The Blackjack Strikes Back

2004-02-10T17:42:00.000-08:00

I'll be honest. I, like Dave, sold out to the Xanga community. I might post stuff on here from time to time, but I think the days of Noshameinthat are finished. Visit me at

http://xanga.com/umassoesch

and sell yourself to get your own Xanga.

So long Suckers, see ya over there on the Xang master.

No, I didn't mean sell yourself as in sell your body like a prostitute does. Perverts.

2004-02-02T18:39:00.000-08:00

As an out of state sports fanatic, there was something I admired about Red Sox nation when I first arrived at UMass last year. I grew jealous of the passion that consumed Massachusetts from March thru October, and was even more amazed that people could be so enthusiastic about a team that had lost for so long. These people had fought for so long hoping for a championship, and their team had let them down every time. I saw a connection among all of these fans like no other, along the lines of two completely different people being held together by virtue that they were both Sox fans.

Then I wondered why that same community didn’t translate into a great community at UMass. I wondered why UMass didn’t come together like Red Sox fans did. We all share something, don’t we?

It really started to bother me last semester after I attended the UMass-BC hockey game, where we lost 4-1. It was a decent game from a neutral perspective, as both teams had their chances to score, the difference being that BC put their chances in the back of the net. Regardless, the loss put a damper on the rest of my night, as I had been getting pumped up for this game for almost a week.

Afterwards, I met up with some friends of mine who did not attend the game, and they saw the look on my face and knew that the hockey team lost. Then someone mentioned to me that they were “sorry that my team lost.” I told her that her team lost too, which netted me a confused “What? My team?” look, as if to say that the hockey team losing only mattered to those who participated.

The greater meaning of this, however, pointed to something even worse.

I've often told people that the biggest problem with UMass is the size of the state. The fact that the majority of campus lives within a two hour drive of home is an absolute killer of community. I would guess that the average in-state student misses about five weekends a semester, which makes home an ultimate safety valve. Half of college is about growing up and being on your own for once, and people don't learn that nearly as well when they have that safety valve of home, with their old friends, family, and dog ready to greet them. People going back to their friends at home means that they aren't building friendships here, they aren't going to sporting events here, they aren't becoming part of the UMass community. College isn’t supposed to be people hunched over their computers in their rooms telling their friends on instant messenger that they’ll be home in three days. Every time someone goes home because they miss their cat or because they have to go back to their job means the University hurts a little more. And that just stinks, doesn't it.

Without question, college athletics are one of the best ways to built community within the university. They make you feel like you're a part of something, they give you a place to hang out with your friends, and most importantly, you start to identify with the school. UMass doesn’t remain the place where you take your classes, but the era where you spent some of the best years of your life. You might find yourself things like

“Hey, that's right you guys, I go to UMass, home of the Minutemen.”
“Yeah, I go to UMass, and our Mass Attack is going to whip your asses on Friday night.”
“I go to UMass and I love it here.”

Things that happen on campus aren't mutually exclusive. We will all feel the effects of our hockey team losing, we will all feel the effects of a certain department losing its best professor, we will all feel the effects of budget cuts, one way or another. Like it or not, the kid who lives down the hall who you never talk to will affect you somehow, and the same goes for the kids who got arrested for rioting after the Sox won.

The person who told me that she was sorry my team lost is missing out on something. Community at a university is much more important than sporting events or other extra curriculas; these things are a means of building it. Only when we come together will we ever be considered an outstanding university. It should never be said that "the hockey team lost."

My hockey team lost. Our hockey team lost. And man, are we ever going to whip your asses come Friday night.

2004-02-01T12:31:00.000-08:00

It's good to be back.

The only thing bad about coming back was the whole "how was your break" conversations with everyone, to which I said the same thing, "it's good to be back here." I've seen all the people I've missed, and now I think a crew is developing on the 6th floor of John Quincy Adams hall, aomething I missed the first semester.

I've gone to all of my classes and I must admit they all seem pretty interesting. My Greek myth class is taught by a member of team misognyist, as he kicked out a certain female whose cell phone went off twice in class, and all 450 people saw her walk out the door with her head held in shame. To my amazement, my astonomy class has been actually interesting thus far. Filling out gen eds usually suck, but despite the professor being one of the bigger nerds I've met in my life, this really isn't too bad.

My sport management classes are looking pretty sweet as well. I'm taking sport law and sociology of sport, and both professors are top notch.

My last class is history 381, US and the Cold War. This class means nothing towards my major; it isn't a gen ed or out of department requirement, yet, it's the class that I want to do the best in. The professor told us flat out the first day that he expects 25% of the class to fail, and I feel somewhat motivated right now to not only pass the class but to ace it. Usually first day classes are useless and filled with going over the sylabus and what he expects, and then we get to leave with thirty minutes to go. Not this guy. In addition to going over his expectations, I took three pages of notes, and now I'm pumped to kick some ass in this particular class. Weird how I would take an upper level history class tat meant nothing and now I want to nail it. Awwyeah.

I sent in my first column last night, to be printed Tuesday. I honestly wasn't all that happy with it, and I didn't like handing in what I felt was sub-par material.

Truthfully, I am very cocky when it comes to what I write for the Collegian. There are about 20 other columnists, and of those, I feel that 15 of them suck. I'm usually proud of what I put in there because I know it's a lot better than the alternative reading, but this column felt like I was sinking to the level of other crappy columnists. I've even told people that I don't have too much of a problem with handing in something I'm not totally happy with because I know it's still going to be better than the other columnists....am I sinking to their level? Ah well. I've realized that you can't hit a home run every time, so maybe in two weeks when my next column is due I'll have something to rock UMass's socks off, along the lines of banning sex for the good of the country.

That's all I got. The Super Bowl festivities start in a couple hours, and I've got my riot gear all ready for when the Pats win. That'll be the story for tomorrow, along with my column.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2004-01-18T00:22:00.000-08:00

Face it Massachusetts. You’re gonna lose.

And it’s not even going to be one of those photo finish, heartbreaker, field goal to end the game losses, either. It’ll be the kind where you’re team goes down so hard, from start to finish, that you don’t even care anymore, and you only hope for next season to show up a little sooner.

The winner, of course, will be George Bush. He’s already laughing, along with the rest of the Republican Party, all of them knowing how much of a cake job this next election will be.

In truth, the Democrats have no one to blame but themselves, due to the increasing possibility that Howard Dean will win the primary among a group of other obscure candidates (let’s not even bring Al Sharpton into the discussion). The rise of Howard Dean can be attributed to the sole factor that he portrays himself as the man who is nothing like Bush, a tactic that wins primaries but doesn’t win elections.

In order to win a primary, a candidate must reach out to the most extreme members of a party because every vote counts that much more. Howard Dean’s strategy is to show America that he is the candidate who was dead-set against the war (the biggest topic in this year’s election). Since the pro-war vote is being split by the other candidates, this leaves Dean as the man who will garner up support from the anti-war voters. However, just because Dean may be able to grab 30% of the vote in the primary, it has no bearing on how he will do in the election, which is why the man who wins in 2004 will have supported the war.

By alienating the pro-war vote, Dean’s best chances for winning rest on something catastrophic happening in Iraq, which, despite what you may read in the Boston Globe, has yet to occur. The troops have nailed 41 of the 55 most wanted men in Iraq, Saddam’s capture boosted support for the war and morale (something Bush will milk until the polls close next fall), and the recent events of Libya disarming its weapons programs have proved that America’s new “kick some ass” mentality is much more likely to disarm a rebel country that appeasement or European diplomacy. Through all of this, polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans still support the war.

This is why the people who scare the Bush campaign the most are John Edwards and Dick Gephardt. Unfortunately, since they have to share the pro-war burden with too many other candidates, their chances of winning shrink a little more, leaving the possible winner battered for his showdown with Bush.

Then there is what the president has going for him. I have already mentioned the war (although many of you disagree), but a rising economy, an ever present Bible Belt, and Bush’s campaign war chest of $175 million dollars make the incumbent even closer to invincible.

Bush’s steady support from the Bible Belt would make it even tougher for Dean and the Democrats to win in 2004, since Dean’s anti-war stance and the lack of religion in his life would easily give all fourteen states to Bush, making him only a few swing states away from re-election.

Dean has recently tried to “prove” to people that he is a man of faith, by showing his track record of sorts for church attendances, and speaking about his beliefs on God. This really isn’t fooling anyone about what he really believes, and his chances of impressing Southern voters these days are nearly nil after his “I am the candidate for the Southern redneck” speech blunder.

What it comes down to is that liberals like Dean don’t win elections. Dean will mortally wound himself in the primary by appealing to the extreme left wing of politics, and conservative voters will remember that at the polls. The best candidate for Democrats in winning elections is a moderate one; someone who can attract members from both sides of the party without resorting to extremes. Look at Ronald Reagan, both George Bush’s, and Bill Clinton, and show me the liberals in the group. If you really want to beat George Bush, you had better hope that Howard Dean loses in the primaries to someone who has a chance of winning the election. Unfortunately for you, Massachusetts, all I see is a scoreboard with you and George opposing one another, and you’re the loser.

2004-01-13T17:57:00.000-08:00

There I sat.

Hidden away behind the back seat of a Chevy Venture I waited for them. I had heard that they would be reaching me at the time of 9:00, so I crouched and waited for their arrival.

It wasn't pretty. Imagine four of the longest men you'd ever seen, the shortest of them sat at a lanky 6'5, who went by the name Darnay (who also had a secret alias with the term "sweet" thrown in there). The rest of them stood at 6'8 and two at 6'10, respectively, although one of the 6'10 gentle giants who went by the name of my favorite basketball player must have had a 53 inch waistline, and I could tell that all he did was gorge himself in a gluttonous manner on everything sugary, sweet, and Southern. The one who was 6'8 obviously threw his wallet around, because everytime they called on him, the idea of "Money" made it's way into the conversation. And then there was the last character, a beachgoer who obviously enjoyed the thought of his hobbies giving him names, as they called him "Ocean." I must say that after passing my eyes over this beautiful creature, I had never been questioning my sexuality more.

Away we went. The beautiful one was driving, and sad laments about a certain movie not being played were solomnly cried upon. The guy flashing the cash sat shotgun, and the fat one and short one sat right in front of me, and I am still stunned that they didn't hear my heavy breathing throughout the night.

Apparently these men played a lot of Poker, because the car ride started with a lot of talk revolving around "the wild card." At first I thought of these men as perverts, and wild card was just a codeword to talk about strip clubs or foxy women, but I was sadly mistaken. As this talk dissapated the car slowed down, and they all exited for a party at the place known as "the Homo's," and I waited for their return.

To pass the time, I made some haikus.

