to rid the UK of
16 year olds, do not see the impor- that does not truly represent the would have ever found they were all people who are not ‘true’ Anglo
tance of politics and therefore do political opinions of the nation. being deceived by their politicians? Saxons. There will also be an end to
not follow it on television. Conse- The most important reason why I can assure you that this has cre- the foreign relations with the USA
quently, when these ‘ignorant’ 16 it appears as though the British are ated widespread worry throughout and a drive to make Great Britain
Britain. For example, 59% of adults self sufficient by charging extor-
questioned in the Harris Poll be- tionate taxes on imported goods. At
lieve that they would be more likely the moment, the likelihood of this
“The most important reason why it appears as to support an ‘independent candi- happening is very slim, but it is a
date’ in the next general election possibility. This is why British vot-
though the British are apolitical is due to the rather than the ‘corrupt’ MPs that ers need to wake up.
the UK is churning out. Political voting is not a game to
The answer to vote for ‘indepen- see who can score the most points.
lies and deceit from British politicians. British dent’ candidates has promoted the Nor is it a lucky dip where you can
growth of right wing, anti-immi- just tick a box and wish for the best.
voters have lost faith in their representatives grant parties. These minority par- It is a serious business. The Brits
ties are beginning to become more should be voting for parties and
because of the widespread political powerful in Britain because their policies that represent their inter-
representatives were not involved ests rather than just voting against
in the above scandals. Even though individuals because they are cor-
corruption. ” their policies are extremist and rac- rupt. Individual votes matter. Each
ist, the British public feel they can and every person has the ability to
trust these parties. Furthermore, it change the way their country is
year olds reach their 18th birthday apolitical is due to the lies and de- has been suggested that the young governed for the better or the
and gain the power to vote, they do ceit from British politicians. Brit- generation is more inclined to vote worse. We have been given this
not know what to do with it. This ish voters have lost faith in their for these extremist parties because vote as a right, therefore we should
leads them to panic vote for a party representatives because of the they do not notice the differences use it!
that looks somewhat ‘interesting’ widespread political corruption. In between the labour and conserva-
or to not vote at all. According to 2009, it was discovered that MPs tive policies. This is another ex-
the 2005 election data, only 45% were exploiting the parliament ex- ample of why Great Britain needs
 8 October, 2009 The Purdue ReviewThe Pur

Affirmative Action
Combating Discrimination with… Discrimination? By MORGAN IKERD & ASHLEY HOBBS
While most may agree that a di- It’s not just the “privileged white dents or employees to work harder bewildering is the very next sen-
verse collection of students makes male” who is negatively affected and perform better. We should re- tence which states, “A complete
for an interesting and unique by the affirmative action policies; ward ambition, hard work and dis- affirmative action program also in-
learning environment for an aca- prominent minority members cipline, not give applicants “bonus cludes mechanisms that enable the
demic institution, should students who attain their success by hard
with a minority ethnicity really be work and ambition are being de-
given special privileges during the meaned by this program. People “While affirmative action was originated to
admissions process, based on their may wonder whether they attained
race alone? Or should hard work success through their own merits, give minorities a “boost” onto the level of the
and merits be the only factor upon or whether the government held
which students are judged? their hand and pushed through the
In the words of John Wallace, crowd of “average Americans.”. In “privileged” society, it essentially does the
“The United State of America has effect, minorities must work twice
been known as a country of rug- as hard to earn their respect when opposite. ”
ged individualism based on indi- affirmative action is supposedly
vidual freedom and liberty. Why enforced to facilitate their career
has America become a country and educational experiences and points” because they were born University to continually monitor
obsessed with classifying its citi- place them on a level parallel to the with an alternative skin color; and and evaluate its employment prac-
zens into different racial and ethnic remaining population. in effect, punish those who weren’t. tices to ensure that they are free of
sub-groups?” In a country where it At the opposite end of this idea, Purdue University’s Affirma- bias and discrimination based on
has become offensive to ask people minorities may take advantage of tive Action Plan explicitly defines race, religion, color, sex, age, na-
about their sexual orientation or these affirmative action policies discrimination as the “process of tional origin, ancestry, disability, or
religion, why is it so acceptable for and realize that they in fact, do not illegally differentiating between veteran status.” Basically, the uni-
applications to ask of peoples’ eth- have to work as hard as Caucasian people on the basis of group mem- versity wants to be free of bias and
nicity? If we lived in a world where students to be accepted into the bership rather than individual mer- racism, so they adopt an affirmative
race no longer coincided with one’s university they want to attend or it.” Page 9, Section B of Purdue’s action program that forces Purdue
worthiness or acceptability, we the job they wish to be hired for. If plan explains their goals in the to make decisions based on race.
