Uni High Gargoyle Staff Blog

Every year it seems that stores bring the holidays earlier and earlier. Toward the end of August, two months before Halloween, I saw stores starting to stock up on big bags of Halloween candy and decorations to hang outside your house to invite trick-or-treaters.

Similarly, there are already Christmas decorations starting to pop up in stores. Though I haven’t personally seen any yet, many people I know have said there were already Chrsitmas decorations in Walmart two weeks before Halloween.

What’s the hurry? Halloween isn’t even over yet and we already have to get ready for Christmas. Whatever happened to Thanksgiving?

I wouldn’t mind this if it didn’t seem to ruin the fun in celebrating holidays. Seeing stores display so many gifts and decorations imposes the idea that holidays are all about buying things which you’ll only use once a year.

And you tend to lose sight of what the holiday really means if all you can think about are the things you need to buy. But stop and think: Does all that really matter?

It’s not like spending money for holidays is a bad thing. Many people enjoy the preholiday fervor. And everyone likes getting gifts. After a month it can get boring if you have to look at the same decorations whenever you make a trip to the store.

Not only have stores started bringing the holidays earlier, they’re also expanding their horizons. Hallmark for instance supplies Diwali cards in addition to their usual array of holiday cards. It seems that the usual holidays aren’t good enough for them. Will they try to ruin the spirit of hoidays from other cultures as well?

Perhaps if stores waited until a few weeks before holidays instead of months before, then people would look forward to Christmas and other holidays more than they do now. It doesn’t seem like they’ll change anytime soon, however.

In the meantime, I’m going to get ready for Christmas.

— Avanti Chajed

Posted by Gargoyle Staff at 7:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Protests, protests, protests. This really seems to be the only thing we whiny, bleeding-heart liberals know how to do these days. Only problem is, they really don’t work that well.

Have you ever noticed that all of the anti-war protests haven’t done, well … ANYTHING? We’re still in Iraq. We still haven’t sent a timetable for withdrawal. The president still can’t say “nuclear.” But still, we get e-mails and see flyers advertising the newest reason why we should show up at the Union to send a message that people have gotten extremely good at ignoring. For example, I filter all e-mails with the word “protest” in it to a special “protest” folder, where they can be easily deleted.

Am I suggesting we just sit back and relax while thousands of innocent civilians are killed? Of course not. I, to some extent at least, have a soul. But the thing is, the more we assemble ourselves at mass protests, the less impact they have. Our chance to make a point by assembling has long since passed.

Here’s a great example: the protest during the Republican National Convention in 2004. Did anyone happen to notice that BUSH WON THE ELECTION? Apparently not, because these futile displays of dissatisfaction have continued, and with alarming regularity.

But isn’t it just so much easier to assemble and preach about how much we’re doing than to actually ACCOMPLISH anything? Because that’s what most of these anti-war protests seem to really be about, and that is what is truly disgusting about them.

Instead of having people take an active interest in politics (like persuading them to vote, for instance), these protests really just make Democrats, and liberals in general, into a party of complainers. All that accomplishes is making us sitting ducks for conservative talking heads, like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, who can slander us at their leisure.

The time for action has indeed arrived. A message does need to be sent to those in power that if they refuse to stop the violence against innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, we will remove them from power.

How, you ask? The midterm election on Nov. 7 is one great solution. Maybe more than 50 percent of the population could get off their collective ass and actually try to take back what should be theirs: the government. You could also get all of your community to write letters to your congressmen, demanding that we stop the slaughter.

But wouldn’t it just be easier for us to assemble on the Quad, act indignant for a few hours, give ourselves a pat on the back for being so involved, go home, and act like we’re morally superior to everyone else? Remember that when you see people assembling at around 12:30 Saturday afternoon outside the Illini Union for the “National Day of Action Against the Iraq War.”

— Carl Zielinski

Posted by Gargoyle Staff at 1:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The recent Military Commissions Act has caused an uproar within the Uni student body. And it should. It should cause an uproar everywhere. Such a clear breach of our consitiutional rights needs to be taken seriously and dealt with immediately. However, there are aspects to this entire issue that I find more troubling than the actual act. This has to do with our society and our increasing ignorance.

What influences voters? What do voters care about? What is going to make them vote for me? These are the questions everyone who runs for office asks themselves. And increasingly, politicians are finding that it is not what they say that wins them votes; it’s what they do, or rather, what they don’t do. Apparently, people don’t care about policies, ideals, or political views, they are more interested in whether or not the candidate ever smoked marijuana, or whether the candidate ever hired an illegal immigrant. And this is what is troubling me.