The biggest problem
with a Chevy Venture is
the tight trunk space.

Finally, after an hour at the Homo's, they returned, with a little man in hand, known as the Cloak. I'm not sure how he received this name, since he wasn't wearing a thick jacket, but rather a red shirt with a stripe across the front that was definatly from the Gap. He sat near the back.

There was something different about this car ride, and I noticed right when the car started. The ride was noticably different and much more bumpy and much more uncomfortable. I peered over the Cloak's shoulder and noticed that the Fat One was in the driver's seat. He made his best efforts to keep the car going foward, but his belly would often bulge from beneath his shirt and steer the car to a different path. The good side to this was that the tall foxy one was now sitting in the back, and I had an extroardinaryly good look at his beautiful eyes.

Five turns and two near-misses later, the car stopped was back near where the night started, and they all piled out. I started another haiku, but all I got was

"That beautiful man
is one specimen who"

and didn't finish because they all were back in the car within minutes. The Cloak seemed to be in a hurry, but the others laughed in his face.

A female named Sally was the culprit. Apparently the Cloak had been caught in one of her devious traps, like a fly stuck in a web, and he couldn't escape. After a two quick stops at a restaurant and at the Homo's to drop the Cloak off, I was convinced that this Sally figure was the one and only Bride of Satan.

The original four and myself left the Homo's, with the fat, porky one still driving. His gut flopped out again and took control of the wheel, and only the screaming of the other three could stop it from taking their lives with it.

Something was missing during this ride. An important event apparently had happened during this portion of the ride, and I longed to figure out what it was.

The next stop was at some sort of bread and breakfast, and all that was seen as the car pulled into the parking lot were the bountiful breasts of a hideous woman flowing in the wind. The four exited the car to see the commotion, and returned fifteen minutes later, much to the chagrin of the fat one, who loved the sight of hideous women having less than six teeth. I heard them arguing back and forth, and then they left the car again. During this time I finished my haiku.

The beautiful man
is one specimen with whom
I cherish a lot.

In retrospect, I think that one needs retooling.

This time, coming back from the hotel, there was a lot of screaming. To my fright, they opened up the back where I sat, and threw in a very feminine looking man, who was blindfolded. Luckily, it was too dark for them to spot me, so now I had company. The four gentle giants in front, me and this strange character in the back.

They drove off, and stopped not three minutes later, and grabbed the feminine man from the back. I sat and pondered who this man was, and was thankful that they again didn't see me.

After five minutes of waiting, they returned, with the feminine man now wearing a turban. The hurled him in the back, said something about killing, and resumed their seating positions, driving off in the search of some delishious Candy.

The talk swirled the car about this man "Phi", like the Greek letter, who eventually took up the name of the wild card. They stopped the car and talked to him, and through the panels of the car I could barely hear his words, although the feminine man kept trying to seduce me after taking off his blindfold, and eventually his pants. I listened hard for the talk of what would happen next, when it hit me: Phi was code for the word "pedoPHIle." This man was a sick, twisted bastard, and I felt very afraid. Relief set in when the four returned and drove off to the Ocean's house.

This voyage took a turn for the worst, and they went right past this foxy man's house for some diner. When these words of the diner came up, they all turned giddy, as if these were old stomping grounds. The all left the car, leaving only the feminine man and me. The next twenty minutes changed my life.

He started to talk to me, in a very subtle way, and all of a sudden, he jumped on me. Covering my face from his lips did I, and smooches fell onto my short arms. But his war tactics were overpowering, and he kicked me in the crotch in the same was a feminist defends herself. I thought all was lost, when I saw the turban laying on the seat. I lunged for it and managed to wrap around his neck, and slowly choked him. He lashed back and forth, until he muttered his dying words to me, and I cried knowing the irony of killing the man who thought I loved him. He laid on the flootr, and right as I stopped crying the four returned, all in a huff over having to drive quite a distance to another diner.

The ride was much quieter this time. There wasn't much laughing, the night seemed to be winding down. Twenty minutes of this and the car stopped again, and they left me and the man I had just killed.

I waited for them. I wanted this day to end, and I wanted sleep. But I couldn't stop thinking about the feminine man. His lust for life (and apparently me). His undying good nature. I wondered aloud why killing a man in the heat of battle was called heroism, but killing this man in the heat of passion was called murder. I wept. They came back two hours later.

This time there was no talking. The shorter sweet on actually slept, and the other three stared. I continued to weep, and after they dropped off the beautiful tall man I stopped. We drove off to where the night had started, and I fell asleep.

"WHO THE HELL ARE YOU?" was the sound I heard when I woke up? The three remaining tall men stared me down, and I said nothing, and then cried and told them everything. Instead of being angry, they looked at the lifeless man sitting next to me, and then picked me up and hugged me. I had made their night, they said, and when the big fat man hugged me and put my face directly into his armpit, I knew everything was going to be okay.

2003-12-30T18:58:00.000-08:00

Without question, everytime that I see the name "Steve Spurrier" in a column or scorecard or whatever, I get really angry. Not angry in the sense of me being a Tennesee or Florida State student, or angry in the sense of my team being a rival of the Redskins. What made me so angry about Spurrier was just how awful of a coach he was in the NFL.

Bill Parcells has done quite a job in Dallas this season with players he has hated. He's always been known for loving big linebackers, and Dallas' LB's are among the smallest in the league. He definately didn't want guys like Quincy Carter or Troy Hambrick as huge pieces of his offense, but there they were at his disposal. So did he gripe and whine about it, and beg Jerry Jones to ruin the salary cap and sign someone else? Nah. All he did was steer that team to a 10-6 record, defying the odds and making the playoffs.

This is one of the fundamental things that is wrong with Spurrier. He came into Washington bragging about how he was going to use a fun 'n' gun offense taylor made for players he didn't have (and taylor made for a completely different game as well). Instead of taking what he had and working with that as an excellent coach like Parcells would've done, he stuck to his original plan, and what could've been a halfway decent team stayed in mediocrity. He claimed he could make Danny Wuerffel a star (and my idol, Peter King, believed him). He signed Jaquez Green, because he knew "the system." And what he did, or didn't do, depending on your point of view, was just let Stephen Davis pound the ball twenty-five times a game. He ignored his best weapon and tried to make a couple third stringers become legendary gunslingers.

This is the primary reason as to why I would never believe the rumor about Spurrier taking over for Dave Wannstedt in Miami. The old saying goes, you trick me once, it's your fault, twice, it's mine. The Dolphins letting Spurrier take over the reins and do the same thing he did in D.C. (that is, try and make Jay Fiedler a star and give Rickey Williams about seven touches a game) would have been a travesty.

The next big mistake Spurrier made was forgetting about the future. Instead of holding to his word about making Patrick Ramsey the starter for the rest of the season, he kept inserting Shane Matthews and Wuerffel into the game. Spurrier lucked out on this one because Ramsey has a head on his shoulders, and didn't let Steve's stupidity get to him.

And then, lastly, Spurrier's biggest mistake of all was essentially ignoring everyone on the team who wasn't named Matthews, Wuerrfel, or Ramsey. He forgot that he was the head coach of the team and not the assistant coach, and it's now being reported that Marvin Lewis, not Spurrier, kept the team together last year. The sad thing was, Lewis still had to bend over for Spurrier even though he was the guy holding down the fort.

So finally, Steve resigned. He proved to himself he couldn't coach in the NFL, and he further proved the fact that Dan Snyder, the Redskins owners, is a douche. What a pair.

At least one of them knows how bad he sucks at life.

2003-12-21T09:33:00.000-08:00

It's been said before, and I'll say it again: the world is way too PC.

My beef with this comes from the NFL, where Detroit Lions president Matt Millen got an entire espn.com article devoted to his calling of Johnie Morton "a faggot."

Who cares?

As the articles put it, what Millen really meant when he said that was "you're a homosexual. I hate homosexuals, and I can't get over how gay you are. Die, slowly and painfully, you fag."

Really now, is that what he meant? Yes, it was something he shouldn't have said, considering he's an executive and he has to know that he will have a mic around him after a football game. But for one, Matt doesn't hate gay people, and two, the word "faggot" isn't even a derogatory insult towards gay people anymore.

We all remember American Pie, don't we? The word that sprouted out of that movie was "MILF" (a Mom I'd Like to F___). Clearly, in 1999 if you said "milf" you might get a few looks, because five years ago it had a very dirty connotation (and for good reason). Now, today, it's almost a term of endearment, to say, "hey, for a mother of two, you're not doing too bad." You aren't saying "wow, can I be the father of your next child?" The meaning of words change over time, what we say today doesn't mean the same thing if we said it ten years ago.

The same goes for fag or faggot. We would call someone a faggot in sixth grade, and the retort we'd all hear was "wow, so I'm a bundle of sticks," which was actually the word "fagot," with one 'g.' Being sixth graders, we really had no idea as to what to say back, and would just think to ourselves if that's what it really meant, when all we were truly trying to say was "you're stupid."

Consider today how often you call someone a fag. I won't lie and pretend that I don't; the word arises out of my mouth almost daily (and for all of you who played sports, during a game, anything went in terms of insults). And all of you know that I work at a flower store, I have many gay friends, and I even support gay marriage on a constitutional basis, yet, if I went on national TV and the word fag slipped out of my mouth, I would be denounced as a homophobe and a real jackass too. It all comes back to the world being too PC.

What is really ironic about the situation is that if Matt Millen had been caught on TV twenty years ago saying calling someone a fag, when the word actually was a gay slur, nobody would care, because being gay back then was still a faux pas. Now, he calls Johnie Morton a fag, and everyone thinks he's terrible because it's okay to be gay nowadays, yet, the word doesn't mean what it meant twenty years ago.

I think we all need to ease up on the guy...and if you don't believe me, remember when you weren't allowed to say "that sucks?"

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-12-18T11:23:00.000-08:00

So I officially just saw one of the more rancid and disgusting things ever to occur over here in John Quincy Adams. I have a physics exam in an couple hours, and I'm doing my laundry because my mom is picking me up tomorrow morning, and I need to get all packed. I walk into the laundry room to switch over my wash, and see something in the corner of the room which was quite unexpected. There is a little drainage hole for if/when the washer overflows or water gets out of the sink, and pointed in that general direction is Blake, an aquantaince from the other side of hall. I look up just as he was zipping up, and he says "Oh, sorry, this little drainage hole here is great when you don't want to run all the way upstairs to go pee...yeah..." I just stared at him and was too repulsed to actually yell at him for taking a whizz on the floor near where I dry my clothes, and too disgusted to awkwardly laugh it off.

Blake left the premises, and I just kind of stood there for a moment and thought of all the times I had dropped a piece of clothing on the floor when pulling it out of dryer, and then pondered the urine content of the clothing that hangs on the dresser five feet from where I am now.