would be forced to concentrate an African-American student can application process: “This process Wow. Talk about contradiction. Im-
solely on one’s achievement, intelli- get into Harvard with a 3.5 while requires an analysis of the present plementing these standards may,
quantity and quality of employment in some ways, prevent institutional
of women and minorities within chauvinism; but it does nothing to
“It’s not just the “privileged white male” who the University to determine if there prevent discrimination towards
are areas where the number of in- race, ethnicity, or gender. In many
cumbent women and minorities is ways, it encourages prejudice in
is negatively affected by the affirmative action less when compared to the number the attempt to eliminate it.
that would be reasonably expected While affirmative action was
policies; prominent minority members who of women and minority employ- originated to give minorities a
ment candidates available in the “boost” onto the level of the “privi-
attain their success by hard work and ambition recruitment area. If it is found that leged” society, it essentially does
the number of women and minori- the opposite. We are putting these
ties employed at the University is minorities in a position where they
are being demeaned by this program.” less than the expected availability are further discriminated against
in the relevant labor market, the because of their advantages; cre-
University must use its best efforts, ating a reverse discriminatory so-
gence and skill. Somehow, this con- the competing Caucasian student is in good faith, to develop and imple- ciety. Affirmative action programs
centration is viewed as a hindrance turned away with a 4.0, why would ment procedures that are designed are condescendingly treating
to achieving a society of “equal the minority student venture to to increase the number of qualified Asians, African-Americans, Native
opportunity” for all. Rather than work harder? A school may as well women and minority candidates in Americans and women as if they
creating an assimilated civilization cut to the chase and simply state the applicant pool, which will lead must need special treatment to
where no discrimination or biases that white males need not apply on to the establishment of placement succeed in their educational envi-
exist, we are creating the exact op- the application. Affirmative action goals for women and minorities in ronments and careers. By lower-
posite by our own government’s lowers standards of accountability areas where they are needed.”
intervention in social issues. that are needed to motivate stu- What really makes this process See “Action...” on Pg. 9
ReviewThe Purdue Review October, 2009 9

Spurlock’s Review
By DAVE SIUKOLA
After several grueling hours of
coding on a Sunday afternoon, my
friends and I visited the new res-
taurant, Spurlock’s. It is located at
the bottom of Chauncey Hill, right
next to the McDonald’s on 26. We
were planning to go our separate
ways after dinner, so each of us
drove separately. Because of the
median on River Road, the only
way to get to the restaurant is to
drive south on River, and to make
a right turn into Spurlock’s parking
lot. Consequently, the three of us
took different routes to Spurlock’s
from the 3rd St parking garage.
Spurlock’s has seating on both
the first and second floor. Mul-
tiple flat screens are on the walls
upstairs. My friends and I were
able to watch the Patriots rout the
Titans during the second quarter.
The sound was up, so there was no
need to rely upon the severely de-
layed closed captioning. There is a
small bar area that services a little
less than a dozen people. The wait
staff was very responsive with our
orders and refilling our drinks. The
frequency was not so much that it
was disturbing, but my glass never
ran dry.
Spurlock’s menu contains all
kinds of wraps, salads, sandwiches,
and appetizers you would expect
to see at a normal sit-down restau-
rant. The average menu item rings
up around $7 without drinks. All
sandwiches come
with pub chips and
a pickle, but you can
substitute that for
fries or onion rings
for an extra dol-
lar. The drink menu
listed off daily drink
specials. Spurlock’s
has eight beers on
tap, a normal variety
of hard liquor, and a
wine selection.
I wound up or-
dering a hamburger
with melted blue
cheese and onion
rings on the side.
The burger was still a little pink
and juicy when it arrived, but that
is the way I like it. The melted blue
cheese was salty, a good comple-
ment to my not–too-bitter iced tea.
I opted for the onion rings and was
surprised that they were not very
greasy. The breading was light, and
I felt a crisp as I bit through the on-
ion. One of my friends got the buf-
falo chicken sandwich with the pub
chips and enjoyed them both. My
other friend ordered the wings and
said that they were comparable to
wings you could get a B-Dubs.