The Military Commissions Act represents how corrupt the Bush Administration is, but the Untied States has now elected President Bush to two terms. The Patriot Act is another example of legislation that went completely ignored. The War in Iraq, the billion dollar deficit, Bush’s stupidity- these are all things that should have influenced voters. But no, it was the fact that President Bush is a good Christian that won him votes. What happened to the seperation of church and state? George W. Bush’s religion should have no effect on his amount of votes and should have nothing to do with his running platform.

Democratic attempts to win back voter support in the aftermath of the Mark Foley scandal is another illustration of this new trend. I think that Foley was wrong in sexually harassing the 16 year old page, and I think surrounding officials were wrong for not reporting the incident and protecting the page. But, nobody seems to care that Mark Foley, throughout his 11 year career in the House of Representatives, tried to increase restrictions on child pornography and outaw commercial photography of children, or tighten federal sex offender laws. Nobody cares that Foley was pro-choice, against giving President Bush more power in international trade agreements, and an advocate of protecting the Florida Everglades. The Democrats, hellbent on using this to their advantage, have failed to see that Mark Foley is one of the few moderate Republicans left in the House. They refuse to notice that the end of his political career increases the possibility that a more radical rightist will run and win.

Of course, it is not really the Democrats’ fault. If they support Foley, their campaign will suffer. Nevertheless, there is a longstanding trend in which the candidate who can put on the biggest show, dig up the biggest secret about their opponent, and coerce the most voters is the candidate who will win. Long gone is the time when a politician can campaign based upon the truth, based upon their policies, and based upon their visions.

— Sarah Pfander

Posted by Gargoyle Staff at 4:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

There are many great things about Uni, from the high academic standards to the family-like environment, but there is one thing that does not appeal to me very much, and that is the lack of a school lunch. I am not blaming Uni for this problem because I understand that Uni does not have the resources or the interest to do this.

However, when you compare Uni to Countryside, there is a dramatic difference between the quality of the food provided by the schools… or lack thereof. From what I have heard, Countryside gets freshly delivered food from local resturants such as Za’s.

I think it is very important that students have a good lunch, especially when they are working their butts off every single day. They need the nutrients and the energy to focus on school. From personal experience, I can tell you that going without a lunch can greatly distract you from your important lectures since you are too busy listening to your stomach growl.

I realize that most of the students pack their lunch and they are fine with that. But there are some people that don’t for whatever reason. They tend to go to the Union or Deralds for something tasty. However, sometimes the prices for quadruple cheeseburger with bacon and egg can get outrageous.

I think the administration should work with Deralds or some other local vendor that would provide discounts for only Uni students. The vendor would provide high-quality food for low prices and Uni students would have feasts every single day—I know I would. It is a win-win situation.

I think it is imperative for the Uni adminstration to make amends to the current situation. I mean, how many high schools do you know that do not have a school lunch of some kind?

Having a school lunch of some kind would help the students concentrate and do better in school, maybe turn a couple of B pluses into A minuses. The benefits from this can be extraordinary. Times up, just some food for thought for you people out there.

— Ranny Ma

Posted by Gargoyle Staff at 10:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I don’t understand why there is so much pressure to do well on the PSAT. So yeah I guess if you do well on the test you get to include the flashy title of “National Merit Semifinalist” or “National Merit Scholar” on your resume, but that’s about it. Only a small percentage of National Merit Scholars actually receive scholarships, and Semifinalists don’t receive any.

The reason why being a National Merit Scholar or Semifinalist is hyped up so much is because students and parents alike believe that this title will be one of the major determining factors in college admissions. Also, the “projected score” is suppose to predict the outcome of our real SATs (and thus give us a range of colleges we can look at).

I however don’t think that being a National Merit Scholar or Semifinalist will make or break your application. Think about it. Not even the SATs can define how good of a student (or applicant) you are. Certainly the PSATs should matter less. There are so many more qualities that you possess and things you have done that carry much more weight than doing well on some dumb PRACTICE test. As I said before, neither the PSATs or SATs say anything about how good of student, applicant, or person you are!

Also, if you happen to not do well on the PSAT (God forbid), don’t let that predicted score stifle your ambitions. By that I mean don’t listen to your predicted score if it says that “there is no chance that you will be accepted to that awesome dream school of yours, so you might as well forget about it completely.” Gosh, we have just started junior year, and we haven’t had much time to prepare, get used to, and do well on the test. There is much more room for improvement after the PSAT.

I propose that we all take a chill pill and stop stressing out about the PSAT.

If you do well, great! If you don’t do well, so what!

— Andrea Park

Posted by Gargoyle Staff at 10:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)