I guess it's no big deal. My roomate Dave bought FeBreze a couple weeks ago. That stuff cures all.

Even urine.

2003-12-09T19:42:00.000-08:00

There was an article in the Collegian a week or so ago regarding The Feminist Epiphany, and what feminism means today. But what feminism has become is one big curse.

First off, let me say that many of thing "injustices" feminists argue about today are complete baloney. My first point is the so-called injustice of unequal pay. I don't mean to say that it is right for two people doing the same job to be paid different amounts of money (this is where feminism has done something worthy, help make women get the same pay for the same job as men would do). But feminists point to the facts about women averaging less than men do, and then gripe about the outrageoulsy low figure of women CEOs and CFOs and the like. What they don't realize is that average equal pay will never be possible.

Women breastfeed.

Yes, that is dumbing it down too much, but the simple fact remains that women will ALWAYS be the ones to have children (unless you think that the movie Twins could actually happen). Due to this biological phenomena known as childbirth, women will always on average spend less time at the workplace, and less time on the workplace means less pomotions, bonuses, overtime, et cetera. This is precisely the reason why lesbians make more money than heterosexual women, because they are less likely to have children (although they still can and do). The day that women and men average the same amount of pay is the day the human race begins to literally die out, because it would precisely mean that there would be no children being born that needed to be breastfed (along with the other duties that being a mother entails).

As I think about it more and more, feminism is a type of communism, in the sense that it tries to make all people essentially the same. A Marxist professor of mine preaches to my class about how communism has worked in our society today, and we need to change the way production is formatted to stop the exploited proliteriat from rising up and waging (in the monetary sense as well) a revolution against the capitalist pigs. His example for communism working today are engineers over in Silicone Valley who pool their money and come up with great ideas together and run everything nicely and smoothly without managers and everybody is happy. He makes it sound as if anybody could just make their own company with their friends.

The problem lies in the fact that not all humans are created equal. Communism tries to stress the fact that anybody is capable of doing anything, and I'm being pessimistic here, but they aren't. Some humans are inherantly poorer workers than others, or not as bright as others, or less skilled than others, and no one has the same talents that others have. These engineers can be successful in business because they are all geniuses; although I would seriously doubt that if you took all the people who worked at a McDonald's and tried to get them to create a small buisiness together they would succeed, due in part to the fact the people who work forty hours a week at McDonald's (minus the managers) typically aren't the most intelligent, they aren't the best workers, they don't show up on time, they're lazy, they lack ambition, and they are usually quite unskilled (please make no attempt to argue this point). All men are created equal in the sense that they have inalienable rights, but they are clearly not equal in the sense of skills/intellect that will get you somewhere in the workplace, however narcissistic that may sound.

And this sort of thing is where femisism goes wrong. It tries to make the argument that men and women created the same (it rarely argues that they were created equal). It takes away those things that are unique only to women and makes them out to be weaknesses rather than things that are good and honorable. This is why women who work in the home taking care of children aren't respected in society anymore (as I wrote about a few months ago). It's as if she isn't smart enough or capable enough to have a job, that's she's taking care of her children because she has to and not because she wants to; that she cannot be the the all-American woman that feminism is cheering for and at the same time blaming men for forcing the women to be all-American moms (I do agree that men are quite guilty in this regard, in one of feminism's more applaudable ideals). But feminism still secretly wants women to be freed from these shackles of childbearing.

Sadly, what this has done has taken away one of the most beautiful and amazing things that women and only women can do, and has it to be something that is a burden and not a blessing. It is directly because of this that women will try and give way to the claim of "my body" when it comes to abortion rights, when it clearly is not. It is because of feminism that some women have been persuaded that it what is inside the womb isn't human, and that it is humane to exterminate these fetuses (baby is too nice of a word). Feminism has killed many, many children, and it will continue to in the name of planned parenthood and continue to swear that accountability isn't a good thing, and we can forget it when the condom breaks.

Yet, the dangerous ideas of feminism won't be stopped because of what men have become. Feminism has taught men that it is okay to be weak, and this only makes the feminist cause stronger. Men not taking accountability in things like marriage, their children, and unborn children is only making the feminist push stronger, and thus convincing women even more that they essentially take both a man and woman's role in society.

What feminists don't realize is that men and women were created differently for a reason. Men will always love oggling women and wrestling with their friends, women will always be better with emotional aspects of life, men will always be physically stronger, women will always give birth, and both will be completely capable of doing the same job as well as the other (yes, I know there are exceptions to all of these). But above all, we aren't the same.

Yeah, I know I was all over the place on this one, but that's how stream on conciousness goes. I'll just end with the usual

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-12-01T21:33:00.000-08:00

Let me just tell you that the UMass Minuteman Marching Band rocks my socks off. So much so, that I even dedicated an article about it (in my quest to become an honorary drum major (I am already an honorary tuba)). Here goes:

Hail to the Band
by Zach Oelschlegel, Collegian columnist

Senior Day is always a time when we can honor those among us who have just completed their final season. It's the time to tip our hats and thank them for the good times. It's the time to hug them and wish them well as they move on with their lives. It's a bittersweet day for players, excited about being able to play one last time, yet sad that this is the beginning of the end.

Nov. 22 was Senior Day at the University of Massachusetts, where we honored those football players that dedicated their last four years to the glorification of our school.

Unfortunately, a few seniors were forgotten, and they weren't the linebackers or quarterbacks. While the football team did have an excellent season, there is a group of people that always has an outstanding season, yet they are typically an afterthought to the ignorant majority of campus. They are none other than our Minuteman Marching Band, the unsung heroes of UMass.

Never before have I seen such a hardworking team of students. They come to school a full week early for band camp (not counting the drummers who come back to school two weeks early and run laps around the field with those big 50-pound drums attached to their torsos).

It's not as if band camp is some easy thing. First thing in the morning, at 8 a.m., is practice, followed by practice, and maybe some more practice, all of which ends no earlier than 11 p.m. The band members wake up for the next six days to do it all again in what is one of the most grueling camps at UMass.

And you thought the athletes were the only ones who had to go through two-a-days.

Then, during the school year, the band has practice every day for an hour-and-a-half, and they will even sacrifice a large portion of the weekend doing what they do best.

Game days begin at 7 a.m., followed by another four hours of practice, and then the band wakes the hung-over students of Southwest with their Saturday ritual of marching through the Quad to play a few ditties at the Pyramids next to John Quincy Adams and Washington towers. On days when the football team is on the road, the band can be found 300 miles away, either at the game or playing in cities as random as Allentown, Pa.

Instead of sleeping in lavish hotels, the band usually winds up sleeping on hardwood gym floors. But are there any comments or complaints about their modest sleeping accommodations? Nah. In truth, the band relishes the idea of being stuck inside cramped buses, and the members are proud of their ability to sleep on floors more uncomfortable than Oprah when she wears spandex (unless, of course, the trumpets decide that pelting everyone else with water balloons is a good idea). It all begins and ends with humility.

And that's what it's all about. The band is almost never the main event. They aren't the ones scoring the touchdowns; they're the ones cheering those guys on. There aren't any band prima donnas; the talk around campus isn't about our star tuba section (although maybe it should be). They don't need to pad their stats to prove they are up to snuff.

In fact, what they really are is just a group of the most remarkable, fun-loving people you will meet. They don't put in 15 hours of work a week for a measly two-credit GPA booster or some scholarship; they do it for UMass.

No one shows that they love our school like the band does, and it shows when they strut their stuff on that football field seven times throughout the year. How many people can you point your finger at and say they care more about something other than themselves?

In conclusion, I'd like to congratulate the football team on a great season, and I can't wait to go and cheer for them next season. But I'd also like to tell the football team to go and thank the band for always screaming, hissing and being the only crazy people at the game.

So football players and anyone else that reads this: go and do yourself and your university a favor the next time you hear someone utter the phrase, "band geek." Walk right up to that guy and say, "Hey, buddy, I think you meant band stud."

Those studs have done more for our school than we'll ever imagine. Maybe next time they should be the ones we congratulate for having a dazzling season.

2003-11-30T21:22:00.000-08:00

As I always do during thanksgiving break, Robertson's and delivery of many flowers were a huge part of my itinerary (to the tune of 25 hours, a quarter of my time spent at home). I enjoy my time there, it's fairly nice to be able to come home and get hours when you need some cash, as I do right now. And after a lot of time spent delivering to places spread all the way from Bensalem to Lansdale to Malvern to south Philly (one helluva delivery area), you tend to make broad generalizations about how people will treat you. The source of my frustrations come from the MainLine, or, for those of you unfamiliar with the term, the really rich suburb of Philadelphia where PEOPLE SUCK.

They really do. I'm not kidding. Ask any delivery boy, and he will tell you that the place you are least likely to ever get a tip or a warm smile is from one of those rich spoiled old women, who seem to have the attitude of "Wow. Flowers. Cool. This means nothing to me; I don't need rich friends of mine sending me flowers telling me to get well when we all know that I am the center of my own universe. But thanks." (door slamming in my face).

It bothers me when people don't appreciate these things. And it's this sort of attidude, this "my shit don't stink" attitude that bugs me about delivering around there.

Take a house with a gate at the driveway. Nothing gets to me more when I am in a hurry, the whole idea of having to call the owner of the house so he can buzz me in, or sitting there while I call Ian so he can find SOMEONE who can give me the code to open the gate because no one else is home to open it. It's also not as if a guy who's planning to rob one of these houses will be thwarted by the high technology of these gates and will decide that the house next door with the doberman will be a better target. It's stupid.

Even more depressing, however, is the subtext of having a huge gate surrounding your house. It automatically makes for a hostile environment, one that says "You're lucky you're here, I didn't have to let you onto my property." It says that I'm better than you are, and to prove that, I'm going to make sure that your filthy kids won't ever set foot on my property. I am so much better than you the notion of you even coming near my property devalues it two fold. Therefore, I need a fence to set myself apart from you untouchables, and no, it's not just because you're unclean, it's because you suck at life and you aren't even good enough to be my bitch. Make sure you wipe your feet on the hood of your car before you step on my grass..

It's just another sign of people detaching themselves from society. As I commented in a few posts ago, people need to feel and be like they are a part of something, and just about everyone should be able to get in on the fun as well (my example was college sports, yes, I know, not everyone can be a part of everything). But when you put a gate around your house all you do is tell people that you are part of an all exclusive club whose only members are the Jones'. Maybe it's just a case of good fences making for good neighbors.