I recommend Spurlock’s if you
are looking for somewhere that is
not too crowded. It would probably
be a good place to get a beer on a
Saturday night if you knew that
there would be no tables left at
Chumley’s. The atmosphere is
good, and you’ll be able to carry on
a conversation with your friends.
My major complaint is the location
of the restaurant because of the
median on River Road. This point is
moot if you decide to walk. Spur-
lock’s is comparable to an Apple-
bee’s and those types of restau-
rants, but you would not get any
kind of gimmick with those restau-
rants. While I don’t particularly
care for Applebees, I enjoyed a pos-
itive experience at Spurlock’s.

Action...
From Page 8

ing the standards for hiring or ad- or students. As righteous as it may

mission, we are essentially saying
“You’re not good enough to make
it on your own, so let me help you.”
Regardless of what Purdue or any
other institution believes to be
ethical, this provided “help” is not
beneficial for whites, minorities or
the society as a whole.
While affirmative action may be
a very noble and well-intentioned
cause, it creates much debate and
controversy for a reason. This pro-
gram seeks to correct the wrongs
committed against minority groups
throughout history and ignite the
economic and social advancement
by requiring institutions to admit a
more assorted group of employees
seem, this program essentially
does nothing to reward hard work
and motivation; it singles out a
group of people to reward for un-
qualified reasons and tells them
they are unfit to make it on their
own, so they need affirmative ac-
tion to get ahead in life. While the
government enforces these policies
to bring people of all races togeth-
er; they are actively forcing society
in opposite directions. Our “one na-
tion under God” is no longer “indi-
visible” for we are slowly becoming
much more divided in the attempt
to equalize citizens. Discrimination
is discrimination, no matter what
the intention.
 10 October, 2009
About that Smoking Ban
By TYLER MARTIN
From slavery to speed, our gov-
ernment can be credited with the
elimination of great threats to the
social integrity of this society. Be-
ing that it retains a solid sense of
order and safety throughout, most
of us find this type of legislative
action to be appropriate. In rela-
tion to this idea, the first couple
centuries of United States history
were marked by the granting of
basic rights to all of the stereotypi-
cally disadvantaged social groups.
From that point, one must wonder:
will there ever exist no more basic
rights to protect, leaving only ques-
tionably unacceptable practices to
be put forth on the agenda of Con-
gress?
Growing concerns and para-
noia among the people, amplified
by developments in science, have
bred a wave of new concerns that
Congress is taking head-on with a
barrage of legislation. The human
aspect of global warming and the
carcinogenic nature of second-
hand smoke are perfect examples
of this. Global warming as a result
of human development has been
fueled both by people worried of
its potential consequences on the
environment and by the scientific
community, which spawns new the-
ories and goes about testing those
subsequently discovering a shock-
ing link or pattern that, if ignored,
could mean many ruined careers.
Smoking and its effects on non-
smokers follow a similar pattern.
People are overly-concerned for
their health, and the scientific com-
munity promotes this almost hy-
pochondriachal behavior. Science
does have good intentions, and it
can discover valid reasons for con-
cern over one’s health, as well as
the remedy to those concerns-but
at some point, the line between ir-
rational thinking and solid science
iscrossed. It is not obvious whether
something is paranoia or solid sci-
ence; rather, it is just something to
consider when thinking about is-
sues of this sort. Data and research
regarding health consequences of
second-hand smoke seem fairly
confident that it does do harm to
people (ie. for every eight smokers
who die from smoking, one non-
smoker dies also). The question
then is how much, and from what
types of exposure is the harm done.
Earlier this year, The Family
Smoking Prevention and Tobacco
Control Act went into effect, pass-
ing in Congress and being signed
into law under the Obama admin-
istration. In short, it gives the FDA
power over regulating tobacco
products. On the local level, a total
smoking ban has been proposed
here at Purdue. The rationale be-
hind this is that second hand smoke
is dangerous and the current “30
feet from university buildings” pol-
icy is too hard to enforce. One must
ask where they’re getting the facts
that say that second hand smoke
is dangerous, and then why there
can’t be designated smoking areas
in lieu of current smoking rules.