I guess this is just an exception.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-11-20T20:15:00.000-08:00

I made my schedule today, which included the ever-present anxiety that comes with that sort of thing, but basically I'm looking very set for next semester. My schedule is as follows:

Sport Management 335: Intro to Sport Law
Sport Mnagement 200: Sociology of Sport
Classics 224: Greek Mythology
Astronomy 101: The Solar System
History 381: US and the Cold War 1917-1990

I am completely on track for my degree, and after next semester I will need another 60 credits to graduate, and the breakdown for is something along the lines of 18 more credits in sport management courses, and 12 credits in out of department courses, and then I'm figuring that I will have 30 odd credits at my disposal to play with (my advisor told me that it was more like 15, but I don't see the math). That last fact makes me happy for a number of reasons.

I was talking to Bradley a couple of months ago, and I'm telling him all these plans I have, for instance, I think at the beginning of this year I was going to try and double major in sport management and journalism with a minor in economics (this is definately not happening). This perplexes Bradley, and we discussed how these options would affect my future.

Basically, a journalism major means jack squat if you can't write. You will also learn a lot more from actually working at a newpaper than taking any journalism class (I've ben toying with the idea of being an assistant editor at the Collegian next year). The minor in econ is also essentially worthless; the little note about a minor on my resume isn't all that important, and wouldn't be the make or break point that convinces a future employer to hire me.

I remember riding to work one morning with my brother Ian a while back. Since Erich's a great employee, Robertson's (my flower shop), was going to fly Erich in from Pittsburgh for the week so he could dispatch during Mother's Day or something. Erich would be missing a week of school because of this.

"Aren't Erich's grades bad enough?" I said to Ian (Erich had gotten a couple of F's and a D or so). "He's trying to go to grad school; he doesn't need Robertson's to have him miss school."

"GPA is stupid," Ian said to me. "Erich is the smartest kid I know, he knows more about computers than anyone else I know." Ian then preceded to tell me about some friends of his who graduated from prestigious business schools with 4.0's, but when it came to it, they knew about as much about business as I know about playing the tuba. Erich might have had some piss poor grades, but he knew his stuff better than anyone else.

I'm not writing this to say that getting bad grades is okay (don't worry Mom). It's just that trying to take all of these hard classes or trying to accumulate a ton of degrees isn't going to get me too many places. Bradley reminded me that this was college, and it happens once a life, so take advantage of what you can do, meaning, take some fun classes, because there aren't any opportunities to take them later. Hence, the reason why I'm taking that history course. It has NOTHING to do with my major, but I figure I'll enjoy it. And I have a lot more credits to play around with too.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-11-19T21:18:00.000-08:00

I'm feeling vindicated. UMass basketball whooped St. Francis last night, 80-58. Yeah, yeah, I know, St. Francis isn't exactly Duke, but that's the kind of team we might have beaten last year as opposed to whooping them like we did last year. I think March Madness is in the picture this year...we're gonna go dancin', and maybe I won't be able to get tickets to a game. I will cry (both tears of joy and sadness) when that day comes. Sadly, I know in my heart that it will continue up unil the team has a losing season....

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-11-15T23:01:00.000-08:00

We lost the hockey game last night to BC, 4-1. If it was coming from a neutral perspective I would have to say it was a great game, because both teams had their chances, BC just put theirs away and we didn't (it also sucks that this writing DOES NOT come from a neutral perspective). Regardless of which, I was kind of bummed after the loss. I had been extremely pumped for this game (often one can tell how stoked I am for a home match by the amount of plays Motley Crue's "Kick Start My Heart" gets from 617 JQA), and to have a loss against a league rival like that in front of a huge crowd kind of hurt.

After the game I went to the One meeting, which is the semester meeting for all of the Christian groups on campus to get together for some shindig of sorts. I wasn't particulary looking foward to it because the course for the night was just a lot of karaoke, which usually just gets me really angry (don't ask). Anyway, the people there that I knew saw the long face and asked me what was wrong, and seemed somewhat surprised that a hockey game had made me a bit peeved, bringing me to point number one.

Often times people will say that winning is what it's all about, and to that I disagree. Having a winning team means jack squat if you are a fan; it takes absolutely no balls to root for the Yankees (hence the reason why I have utmost respect for Red Sox nation). The looks on the faces of the people around campus the next day after that fateful/epic game 7 loss to New York are the looks that real fans have. Anybody can root for a winner, but dying for a loser is what makes someone a true fan. There is a reason I chuckle to myself when people (especially upperclassmen) tell me that they became die-hard hockey fans last year (and then I want to ask them about all the cheering they did earlier in the season when the team was losing). There is a reason as to why I secretly (I guess not anymore) hold a grudge against people who claim this die-hard status (and there's an even bigger grudge against those who don't even feign die-hard status and don't show up at all). And when the basketball team starts winning a few games this year, I will laugh at those same people who magically became die-hards as the season progressed (and hold more grudges if we make March Madness). Becoming a cheerleader up only when your team wins proves that you have the testicles of a schoolgirl. And I still wouldn't give you that much credit.

At that One meeting, someone (who shall remain nameless for the sheer matter of my wanting to thrash her) told me that she was sorry that "my team" lost. I told her that her team lost too, and she gave me a very confused look (my team? Really?), as if to say that this sort of thing on campus only pertained to those who participated.

The greater meaning of this (the subtext), however, pointed to something even worse.

I've often told people that the biggest problem with UMass is the size of the state. The fact that the majority of campus lives within a hundred minute drive of home is an absolute killer of community. I would guesstimate that the average in-state student misses about five weekends a semester, which makes home an ultimate safety valve. Half of college is about growing up and being on your own for once, and people don't learn that nearly as well when they have that safety valve of home, with their old friends, family, and dog ready to greet them. People going back to their friends at home means that they aren't building friendships here, they aren't going to sporting events here, they aren't becoming part of the UMass community. And that just stinks, doesn't it.

Without question, college athletics are the best way to built community within the university. They make you feel like you're a part of something, they give you a place to hang out with your friends, and most importantly, you start to identify with the school. Hey, that's right you guys, I go to UMass, home of the Minutemen. Yeah, I go to UMass, and our Mass Attack is going to whip your ass on Friday night. I go to UMass and I love it here.

Things that happen on campus aren't mutually exclusive. We will all feel the effects of our hockey team losing, we will all feel the effects of a certain department losing its best professor, we will all feel the effects of budget cuts, one way or another. The person who told me that she was sorry my team lost is missing out on something. Community at a university is much more important than sports or One meetings; these things are a means of building it. It should never be said that "the hockey team lost"

My hockey team lost. Our hockey team lost. And man, are we ever going to whip your asses come Friday night.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-11-13T22:09:00.000-08:00

I'm lazy. Yeah, I had a nice idea for an article about why I should have the right to be a racist (I'm not one, but many Europeans don't have that right). Instead, the sex ban article, which has been reworked again and again will be put into Collegain print. I feel almost as if this is along the lines of Erich's couch story, which he has rewritten on occasion. The biggest changes in this article would be the completely new introduction and conclusion, a couple one liners here and there, and I made it a little more of a point to get the idea across (as apparently I am the only one who understands my writing, wink wink, Dave). I also made a subtle tribute to Jonathan Swift with the title, for those of you who are English majors (or for those of us who enjoy pretending that we have an appreciation for olde (yes, with the e on the end) English satire, so that we look smart). Truth be told, I feel that this is probably the best piece of work I've ever written, and that brings me to my next point.

An underlying factor in my submitting this article over the potential "right to be a racist" article was that I want to create a name for myself, of sorts. You kind of know whether or not you're going to like an editorial by looking at the photgraph above it. For instance, when I see the bandee picture of Mark Ostroff or Robert Carey above an article, I'm fairly certain that it is going to suck. By putting my better work out first, people will be more prone to pay attention to my writing later in the year, as they recognize me as that guy who wrote the funny article about banning sex, and not that idiot who writes about how Bush sucks in all of their articles (much in the style of Carey and Ostroff and Johnny Donaldson). People remember that they like or dislike what you write simply by looking at the photograph, and are that much more likely to read with serious interest that same article as opposed to turning the page to the horoscopes. All of this put aside, here is the finished version of "Another Modest Proposal."

“Another Modest Proposal”
by Zach Oelschlegel

After tons of back and forth fighting, debating, and anger, the partial birth abortion ban was signed by George Bush. Naturally, this initiated that time of the year in the Collegian editorials, where it seems everyday a pro-life or pro-choice article finds its way onto page three or four. The pro-lifers literally scream bloody murder, and then the pro-abortionists wail back about women’s rights, and everyone just ends up really angry. What makes this scene even more pitiful is that the most obvious and sensible answer to this chaos hasn’t even been uttered.

The government should ban sex.

I figure, sodomy was already illegal in some states, so why not go all the way and ban the whole thing, heterosexual and homosexual sex? The way it seems in America today, the cons of sex far outweigh any of the pros, yet, people still love to engage in drunken orgies for some sick and twisted reason.

You look at me and say “That’s outrageous! How will we procreate?”

Well, my friend, haven’t you heard of a thing called artificial insemination? People can still have beautiful offspring without all the vigor and hard work of sex! Simply take a sperm specimen and egg, put it together in a Petri dish, and voila! You have instant baby. And even better than having instant baby, this abortion mess is solved! No more of these “unwanted pregnancies” due to casual sex! No more fourteen year old moms! Syphilis, gonorrhea, and herpes could be gone forever! We might have actual responsibility for our actions! And we can still have kids. Isn’t everybody a winner?

The biggest caveat to this idea, of course, is that people will not get that perverted pleasure from sex that they have been dreaming of since that magical age of puberty began. I say, like war, what is sex good for? It’s been proven that we cannot handle these babies and other hazards of sex, so why should we be so ballsy (pun intended) to try it anyway? Then there’s the fact that there will be no more Jerry Springer, since every story on the show revolves around the romantic sex lives people conduct with their bosses, attractive family members, and religious leaders.

Now, we come to the simple duty of enforcing it. This will be an expensive task, but when you figure in all the budget cuts that the state of Massachusetts is making towards higher education, we can easily afford it. We will have the shaggin’ police force. Yes, every room of every house and building will be equipped with a video camera, along with cameras on every street and sidewalk. A group of ten officers will be present in video rooms stationed strategically near the alleyways, parking lots, and airports (where people are most likely to be doin’ the nasty), checking screen after screen of footage to make sure no one is getting their nookie on. If someone is caught in the act, a group of three officers will be dispatched to the offending area to stop the crime, outfitted with gloves and dark sunglasses in case the couple is especially grotesque. Initially, a small misdemeanor fine will be given for the first two offenses, but the third time someone is literally caught with their pants down, the “three strikes” law will be in effect and the offender will be jailed for the next ten years for attempting to produce offspring without a license.