Moreover, if people can’t find a
place to smoke within a reasonable
distance of a building (as would be
the case in a university-wide ban),
they will be indirectly forced into a
possible nicotine withdrawal. This
condition, as defined by the Mayo
Clinic, is characterized by, “physical
and mood-related symptoms, such
as strong cravings, anxiety, irrita-
bility, restlessness, difficulty con-
centrating, depressed mood, frus-
tration or anger, increased hunger,
insomnia, and constipation or di-
arrhea.” Surely the onset of some
of these symptoms wouldn’t do
students’ academic performance
any justice, nor would it be benefi-
cial for their overall sense of well-
being. Of course, there would be an
intermission between the passing
of the proposal and it going into ef-
fect that could be used to begin ta-
pering off of cigarettes, but the ex-
act time needed to be a non-smoker
varies from person to person. Thus,
this period might not be sufficient
in length. If the ban were to go into
effect, one would hope that Purdue
would at least offer nicotine with-
drawal counseling services to miti-
gate withdrawal cases.
Let us assume the ban goes into
effect, and people naturally break it.
How would they be punished, and
can they be fully blamed for their
behavior? It is simply a weighing
of the risk of punishment with the
distress of nicotine withdrawal; if
the withdrawal outweighs the risk
of punishment, then people will be
smoking nonetheless. If smokers
take to the outskirts of campus to
satisfy their cravings, then people
that reside in those areas will be
unfairly exposed to high levels of
The Purdue ReviewThe Pur
smokers. And if second-hand smok-
ing is truly dangerous, then Purdue
is essentially handing a death sen-
tence to its West Lafayette neigh-
bors. A perfect solution to this
and to withdrawal symptoms in
students would be the establish-
ment of designated smoking areas
(not lounges) on campus. Smokers
are still allowed to smoke, and non-
smokers are still given the option
of a smoke-free environment.
A look at this issue from the view
of values our country has embraced
gives light to why it is important
that we keep smoking bans out of
the realm of possibility. When slav-
ery was banned, some likely argued
that not being permitted to enslave
others was infringing upon their
rights, and the slaves could just as
easily counter-argue that. In such a
case, it’s obvious whose rights are
really being infringed upon. No one
can rationally argue that someone
has the right to enslave others; it is
accepted by all good natured peo-
ple that no one deserves enslave-
ment. The clarity of this analysis
as applied to a smoking ban blurs
and becomes clouded with sugges-
tions from science and the actions
of Congress. Whose right is being
infringed upon: the non-smokers’
rights to clearer air, or the smoker’s
right to smoke? The answer, as op-
posed to that with slavery, is not so
clear. Is a ban on smoking a gateway
to other bans? Could we eventually
see a ban on bright clothes because
they hurt people’s eyes?
Smoking as a right is something
that should be embraced by all,
whether a smoker or non-smoker.
It is a safeguard to the penetration
of the government into increasing-
ly subtle and questionably negative
aspects of people’s lives. Once it
has been banned, the floodgates of
authority have been widened just a
little bit more, and like it is with
weight, it is much easier to gain it
than it is to lose it.
ReviewThe Purdue Review
Was Jesus a Socialist?
By AARON ANSPAUGH
On October 4th of this year, Mi-
chael Moore posted a blog on his
website aimed at those going to
church that Sunday morning. He
eventually arrived at this point: “I
have come to believe that there is no
getting around the fact that capital-
ism is opposite everything that Je-
sus… taught. All the great religions
are clear about one thing: It is evil
to take the majority of the pie and
leave what’s left for everyone to
fight over.” At the end of this letter to
churchgoers, he makes this closing
comment about Jesus and the feed-
ing of the 5,000: “Either he was the
first socialist or his disciples were
really bad at packing lunch.”
Was Jesus Christ really a social-
ist? Well, first, socialism must have
a definition. Merriam-Webster’s
dictionary has 3 definitions for the
word, and they all involve collectiv-
ism, governmental ownership of
the means of production in a soci-
ety, and the lack of private property
rights by individuals. Socialism is
much closer to diet-communism,
containing all the potential for a
collectivist society without quite
so much bloodshed. The goal of all
Marxist theories (including social-
ism, fascism, and communism) was
to eventually create a paradise on
earth. This paradise would be gov-
erned by the principle that each
person was not unique. That person
simply worked as part of the whole,
putting in as much as they could and
being given only what they needed
by the all-powerful government.
Now that socialism is defined,
the work of Jesus must be put into
a similar light for comparison. Je-
sus was sent to Earth as the Son of
God, preaching salvation for belief
in Him, and of a paradise AFTER this
life is over. Jesus did in fact do many
wondrous acts for people through-
out His ministry, including healing
the sick, feeding multitudes through
miracles, and even raising others
from the dead. Jesus once said,
“Give, and it will be given to you…”
(Luke 6:38a), and on another occa-
sion stated, “Sell your possessions
and give to charity.” (Luke 12:33a).