Lest we forget the socio-economic pros to banning sex. For one, alcoholism would go straight down, since men would cease to have the need of getting their girlfriends drunk so they will sleep with them, and men themselves would stop drinking to make their girlfriends look better. Two, productivity in the workplace would skyrocket, since men and women wouldn’t be taking any time off from work to have so-called “nooners” and “quickies.” I also read that men think about sex on average at least once a minute, and outlawing the dirty deed would cause this number to be reduced drastically, hence mental output in men would be doubled at the very minimum. Just think of what Isaac Newton could have come up with had he not been so preoccupied with sex!

Finally, people would use their money more wisely with the banning of sex. Men wouldn’t spend countless dollars on condoms and women wouldn’t have to spend the occasional $300 for an abortion or have to get their Pill prescription filled every month. All this money saved from the sex ban could be used to pay rent, or even, God forbid, pay child support, which is usually the result of good sex (as if there was such a thing?) gone bad. No more high-tailing it to the pharmacy for that “morning after” pill.

In all seriousness, a world without sex would be the utopian society mankind has dreamt about. People would be better thinkers, better spenders, and would probably have the audacity to take some responsibility. I’m thoroughly amazed that this is the ban old George isn’t passing.

2003-11-03T11:32:00.000-08:00

Making a resume is really, really depressing. I'm going down the list of past jobs, my classes, and dear God does my resume suck. Newman Center Cafe? Robertson's? McDonald's? All laughable. And then there are the courses I've taken. I've run down the list and I hink it's 10/15 courses are intro courses. Laughable again. Ah well. I guess I'll have to rely on my devilish good looks to get an internship this summer. I need to get going on that one...

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!...although at the present that sucker is me...

2003-11-02T16:45:00.000-08:00

A new name beckons.

2003-11-01T15:30:00.000-08:00

This article was almost a second draft of a little ditty I wrote back in July and posted it on here. You will notice both concluding sentences are exactly the same, but there's a lot more to this one. In all, I'm not terribly excited about submitting this one like I was with my last, but when I read some of the other crap that gets printed this looks almost brilliant.

“True Nationalism”
By Zach Oelschlegel

I am over a week late, but the baseball playoffs are over. No more having to watch those damned Yankees take the field, no more watching those stupid Yankees cry, no more rioting, and finally, I won’t have to hear that stupid New York Irish tenor Ronan Tynan sing “God Bless America.”

You pause after reading that last comment. Did I really just say that I was tired of hearing “God Bless America?”

I’m going to blame my apathy on September 11th. After that day, we had car dealers telling us to buy a Chevy to “keep America rolling,” we kept seeing people on TV telling us that they were “doing their part” by wearing a tie with an American flag on it, every single Mom and Pop store had the phrase “God Bless America” emblazoned on their doors, and of course, you couldn’t walk five feet without seeing nineteen different flags in every direction. Next thing you knew, it was fashionable to wear a hat or shirt that said “FDNY” on it, even if you had no affiliation with any fire department and you made your home in Iowa. All in the spirit of showing off our pride, because that’s what real Americans did, right?

Sadly, we all bought into the lie, as national holidays have returned to being days off from school, and that day we supposedly would never forget was completely forgotten, evidenced by the paltry forty or so who showed up to this years memorial at the Student Union. All those chic flags people hung on their doors became really tacky and they were taken down by January of 2002. But at least we can show our spirit by singing along to the national anthem, right?

Unfortunately, time and again the anthem’s words are meaningless on the ears that hear it. From “Oh say can you see?” to “the home of the brave,” is really just a minute of life people waste in order to get on with the game, and not a moment of reverence for a nation of heroes as it should be (Home of the brave? Like the ones from Atlanta? Would Boston be home of the Red Sox?).

The Simpsons lampoons this when Homer becomes a boxer. The announcer tells the crowd who is fighting, and then says, "Now, due to popular demand, we will skip the singing of the national anthem. Leeeeeeeet's get ready to Ruuuuumbllllle!" The anthem is now something that just gets in the way.

Nationalism is like profanity. The first time you heard your dad curse your ears exploded. If you heard him mouth off again, it got to be less and less of a big deal, until it meant absolutely nothing to you, taking away the entire meaning of those words your mother told you not to say. The same goes for the constant bleating of American pride. I hear these songs at every sporting event I attend, I watch it on TV, and I’ve heard atheists tell me that God Blesses America. And every time I see it, it means less and less, and soon enough, it might take another September 11th for me and the rest of America to know that these words carry power, and aren’t just a sporting tradition.

Oddly enough, when Americans do something that actually shows that they love their country, such as enlisting in the army or Navy, they are belittled for becoming stupid grunts that will do anything for the fascist leader of our country. My brother will be graduating college this December, and will be in basic training by February. I couldn’t be more proud of him, and I wouldn’t love for anything more than to spit on those who call him a brainwashed idiot of a man. These are the same cowards who run away from the draft, and the same jackasses who ignore the present and historical importance of our men and women in uniform.

True nationalism gets blasted while primitive cheering is almost revered. We aren’t showing what a strong country we are by how many flags we can wave. We don’t tell terrorists what America is made of when we smile and tell each other “God Bless America.” If we wanted to do any of these things, we could enlist in the armed forces, or volunteer down the street helping the homeless. We could show our fellow man some of our love instead of some of our attire. We could actually appreciate the freedoms we have right now, and strive to make them better. God forbid, we could go out and vote.

Just don’t try and tell me that you love America because it says so on your shirt.

(Zach Oelschlegel is a Collegian columist). I crack myself up.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-10-29T21:16:00.000-08:00

I find myself meeting with many of my detractors.

If you all have any memory, I posted a little dialogue between myself and Rene Gonzalez about a week ago. The next day, I went into the ALANA affairs office and had about an hour long chat with the guy. Pretty smart, I have to say, and it was very intimidating coming from my point of view, and I we (and by we I mean him) talked politics and I put in a little input and explained what my article was about. After he posted some of his flagrant remarks online on a few other articles this week, I went into ALANA to meet him again today. I must admit, I can only bear hearing so much of his random examples from history that he must include in his schpiels (sp?). It was really bothering me today when I would say something for thirty seconds, and his respnse would be about five minutes worth of babble about the Vietnam war and its relevence to today's war. I also lost a lot of respect for the guy too as it slipped out of his mouth that he would dodge the draft for a war he calls legit. I asked him a little more about it, and he quickly said that he only meant for an "illegitimate war" he would dodge (right).

My retort back to him on that one was that someone who dodges is a pussy, and that their cowardice just means that someone else will die in their place (not the noblest of things). He "agreed" with me and then talked about Scandinavian exports from the Vikings in the year 1415 and its relevence to Iraq.....and I stopped listening and continued to nod my head.

Then, during dinner, I saw Thomas Naughton, the author of "The conservative contradiction," and me and him had a 45 minute chat over dinner. Basically, he said anyone who is gay, a minority, or a woman cannot be a Republican (all of this in a very CRAPPY article). Interesting kid, to say the least. In truth, we actually found ourselves agreeing on more things than disagreeing (and he did understand the point of my article last week). I admit I was amazed when I found out that he didn't thing Bush was the anti-Christ, and that he thought liberals and conservatives were both idiots and needed to find some middle ground (a common lament I've had in my own mind). In all, some good talking was had, and I think I made a friend out of it. I can see some of the other columnists being real assholes, though. However, I do look foward to working in the sports department in the near future, they seem to enjoy themselves...

I miss my dog. I could really go for petting my dog, right now. Alas, it's not to be. Hey, at least I get to work with that foxy short woman tomorrow for a couple hours at the Newman Center....

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-10-29T08:43:00.000-08:00

Well, today was supposed to be NBA preview day, but Andrew, My editor, had informed me of the possibility that there wouldn't be enough space, which is uderstandable. However, they did print an article of mine that I had sent in about fifteen days ago, about how I thought the Lakers offense would be the best in the business. Naturally, there were subsequent trades afterwards to make the article a bit out of date, and there were some other things I probably would've needed to explain. This also was more of a sampling of what I could write for them on the NBA, and if it was printed it was to come back to me for re-tooling. Ah well, I can't really complain all that much, I'm still in the paper, right? And by the way, Dave Hall, I still think the Lakers O rocks the Mavericks O, and am feeling even better about that after last nights romp.

Lakers offense will reign supreme

by Zach Oelschlegel, Collegian Collumnist
October 29, 2003

There is always debate in the NBA over who will win the championship, who will be MVP and who will become the toast of the league. Where there shouldn't be debate this year, however, is who will be the best offensive team in the league.

Three years ago, Sports Illustrated tagged the Sacramento Kings as the team most fun to watch because of their high-octane offense. Two years ago the Nets came out of nowhere with their Princeton offense as Jason Kidd led the team to the Finals.

Last year, Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash and the Mavericks dazzled the league with an eye-popping 103.0 points per game average. This year, however, one should look no further than the Lakers when it comes to putting up outrageous scoring figures.

Lakers GM Mitch Kupchak pulled out quite the coup this summer when he signed perennial all-stars Gary Payton and Karl Malone, adding to what was already a dominating cast with Shaq and Kobe running the show.

Now he's assembled what should amount to the most stacked team in history, and the 1995-1996 Bulls winning record of 72 wins is no longer safe. Here's why.

Shaq is still the most dominating player to ever play the game. Never before has a player commanded the attention of so many double and triple teams. Now, with Payton and Malone out on the floor, an opponent's defense must be outstanding in order to have any chance of stopping the big man. It doesn't hurt that Shaq excels at passing out of the double team as well as any center. With two more big options, look for his assist total to increase this year.

Other than during the 2001 playoffs when the Lakers beat the Sixers for the championship, Derek Fisher was nothing special running the team, and his meager 3.6 assists per game show this. Gary Payton, who accumulated 8.3 assists per game last year while playing for the mediocre Sonics and Bucks, surely will add to the Lakers' offensive production.

With one of the best in the business running the show, expect the other three to flourish. Another attribute Payton brings to the team is his tenacious defense, which should free up Kobe Bryant to focus more on his offensive duties as opposed to shadowing the opposing team's best player. It also nice that "The Glove" averaged 20 points a game last year.

His legal troubles aside, Kobe is still the best all-around player in the league. No one can put up the combination of scoring and defensive presence Bryant brings to the game. Once again, with that amazing cast around him, he won't feel the pressure to kill himself carrying the team as he did last year, and still will be the phenomenal player we all saw take over the league last season.

Karl Malone wants a championship. He's been to the Finals twice and had MJ deny him both times. Questions about his apparent thirst for the scoring record should subside because if he wanted it that badly he would've re-signed with the Jazz last summer as opposed to taking the veteran's minimum to play with L.A. Look for everyone to take a bit of a backseat this year in the name of teamwork.