In His interaction with the “rich,
young ruler” in Luke Chapter 18,
Jesus told the rich man, who argued
that he had followed the law, to sell
all his possessions and give to the
poor. Later, once the rich man went
away sad, Jesus said, “Indeed, it is
easier for a camel to go through the
eye of a needle than for a rich man to
enter the kingdom of God.”
So what comparison can be made
here? Both socialism and Jesus do
indeed advocate giving. The differ-
ence comes in the motivation for
the giving, the method of the giving,
and in the scope of the giving. Jesus
advocated giving to others in order
to store up treasures in heaven. So-
cialism advocates giving to others
“Socialism is much closer to diet-communism,
containing all the potential for a collectivist society
without quite so much bloodshed. ”
in order to do your duty to society,
and to eventually create a collectiv-
ist paradise. Jesus told people to
give freely, since God loves a cheer-
ful giver. Socialism doesn’t really
care about the mindset in which the
individual gives up possessions and
liberty, for it is taken by force in the
end anyway. Jesus did not teach that
one should wait until government
takes the money to give it to the
poor; he said to do it personally so
that it can be used in the furtherance
of the ministry. Socialism actually
prefers government redistribution
of wealth to personal charity, so it
makes personal charity more diffi-
cult and redistribution of wealth the
norm.
Dr. Timothy Faber, pastor at East
Tipp Baptist Church in Lafayette,
disagreed that Jesus was a social-
ist. He stated, “The ability to own
personal property, to recognize that
people have the right to have pos-
sessions, is a God-given right.” Dr.
Faber referenced 2 Corinthians 11
and 12, where believers are urged
not to be a burden upon anyone.
This is a clear message for self-re-
liance. 1 Thessalonians also talks
about personal responsibility, say-
ing to “lead a quiet life and attend to
your own business and work with
your hands, just as we commanded
you, so that you will behave properly
toward outsiders and not be in any
need.” Clearly, the Bible doesn’t ad-
vocate any type of reliance upon the
government, which happens to be a
central tenet of socialism.
As far as who should be do-
ing the giving, and at what level,
Dr. Faber explained that the Bible
makes it clear that individuals are to
care for themselves and their fam-
ily first, and then for others within
their community. He pointed to 1
Timothy 5:8 which states, “If any-
one does not provide for his rela-
tives, and especially his immediate
family, he has denied the faith and
is worse than an unbeliever.” How
can one provide for their family un-
less they have a job and keep some
money for themselves? How can one
raise a family unless they have pos-
sessions, such as a house? Dr. Faber
went on to say “The Bible makes it
clear that the church or individuals
are to meet the needs of the poor,
not the government.” He made it
clear that one teaching of Scripture
(being self-reliant) can’t be ignored
in order to fulfill another (giving to
the poor.)
Leftist individuals would argue
that churches don’t give enough to
charity, thus requiring a socialist
welfare state to provide for those
October, 2009 11
without. This simply does not
match up with reality. We have had
a slowly growing welfare state in our
nation for about 90 years, with the
biggest leaps coming about 70 years
ago during the New Deal. How did
the poor survive back then? Local
churches, funded by the voluntary
giving of individuals, provided that
vital role in the community. And
the willingness of churches to give
has not changed today. According
to Nicholas Kristof, an Op-Ed colum-
nist for the New York Times, 81% of
individuals in America voluntarily
give to charity. Among those who
were religious, 91% give to char-
ity. Throughout the entire nation,
Americans give charity worth 1.67%
of gross national product ($190 bil-
lion). Compared to other nations,
America is by far the most gener-
ous. And yet, socialists insist on tak-
ing the charity roll from churches
and individuals, and “giving” to that
charity by mandating the redistribu-
tion of wealth.
To summarize, Jesus Christ was a
lot of things - a carpenter, a teacher,
the Son of God, and a sacrifice - but
he was NOT a socialist. Going back to
Michael Moore’s reference to the
feeding of the 5,000, it is clear Moore
does not quite understand how far
from socialism this miracle actually
is. The small boy with the 5 loaves
and 2 fish gave up his lunch volun-
tarily, not under compulsion from
the law. Also, he gave it to Jesus, not
the government. Had the govern-
ment been involved, there would
have been overhead costs, health in-
spections, regulations on the types
of fish and bread that could be given,
as well as the usual waste, fraud, and
corruption. The 5,000 would not
have gotten anything. But when the
food was given to Jesus, everyone
was satisfied, with 5 baskets of food
remaining. This type of excess in
government is only found in taxing,
spending, and borrowing, never in
how much they have leftover to give
back to the taxpayer.