Of course, there's no guarantee the team will be as big of a juggernaut as many are predicting. What is the best team on paper is also the team with the most distractions, which is the biggest pitfall coach Phil Jackson needs to address.

Obviously, the Kobe Bryant mess can disrupt this team for the next two years, and can even take him away altogether. Gary Payton can turn into a team cancer if he's not happy, and Karl Malone might still have hopes for that scoring title. However, if anybody can take this team to the top, it's Jackson.

If the Lakers do falter, look for the usual suspects to put up the massive scoring figures. The Kings fortified themselves even more this summer with the signing of all-star Brad Miller, and can be especially dangerous if Mike Bibby puts up numbers like he did in the 2002 conference finals.

The Mavs went out and acquired Antawn Jamison for the steep price of Nick van Exel, although his importance to the team is lessened with the presence of Steve Nash. Don't count out the Timberwolves, who put together a fab four of their own this summer and look to be a force in the West with a lineup that includes Wally Szczerbiak, Sam Cassell, Latrell Sprewell and the ever-incredible Kevin Garnett.

Zach Oelschlegel is a Collegian Columnist.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-10-26T18:23:00.000-08:00

With the NBA season starting very soon, yet again, the East finds itself in the same situation as last year: utterly weak and completely inept in comparison to its Western counterparts. The Nets went down against the Spurs last year in six to give the East zero NBA champions since the Bulls won in 1998. Still, a few teams are holding out hope for a weary West opponent for the Finals, as the road to the Western Conference title will be no small task. Let’s get down to the teams.

Atlantic Division

New Jersey Nets- Despite losing in the Finals for two years running, this is the East’s best hope of an NBA champion. The Nets retained Jason Kidd and signed Alonzo Mourning, while letting go of Dikembe Mutombo, a misfit in the Princeton offense.
Questions: Will Kenyon Martin finally become a player deserving of a number one pick? Will the Nets ever win in the Finals?
Prediction: The East’s best chance for a Final’s champ will again come up short, losing in five games to its Western opponent.

Miami Heat: The Heat drafted Dwayne Wade with the fifth pick and overpaid Lamar Odom with a $67 million dollar contract. The Heat were shocked when the Clippers matched an $82 million dollar contract for the services of Elton Brand.
Questions: How will the Heat’s awkward guard-filled lineup affect their play? Will Lamar Odom continue to have off court troubles?
Prediction: A mediocre team at best, but playoffs are very possible, especially in the East.

Philadelphia 76ers: The team had a very interesting summer, starting with Larry Brown ditching the team for someone that didn’t have troublemaker Allen Iverson as its centerpiece. Keith Van Horn was traded in a four team deal and Glenn Robinson was acquired.
Questions: How will Glenn Robinson and Allen Iverson, two notorious ball hogs, coexist together? Will new coach Randy Ayers be up to the task of replacing Brown?
Prediction: The team will have its ups and downs, and finish in the middle of the playoff pack. Conference finals aren’t completely out of the question.

Washington Wizards: The Wizards surprised the NBA this summer as they signed Gilbert Arenas to a monster, albeit excessive, contract worth $64 million. Eddie Jordan, the respected assistant coach from the Nets was brought in to replace Doug Collins.
Questions: Juan Dixon, Larry Hughes, Jerry Stackhouse, and Gilbert Arenas are all guards. Who will play? Will Kwame Brown recover from all the screaming Michael Jordan did in his direction and become the stud Jordan thought he would be when he took him with the number one pick in the draft?
Prediction: In his third season, Brown escapes Jordan and becomes a legit star, leading the Wizards to the playoffs.

Orlando Magic: The team got Juwan Howard and Tyronne Lue in free agency, but other than that the team is still pretty intact from the last season. Gordon Giricek and Drew Gooden were excellent after the team acquired them at last year’s trade deadline for Mike Miller.
Questions: Will Tracey McGrady be able to carry the team with his chronic back trouble? Will he need to with the potential maturation of Gooden and Giricek? Will Grant Hill ever play for this team?
Prediction: Gooden will become a star and the McGrady will continue to make his case for the class of the NBA as the Magic grab the third spot in the ever so weak East.

New York Knicks: The team finally traded Latrell Sprewell and got Keith Van Horn, and recently signed Dikembe Mutombo for three years. It drafted Mike Sweetney in the first round of the draft and stole Maciej Lampe with the 30th pick.
Questions: How will Van Horn react to the media pressure of New York? How long will it take for Antonio McDyess to re-injure his knee? Is Mutombo really only 37 years old?
Prediction: The team will again be stuck in no mans land, with the talent to make the playoffs but the cancer (Van Horn) to not. Watch for Van Horn to flop as the media hounds him constantly.

Boston Celtics: Just last week the Celtics made a blockbuster deal with the Mavericks dealing Antoine Walker and Tony Delk for Raef LaFrentz, Jiri Welsch, and a draft pick. This was a head-scratcher of a deal for the Celtics, as they are now stuck with the bloated contract of LaFrentz (6 years left at $63 million); however, Danny Ainge seemed very intent on moving Walker.
Questions: How will Walker’s absence affect the team early on, and how much will they miss his point forward skills? Is Vin Baker really as good as they are advertising him in camp?
Prediction: This trade weakens the team significantly, but in the East that 8th seed is always up for grabs.

Central Division

Toronto Raptors: The Raptors had a quiet summer, with the only major changes coming from the draft (Chris Bosh) and a new coach in Kevin O’Neill. The team is very excited about Bosh.
Questions: Will Vince Carter be the player he was three years ago, when he carried the Raptors into almost upsetting the Sixers in the semi Finals? Is his knee healed?
Prediction: Playoffs for this team if Carter produces, doldrums if he does not.

New Orleans Hornets: The team let go of Paul Silas and hired Tim Floyd (of Chicago Bulls infamy) to be their new head coach. Point guard Darrell Armstrong was brought in to back up star Baron Davis, and defensive stopper George Lynch was re-signed.
Questions: How many games will Davis, the unquestioned MVP of this team, play after missing 32 games last season?
Prediction: The Hornets will make the playoffs, taking one of the middle seeds.

Milwaukee Bucks: The team has a very different look than the one that was once favored to win the East, as Glenn Robinson, Sam Cassell, and Ray Allen are all with different teams. George Karl was fired in July, and Terry Porter was named coach. Anthony Mason’s contract was bought out.
Questions: Who will score all the points for this team now that all the stars are gone?
Prediction: This will be one of the worst teams in the East, and playoffs are a long shot.

Chicago Bulls: A tragedy struck this summer when Jay Williams shattered his hip in an awful motorcycle accident (never mind that he should have never been on it anyway). Scottie Pippin was signed and the Bulls look to make the playoffs this year as the team matures.
Questions: Will Eddy Curry become the one of the best centers in the East this season? How badly will the team miss Jay Williams?
Prediction: The Bulls make the playoffs this year, and challenge for the conference title in two years.

Cleveland Cavaliers: The team hired Paul Silas as their new head coach, and traded for J.R. Bremer. Who cares? Let LeBronomania begin!
Questions: Is LeBron the second coming of Michael Jordan? Will he be able to handle the expectations? Will Darius Miles become the star he was supposed to be with the Clippers?
Prediction: This is a very young team absolutely loaded with talent (Carlos Boozer, Dajuan Wagner, Miles, LeBron). Its youth, however, will be its shortcoming, but LeBron will still please.

Indiana Pacers: Jermaine O’Neal was shocked when the Larry Bird gave Isaiah Thomas the axe in favor of Rick Carlisle. Kenny Anderson was signed and will likely supplant Jamaal Tinsley as the starting point guard. O’Neal and Reggie Miller were both re-signed.
Questions: How much trouble will Ron Artest cause this year? Will Carlisle be able to take this team past the first round?
Prediction: Playoffs likely, anything more is not.

Detroit Pistons: The Pistons stole Darko Milicic from the Memphis Grizzlies, dating back to a 1997 trade where Otis Thorpe went to Memphis (then Vancouver) for this pick. Rick Carlisle was surprisingly fired and Larry Brown was hired.
Questions: Does Larry Brown care more about winning championships or more about teaching young players?
Prediction: Look for this team to do come out near the top in the conference, but watch out in a couple years when Tayshaun Prince and Milicic hit their potential.

Atlanta Hawks: The team traded Glenn Robinson for the oft-injured Terrell Brandon, which is essentially like trading cancer for cap space, since Brandon’s contact comes off the books after this year. Jason Terry was re-signed.
Questions: How foolish did the team look last year after guaranteeing the playoffs to their season-ticket holders?
Prediction: This is truly one of the awful teams of the NBA.

Predicted Playoff Seedings
1. New Jersey Nets
2. Detroit Pistons
3. Orlando Magic
4. New Orleans Hornets
5. Philadelphia 76ers
6. Indiana Pacers
7. Chicago Bulls
8. Washington Wizards
9. Boston Celtics
10. Cleveland Cavaliers
11. Miami Heat
12. New York Knicks
13. Toronto Raptors
14. Milwaukee Bucks
15. Atlanta Hawks

Conference Title: Nets over Magic

Western Conference Preview
By Zach Oelschlegel

The West’s domination of the East will continue and be even more apparent this year. Many would argue, myself included, that the top five teams in the NBA reside in the West and some might even go as far as saying the Suns are the sixth best team. There is almost no question that the winner of the West will become the NBA champion, so let’s get down to the teams.

Midwest Division

San Antonio Spurs: Perennial great David Robinson truly retired going out on top, as the Spurs won the title last year, beating the Nets in six games. Rasho Nesterovic was signed away from the Timberwolves, Hedo Turkoglu was acquired, and defensive minded role player Robert Horry was signed.
Questions: Will this team still be able to win the West as other contenders solidified their teams and more?
Prediction: Nobody plays team ball as well as the Spurs, and with Tim Duncan as their centerpiece, they will be in the middle of the title hunt.

Dallas Mavericks: The team again made many deals this summer, dealing away Nick Van Exel and Raef LaFrentz for Antawn Jamison, Danny Fortson, and Antoine Walker. The latter trade of LaFrentz for Walker is a head scratcher, because the Mavericks gave up one of their better defenders for something they didn’t need, that being more offense.
Questions: How many minutes will Eduardo Najera and Fortson, two players who don’t always think offense, play under offense first Don Nelson?
Prediction: This team will probably win even more than last season, and will grab a high seed in the playoffs. Defense wins championships, however, and the Mavs will lose come crunch time to a team not constantly thinking about shooting.

Minnesota Timberwolves: The team went and proved to Kevin Garnett that ownership was concerned about winning championships, as Latrell Sprewell, Michael Olowakandi, and Sam Cassell were added to what was already a good team. Garnett was subsequently signed to a huge contract extension.
Prediction: How will the team react to the mouths of Cassell and Sprewell and Wally Szczerbiak? Will Flip Saunders be able to dole out the minutes so everybody’s happy?
Prediction: This is one of the dark horse candidates to win the title, as they have players who defend (Olowakandi), players who score (Cassell), and players who do both (Sprewell and Garnett).

Houston Rockets: Jeff Van Gundy was brought in to replace Rudy Tomjanovich as coach. Eric Piatkowski, Jim Jackson, and Andrian Griffin are all new to the team. Van Gundy plans on running the offense through Yao Ming.
Questions: After playing almost constantly the last couple years without sabbatical, how tired is Yao Ming? Will Eddie Griffin continue to be the problem child he has been since his career’s inception?
Prediction: This is a good team with Yao and Steve Francis in charge, but it will lose to the better teams in the West in the first round.

Memphis Grizzlies: After starting out last year 0-8, the club hired old school coach Hubie Brown to take control of a young team. Brown looks to improve on the clubs 28 win season with the additions of James Posey and Jake Tsakalidis and his team’s maturation.
Questions: After seemingly turning the corner last year, will Jason Williams become one of the elite point guards this year? How bad is Mike Millers back?
Prediction: The team will have to work extremely hard to make the playoffs, which are doubtful but doable.

Denver Nuggets: The Nuggets were snubbed by many big time free agents this summer, but all wasn’t lost as they still signed Andre Miller and drafted Carmello Anthony, who figures to push for Rookie of the Year. Hard working Earl Boykins was signed.
Questions: Will youngsters Nene, Anthony, and Nikoloz Tskitishvili give the Nuggets something to hope for two years down the road?
Prediction: A team on the rise, just wait a couple years.

Utah Jazz: Nothing went right for the Jazz this summer, as John Stockton and his assist record retired, and Karl Malone left the team to get a ring with the Lakers. The team signed Corey Maggette to an offer sheet that was matched by the Clippers, and added Keon Clark.
Questions: Can’t most college players start for this team?
Prediction: This team will be fighting the Bucks and the Hawks to the wire for worst team in the league.

Pacific Division

Los Angeles Lakers: Before the whole Kobe Bryant mess broke out, the team had signed all time greats Karl Malone and Gary Payton, to form one of the most intimidating lineups in the history of the game. Now, coach Phil Jackson must rally the team in order to prevent it from becoming overly distracted by Bryant’s legal troubles.
Questions: How much time will Shaq miss this year due to his toe? Will Jackson find a way to keep all of the four superstars happy?
Prediction: All distractions aside, there is really no reason as to why this team shouldn’t win the championship.

Sacramento Kings: After watching the other contenders in the West beef up their rosters, the Kings went and signed all star Brad Miller away from the Pacers. The window for this team to win is closing quickly.
Questions: Will Chris Webber finally shed that “loser” status he has kept since college and become the winner we all thought he would be? Is it too late to win a championship?
Prediction: This is still an elite team, and with the addition of Miller, they can still win that elusive championship.

Phoenix Suns: The Suns gave the Spurs a decent run for their money last year before losing the in the first round of the playoffs. Amare Stoudemire shocked the league last year with his stellar play coming straight from high school.
Questions: Does this team really believe that Jake Voshkul will be adequate on defense against the bigger lions of the West? How many games will Penny Hardaway miss this year?
Prediction: This team has two of the best players in the NBA in Stephon Marbury and Shawn Marion, and Stoudemire will be there soon. Still, they aren’t good enough to challenge for the title, but a first round upset isn’t out of the question.

Portland TrailBlazers: This team is still relatively intact from last year, although Arvydas Sabonis retired again after last season. The team is still filled with the same troublemakers from last year.
Questions: How many technical fouls will Rasheed Wallace pick up this year? How many times will Damon Stoudemire and Ruben Patterson run into legal troubles?
Prediction: This was once upon a time considered to be one of the best teams in the West. Now, after so much inner turmoil, team strife, and stupidity off the court, the most one can ask out of this team is to simply make the playoffs, which they will do.

Seattle Supersonics: The biggest transaction this team made was last year, when they unloaded Gary Payton for Ray Allen, and finished up the season going 18-12. The team has a fairly solid nucleus and is looking to make the playoffs this year.
Questions: The team can shoot with the best of them, but who is going to score all the points inside? And how badly is the team regretting signing major underachiever Calvin Booth in 2001?
Prediction: A decent team, but making the playoffs in the West is no easy gig like it is out East.

Golden State Warriors: The team lost top guard Gilbert Arenas to free agency, and traded away their other best player (Antawn Jamison, along with Danny Fortson) for Nick Van Exel. Van Exel and Jason Richardson will combine for one of the better backcourts in the league.
Questions: Will Mike Dunleavy show a reason for the team’s drafting of him with the third pick last year? Will Van Exel play team ball or whine and force a trade?
Prediction: Another decent team that will lose out on the playoffs because of its conference.

Los Angeles Clippers: The NBA world turned upside down this summer when the Clips matched contracts for restricted free agents Elton Brand and Corey Maggette. Unfortunately, the team lost starters Andre Miller, Michael Olowakandi, and Lamar Odom to free agency. Mike Dunleavy (the father of the player) was brought in to coach.
Questions: The Clippers did retain two free agents, but had the cap space to keep two more. Will Donald Sterling ever allow a Clippers GM to have a salary even slightly above the league minimum?
Prediction: Yes, this team did make some moves in the market, but ownership’s commitment to losing will keep what could have been a great team a poor one.

Predicted Playoff Seedings:

1. Los Angeles Lakers
2. Dallas Mavericks
3. Minnesota Timberwolves
4. San Antonio Spurs
5. Sacramento Kings
6. Phoenix Suns
7. Houston Rockets
8. Portland Trailblazers
9. Seattle Supersonics
10. Memphis Grizzlies
11. Golden State Warriors
12. Los Angeles Clippers
13. Denver Nuggets
14. Utah Jazz

Lakers over Timberwolves.

Lakers over the Nets in five games.

2003-10-21T14:50:00.000-07:00

Rene Gonzalez managed to find a way to write something about my article, and of course, he completely missed the point:

"Fair enough, Zach. you've stated your dislikes of liberals and their criticism of Bush.

I challenge you to publicly defend your defense of the Bush administration by providing evidence of concrete achievements of the administration. Remember that an administration's quality does not rest with finding one or a few good achievements, but in the overall picture. So far, with the economy and foreign policy, as well as other things, Bush is a dismal failure (and I'm willing to defend it on this forum).

I'd like to know why you support Bush so much and would like a chance to agree or disagree publicly with your comments. I find that to be the legitimate way to substantiate one's claims. Simply writing an article ridiculing "leftists" doesn't cut it.

If you want to prove the superior nature of the Bush administration in comparison to the Democrats (or beyond the Democrats...to policies suggested by other individuals), then do so.

I believe Bush is either a fascist or an incompetent fool that is advised by a cabal of fascists around him or both.

Do you disagree? If you do, go ahead and post a RATIONAL (please, no crazy, irrational, and ridiculing posts) argument why the Bush administration HASN'T been the worst administration in U.S. history.

Rene Gonzales"

I just wrote him this email:
Unfortunately, Rene, you completely missed the entire point. My article wasn't about defending Bush, in fact, I would call myself a moderate Democrat (still an ultra conservative at the outrageously liberal state university I attend, but a moderate everywhere else in our country). I agree with many of your points you said about Bush; I think his tax plan is completely stupid and hope to God the democrats find a way to stop the tax cuts, I think his gay rights stance is utterly unconstitutional (don't believe my story about not being Republican? Read my first article of the year, completely about how stupid the gay marriage laws are in this country, although you cannot find it on the Collegian website, so I have attached it).

I agree, Bush can be an idiot, and hope that he loses the coming election to Joe Lieberman, although I still don't think he is the anti-Christ people around make him out to be.

Besides that point, my whole article was about the unoriginality of the Collegian columnists. How many articles a week must I read that are focused on how stupid Bush is? Fine, we get the point, there is a whole other world out there that doesn't revolve around the foolishness of our president. Did you notice the correlation of my satire to some of the very previous articles written by other columnists?(read "Dear Conservatives," which, might I add, truly made the author look like an idiot due to the blatant stereotypes he put in there about Republicans, and I would expect you of all people an ALANA member to be totally against stereotyping). Other articles include just about everything Mark Ostroff and Robert Carey have written, and every other columnist usually finds a way to put a negative spin on Bush in their articles (I'm fat, it's Bush's fault, my life sucks, it's Bush's fault). Understand that the rest of the population doesn't always see things the Massachusetts way. I'M TIRED OF IT. WRITE SOMETHING ELSE; ORIGINALITY, ANYONE?.

Lastly, don't write something so utterly off the point it's beyond hilarity. If I wanted a lecture about how bad Bush was, I would just go read the Collegian archives. I'm still amazed that you wrote something of that tone considering how respectful I was when I said I disagreed with you on the ALANA appointed seats, and I thought you would know better than to write something like that after reading your respnse to me (which did in fact alter my stance on the subject to a degree).

Speaking of unoriginality, I will say the same thing others have said to you in the past: you're a grad student, you should know better, especially when you make such a point about it in everything you write. Don't go spouting off on my writing when you truly have no idea what the hell you are talking about, as that was especially evident in this case. We always try to have an unbiased media (and please don't try to tell me that Collegian writing is anywhere near middle ground), and everytime that something remotely even hints at defending a republican, you make a massive outcry about how stupid the politically right is, so to prevent any more of this "right wing propaganda" from spilling into ever so liberal Massachusetts. Go a little south and see how many people love your antics, and you'll get a perspective that includes things other than what you and the rest of campus believe.

You should be ashamed. Don't try and make yourself look like the genius you want to be by challenging me to a debate, there are plenty of Republican club members who actually disagree with your Bush rantings. Next time try to look underneath the surface.
Sincerely Yours,
Zach Oelschlegel

This guy really cracks me up. Best case scenario he might apologize to me for writing soemthing like that.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-10-18T19:08:00.000-07:00

“How to Write for the Collegian”
by Zach Oelschlegel

After pouring over this beloved paper every day last year from cover to cover, and now writing my fifth column for the Collegian, I like to think of myself as someone who knows how to write a half decent article. Unfortunately, as a columnist of sorts I fall into the stumbling areas of writer’s block, and I can only imagine that my fellow Ed/Op columnists fall into the same trap. So, after careful observation of the endless opinions I have read, I bring to the Collegian “Zach Oelschlegel’s Guide to Writing Editorials,” in an attempt to help myself and other Collegian columnists come up with excellent journalism when we’re out of ideas.