 12 October, 2009 The Purdue ReviewThe Pur

Obama’s War on Truth

By JORDAN HEBBE

Less than a year after being would seem more logical to discuss with Fox News calling her out on it. ment, in itself, is somewhat comical
elected as our 44th president, matters of actual significance to the In yet another instance, the goals of due to the fact that Fox News
Barack Obama has officially de- American people and to take care the administration were revealed. consistently leads the nation’s
clared his war on alternative me- of the matter at hand, the President Instead of sticking to the pressing news network ratings by astro-
dia. In the past few months, the decided to make childish attacks on issues that our country is facing, nomical margins. In addition to
administration, and even the Presi- the radio legend instead. such as the wars in Afghanistan Dunn’s remarks, last Tuesday,
dent himself, have initiated an ag- The conflict between Fox News and Iraq, the health care debate, White House Press Secretary Rob-
gressive offensive against Fox News and the Obama administration of- and the recession, the White House ert Gibbs referred to Fox’s two
and Rush Limbaugh, and others ficially kicked off in August when is waging a war on truth. They are top-rated opinion programs, and
news sources like them. Just three Chris Wallace fact-checked Tammy attacking an entire news network Hannity, as the reason for the ad-
days after being inaugurated, Presi- Duckworth, the assistant secre- (the most watched in America) for ministration’s discontent with the
bringing an administration offi- network. White House Chief of
cial’s comments into question. De- Staff, Rahm Emanuel warned other
RAHM WEIGHS IN spite the staggering array of critical
issues needing to be resolved, the
networks not to be led by or to fol-
low Fox News. This seems logical,
Obama administration is focused given that the administration has
on suppressing truth at every op- been consistently plagued by Fox’s
“No, it’s not so much a conflict with Fox portunity. bulletproof reporting of the incon-
News. But, unlike I suppose the way to look In the past few weeks, the ad- sistencies and false “facts” used
ministration has stepped up its by the White House to promote its
at it, and the way we, the President looks at offense against alternative news agendas and keep its secrets. In
outlets, especially Fox News. Anita an effort to stomp out reports that
it, we look at it is it’s not a news organization Dunn was quoted by Time Maga- are harmful to the President before
so much as it has a perspective. And that’s a zine as saying that Fox News is they reach the mass public, Eman-
“opinion journalism masquerad- uel wants to deter other stations
different take. And more importantly is not ing as news.” While commenting from picking up Fox’s stories and
have the CNN’s and the others in the world on the President’s recent refusal spreading them. Although, given
to appear on Fox News, she added Fox’s daily viewership which totals
basically be led and following Fox as if that that the administration more than CNN and MSNBC
views the network as combined, the truth
what they’re trying to do is a legitimate news a “wing of the Re- is likely to reach
organization in the sense of both sides’ sense publican party” plenty of Ameri-
and that it is “not cans whether it
of a valued opinion.” - Rahm Emanuel going to legiti- is aired by other
mize them as a networks or not.
news organi- Last weekend, the
dent Obama took to Capitol Hill to tary of the Department of Veteran zation.” That White House Se-
warn Republicans of the dangers of Affairs on “Fox News Sunday.” At state- nior Adviser and
talk radio. During a meeting with that point, the White House re- chief engineer of
GOP leaders, which was originally fused to provide further guests Obama’s winning
intended for the discussion of his to the program. The White House campaign last fall,
nearly $1 trillion (failed) stimulus communications director, Anita David Axelrod claimed
package, he said that Republicans Dunn, simply commented that fact- that Fox was “not re-
could not continue listening to checking an administration official ally a news station.” The
Rush Limbaugh and expect to get was something she had never seen President himself claimed
things done. Despite the fact that a Sunday program do. She conve- that Fox News is “operat-
our country was entering the larg- niently ignored that Fox News was ing as a talk radio format.”
est economic slump since the days correct in checking Duckworth On Thursday, the Treasury
of one of his role models, former on her comments, given that they Department attempted to
President Jimmy Carter, Obama felt were false. The problem that Dunn make the Pay Czar, Ken-
it was more important to attempt had was not with the official pro- neth Feingold, available
to discredit Limbaugh. Although it viding false information, but rather for interview. In the past,
 ReviewThe Purdue Review
t comicalsuch interviews have always been
ws made open to every member of
nation’sthe network news pool, which is
by astro-the rotation of five networks that
dition tohas shared the daily reporting of
Tuesday,the presidency and other aspects
ary Rob-of Washington for decades. The
ox’s twoWhite House declared that they
ms, andwould make Feingold available for
r the ad-interview to every network, except
with theFox. In an unexpected show of true
Chief ofjournalism, the bureau chiefs of the
ned otherfive networks banded together and
or to fol-refused to interview Feingold un-
s logical,less Fox was allowed to be included
ation hasas well. The White House backed
by Fox’sdown and made the czar available
he incon-to all five networks
ts” used Obama, Emanuel, Dunn, Gibbs,
omote itsand Axelrod’s comments were all
crets. Inpart of the administration’s admit-
orts thatted “new, more aggressive strategy,
nt beforedefined largely by a pledge to push
c, Eman-back hard against news stories that
stationsare either inaccurate or unflatter-
ories anding.” No administration in the his-
gh, giventory of our country has ever made
ich totalssuch a focused attempt to silence
d MSNBCvoices that oppose its poli-
he truthcies. Despite, or perhaps
to reachin light of, Fox’s huge
f Ameri-advantage in rat-
ether itings over all other
by othernews networks,
or not.Obama’s White
kend, theHouse has ignored
ouse Se-the public senti-
iser andment in favor of
neer ofbalanced news
winningreporting. With
ast fall,attack after at-
claimedtack on Fox,the
“not re-Obama administra-
on.” Thetion is attempting to
claimedcripple the network by
“operat-discrediting it and scar-
format.”ing its viewers away. The policy has
Treasurybackfired, however, and brought
mpted totheir greater agenda into the light:
zar, Ken-suppress the truth at all costs. As
availableevidenced by the network pool’s
the past,stand against the Treasury De-
partment’s exclusion of Fox, other
networks are growing tired of the
oppressive tactics used by the
White House to control media.
The Obama administration is
not the only party trying to im-
pose leftist ideology on its citizens
through the media. In May of this
year, Great Britain, which is also
governed heavily by the left, added
Michael Savage to its first list of
people banned from entering the
country. Savage, an especially out-
spoken, but nonetheless popular
radio talk show host and author,
was included on the 16-person list
along with neo-Nazi murderers
and terrorists. The Home Secre-
tary, Jacqui Smith, said Savage had
been banned because he exhibited
behavior that Britain would not
tolerate. Enraged by the ridiculous
assertion that he was as signifi-
cant a threat as terrorists, Savage
fought back and filed a libel law-
suit against Smith. The judge ruled
in favor of the host and his name
was removed from the ban. Follow-
ing the judge’s deci-
sion, the incoming
Home Secretary,
Alan Johnson,
promised to
throw out
the enemies
list altogeth-
er.
Because
of the enor-
m o u s
out-
October, 2009 13
the media because they tell their
rage from Americans and the Brit- viewers and listeners the truth.
ish alike, Smith’s decision was able They refuse to yield to the strong
to be overturned. Savage fought hand of the Obama administration
back against what he knew was a as it tries to suppress the facts at
WAR ON FOX NEWS
On Thursday October 22nd, the White House
attempted to block Fox News reporter Major
Garrett from a five member media pool (Fox
News, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS) that was set to in-
terview President Obama’s Pay Czar, Kenneth
Feinberg. The other four networks stood up
against the White House and refused to con-
duct the interview if Fox News was excluded.
violation of his rights and won. The the source. It has become apparent
Secretary’s actions were part of the that the White House is specifically
larger agenda at play in Britain, attempting to eradicate an entire
which is working behind the scenes voice of opposition and prevent po-
of the Obama administration as litical discourse. Little by little,
well. It was just a small power Americans are catching on to the
grab in the British government’s hidden motives underlying the ac-
attempt to control the means of tions of the young administration.
media and limit what its citizens Thanks to programs like Beck, Han-
see and hear. Once again, the at- nity’s America, Michael Savage, and
tempt failed. People fought back Rush Limbaugh’s radio show,
against the violation of free speech Americans are hearing about the
and put the government back in its liberties that Obama is stealing
place, for however brief that mo- away from us and learning what
ment may be. The support of Sav- they can do to stop him. Before he
age’s listeners and fans gave him has silenced the voices of truth, one
the ability to challenge the unlaw- can only hope that it will be No-
ful ban. This example proves that vember of 2012 and America will
conservatives still hold the power come together to unseat this tyr-
to change things when they work anny before it can wreak further
together, even from across the en- havoc upon our rights.
tire Atlantic Ocean.
In the U.S., Fox News, Rush Lim-
baugh, Michael Savage, and others
like them are the loudest voices in
 14 October, 2009
Halloween Shoppers Scared of Economy
By CHRIS ELLISON
NRF Survey Suggests Cutbacks:
The National Retail Federation’s
(NRF) annual survey found that
30% of consumers will be fright-
ened by more than just ghosts and
goblins this year. This data comes
from the 2009 Halloween Con-
sumer Intentions and Actions Sur-
vey, conducted by BIGresearch. Of
the affected consumers, 88% are
planning to spend less on Hallow-
een. Phil Rist, the Vice President of
strategic initiatives at BIGresearch
is not surprised by the results. “The
overriding theme for American’s
Halloween celebrations this year
will be, ‘How creative can I be and
how little can I spend?’” claims Rist.
Halloween ranks as the largest
shopping season in America behind
only Christmas and Back-to-School.
In 2006, the NRF found that almost
two-thirds of American households
celebrate the holiday. Despite the
growing market, sales are still es-
timated to be down in 2009. This
year’s survey reported expected
sales to be $4.76 billion. That’s
down from the earnings of $4.96
billion in 2006.
Less, Costumes, Candy, College
Spending:
In the survey, approximate-
ly 16% of affected consumers
claimed they will not purchase a
new costume. This could make a
slight impact in sales by holiday-
themed stores such as Spirit and
Halloween Express. Candy sales
are also expected to fall. While the
numbers of people who plan to
pass out treats remain relatively
stable, 46.5% of affected consum-
ers plan to spend less money on
candy. This could be a problem
since the National Confectioner’s
Association estimates that 93 per-
cent of American children go trick-
or-treating every year. Therefore,
lollipop and bite size Snickers bar
sales will give the economy a boost,
but the overall drop in sales could
mean fewer pieces per person. So
kids, better play it safe and make a
back-up costume. That way you can
visit some houses twice!
The NRF notes that college stu-
dents and young adults may be af-
fected the most by the economy. Ac-
cording to the survey, the average
consumer will spend $10- $11 less
than last year, while the average
18-24 year-old will spend $17- $18
less. C.J. Borer, a senior in the Col-
lege of Technology, claims that his
cutbacks will be on buying treats
this year. “I don’t plan on buying
candy to eat,” said Borer, “and also
there is really no trick-or-treaters
to give it to.”
My Take:
It’s important to note that low-
er spending is expected, but not
guaranteed. Halloween falls on a
Saturday this year, which means
that more people will be having
The Purdue ReviewThe Pur
parties over the weekend. This will
definitely provide a much needed
boost for costume, decoration, and
food sales. Also,
trends throughout this reces-
sion have shown that although peo-
ple are willing to cut back in some
areas, they can be hesitant when it
comes to giving up their entertain-
ment. In addition, the economy is
slowly but surely recovering. As a
result, expected losses may end up
being less than originally project-
ed. Most importantly, Halloween is
celebrated only once a year. There-
fore, consumers may feel that it is
worth it to increase their purchas-
es. A combination of these factors
may result in a happier Halloween
than the NRF suggests. Hopefully,
the recession will not scare too
many consumers away. Halloween
is always more festive when people
spend more time trying to scare
each other!
 ReviewThe Purdue Review October, 2009 15

Campus Diversions to repel moody vampires

Stickey Wicket by Stewart Simpson
This will
h needed
tion, and

s reces-
ugh peo-
in some
t when it
ntertain-
onomy is
ing. As a Mallard Fillmore by Bruce Tinsley
y end up
project-
oween is
ar. There-
that it is
purchas-
e factors
alloween
Hopefully,
care too
alloween
n people
to scare
Easy
Sudoku

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

HAPPY HALLOWEEN FROM OBAMA

AND FRIENDS
October, 2009
Al Gore, John Kerry, Ron Paul, Barack Obama, Kathleen Sebelius
16