The trick to writing a trendy article is to find a way to bash George Bush. Yes, it is simply that easy. There are countless websites where you can find the next laughable thing our president said. One of the best ways to lampoon Dubya is to take the word “strategery,” and create an entire column focusing on the stupidity of such a word, and why Mr. Bush should be impeached for having the language IQ of salami. Or, simply resort to name calling and refer to our president as “Senor Butthead,” getting at least a few laughs from the six year old leftists. Do not, however, even think about mocking Bill Clinton’s “it” controversy, as blasting a Democrat is a journalistic faux pas here in Massachusetts.

Naturally, there’s only so much vocabulary a columnist can analyze, so why not try out your hand at some hilarious satire? Campus favorites include writing sarcastic letters to Mr. Bush and commending him for a job well done (NOT!), and then finishing the story by telling us particularly un-savvy readers that you were kidding, followed by you patting yourself on the back for using such inspirational side-splitting comic wit. Sarcastic tones go especially well with the “No Blood for Oil” chant, and the rah-rah “Anybody but Bush” mantra. Throw in a few lines about how Bush has been in bed with every CEO from the Fortune 500 companies if you aren’t at the 750 word benchmark.

For your next article, instead of going after one conservative, go after his entire cabinet and maybe a couple more of these “cronies” the Democrats keep speaking of. Write them a sarcastic letter in the same fashion you wrote a letter to Bush! No one will care anyway, just as long as what you write is about the Evil Empire called the Yankees…er, Republicans. Finish your article with the slogan “Bush Sucks!!”

Potential topics for conservative bashing include stereotyping them for alleged stereotyping of minorities. Ignore the fact that you are doing the same thing you are bashing them for, because in our great state of Massachusetts, no one cares about hypocrisy, especially if it involves a right-wing activist. Continue to make outrageous assumptions about conservatives and finish this article stating that the Republican Club is filled with dimwits, and that if it were legal, they would all try to fornicate with kangaroos.

Keep in mind that there is no middle ground in politics. Use Bush’s “If you are not with us then you are against us” catch-phrase and apply the same to political beliefs. There is no such thing as a true democrat unless he follows the Howard Dean model, leaving moderate Democrats like Joe Lieberman in the category of “ultra-conservatives.” Likewise, if you are a minority, bash Republicans for not accepting you and then denounce Clarence Thomas for being an “Uncle Tom.” Since it is such an important tool of this writing guide, I will repeat it: hypocrisy in your arguments doesn’t matter if no one tells you so.

Lastly, to really stir up some controversy, make a snide comment about Christianity. True separation of church and state means that all politicians must be atheists; it is a scientific fact that these so called “Men of God” have brains made of fried bologna mixed with Cracker Jack. You can trump Bush’s religion and still condemn him for how he discriminates against the Muslims.

In conclusion, I just want to say that it also does not matter if the same points have been made in previous articles, or if you have written an article of similar caliber recently. What really matters is that UMass knows that all Republicans would love for nothing less than to wipe out all minorities in a gruesome genocide not unlike the Holocaust, and would jump at the chance to fornicate with certain marsupials. If beating that into the heads of students is the only way to educate them, then so be it. We all know that around here people aren’t grading us on our originality or something, as if that was of any importance…

2003-10-17T21:56:00.000-07:00

I'm out of place. What the hell am I doing in this place?

I've been bored lately. Not bored as in yesterday afternoon, but bored as in the last month or so. I feel like I watch the World Series on the couch alone, I sit in my room playing Goldeneye, I go to the hockey games by myself, I'm feeling as though I'm missing out on something, and it pisses me to all hell. I've put a lot of thought in to this lately, and I'm not happy with the amount of close friendships I have.

This campus is boring. We had a "pep rally" of sorts last night, and I truly wanted to cry. I'm not kidding. The emcee would get people to cheer, and no one screamed besides me. I looked like a complete jackass, screaming for UMass in a crowd of 300 people who were probably wondering why this tall curly haired freak was screaming. At a pep rally, for gosh sakes. Who does that?

I tell people who don't go to sporting events that they are what's wrong with UMass, although I have a playful tone about it. Now, I want to thrash and maim these people. Right now, I am genuinely angry about the state of this university. I used to be annoyed with the apathy others showed, but now I am truly angry, and it just pisses me off how unpassionate people are. If I felt like it, I could have bawled my eyes out right there at that pep rally, just thinking about the fun I was missing by not attending a Big Ten school that actually gave a damn. I'm not happy with my fellow students, and if you attend UMass and aren't Dave Prevost or a sport management major, that probably means you. You make what could be a thriving university a shithole, and I'm sick and tired of you bringing me down with you. I hate being a martyr.

SLD. You Suck.

2003-10-09T20:31:00.000-07:00

ZooMass is back.

Yes, that popular moniker that used to refer to my fine university here in Massachusetts is back with reinforcements. Let's just say that three times over the past five nights, there have been policemen clad in riot gear clearing out the SouthWest quad where I reside (as in, right next to my dorm, fifty feet from where I am now).

The Red Sox won. That's the reason. On Saturday night, the Sox beat the A's to stay alive in the postseason, and two cars were flipped. On Monday night, the Sox won the series and 3,000 people gathered to burn things and scream and break their legs. Last night, the Sox won again, and 1500 people went outside, and it was peaceful and happy until the cops decided to end the party. Apparently Senor Oinkers beat the crap out of a kid, and then all hell broke loose as I was forced back into my dorm due to the burning tear gas they shot by the dorm door. Many rubber bullets were shot, still on the ground this morning, and last night I saw at least three cannisters of tear gas shot into a crowd to disperse it, only to have the crowd run back five minutes later when the cops turned around to nail the kids coming from the other side.

Do you smell bacon?

I smell a pork product of some kind...

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-10-06T10:03:00.000-07:00

I've often complained about the apathy UMass students have, and the fact that no one around here actually cares. This time, however, I think that it's come in pretty handy.

I've had somer minimal contact with Andrew Merritt, the sports editor at the Collegian. I showed up to the sports meeting a month ago, told him who I was and that I would like cover the NBA, and he gave it to me. That's it. It wasn't like, "Okay, well, we need to check out your credentials, or we need to see if you know anything about the NBA." It was given to me.

So I show up to the Collegian last night to get a few things straightened out with Erika, my Ed/Op editor, and see Andrew, and I remind him about the NBA, when I can do a preview, etc. He gave me 2,000 words for the NBA preview, which amounts to roughly one full newspaper page. Plus, I think that I have a weekly NBA commentary where he's given me 750 words per column. All for showing up.

So, in all, I see myself over the rest of the year having about six columns a month, four of which cover the NBA, and two editorials. And, the best part is, I can write about anything I want to for all of them. Maybe apathy isn't such a bad thing after all...

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-10-03T12:38:00.000-07:00

“Coalition to Stop Gun Violence = Stupidity”
by Zach Oelschlegel

Again, the dream of a utopian society takes away all of our common sense.

Just last Wednesday, one of my fellow columnists wrote an article about why we need to make handguns illegal, citing a tragic death in Maryland where a four year old shot his sister. While I feel for the people involved, and agree with my colleague that this would never have happened had there not been a gun in the house, the whole idea of making guns illegal is completely and utterly stupid.

I really have to laugh at the people who scream about Ashcroft being the anti-Christ, because typically, these are the same people touting the “Stop Gun Violence” policy.

Let’s just think about this for one second. On the one hand, these people are crying that John Ashcroft is trying to turn America into Stalinist Russia. Every right we have will be straight out the door, everything we should take for granted as free American citizens will be compromised in this appalling Patriot Act.

Later in the day, these same people are answering phones for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. Apparently the Second Amendment doesn’t count as one of our so called “inalienable rights,” and, ironically enough, John Ashcroft actually supports our right to bear arms, arguably the most important right we as Americans were ever given.

In truth, the Second Amendment was never really about forming our own militia in case Britain decided to invade us again. It wasn’t designed to give us a gun so we could go out and knock off a few rabbits for supper, or give us a means to protect us from criminals. The true reason the Second Amendment was given to us was to protect us from our own government.

However obvious it sounds, if we did not have guns, we would not have had any chance to win the Revolutionary War. Likewise, when the Bill of Rights was made, Americans were given the right to own a gun so they could protect themselves from their own government, in case that government became oppressive like Britain was before our independence. The Framers made every effort to spell out the freedoms of Americans, and gave its citizens every law and right to stop the government from infringing on them, which is stated in our Bill of Rights.

Now, many people foolishly want the government to violate our rights by taking away the Second Amendment. We are already adequately protected, they say, by our well-trained police force and standing army. Never mind that banning guns would make criminals the only citizens with guns, never mind that banning guns makes every other right we have completely hazy, never mind that the it’s statistically proven that crime rates are lower in states with minimal gun control legislation as opposed to states with high gun control laws.

The idea of taking these guns away is idealistic, but nowhere near realistic. Someone once said, “When guns outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” We outlawed murder and stealing a long time ago, and I don’t see that working out too well. As if banning guns would be any different? Shouldn’t we try to have the people handling the guns be at least law-abiding? We already cower in fear over the potential of being burglarized, mugged, or killed, so why take away our last line of defense?

It isn’t feasible. Remember Prohibition? Going out and banning something that’s been legal for years will not work because of the backlash society would put against the police and the government. Can you imagine the cops taking your crazy Southern redneck uncle Jeremiah into the police station for having a gun in his house?

What we really need to be thinking about, however, is the law itself. The Second Amendment specifically states that “the rights of the people to hold and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Infringing these rights opens the door to Ashcroft or any other politician who wants to steal our freedom. It would make the entire Constitution ambiguous if we were to violate a right that is clearly in our Constitution to never be violated, and it opens the door to re-writing our entire law. There is a reason as to why our forefathers gave us these undeniable rights; they didn’t write these laws in so they could be denied once again by an oppressive government. Banning guns is a nice idea, but what it really comes down to is that it is just plain stupid.

2003-09-26T21:55:00.000-07:00

A final note on my whole satire mess. "Pete," after some people who weren't mildly retarded posted feedback online, wrote this:

"Indeed Zach is making fun of ALANA, but regardless it's still a horrible article. I don't follow SGA , nor do I read the school paper. I'm a "wicked cool" ballcap backward dude? Last I checked, I don't even wear a hat, but hey you're the expert.
I guess the student paper is for the select people who read it.

pete"

Yes Pete, typically people who spout off on Collegian columnists actually have some context. What we will do sometimes to save face, right?

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-09-26T10:03:00.000-07:00

Wow, I have to admit, I really have been posting a lot lately...what's this, three posts in four days? I know the Dave's will appreciate this (the two H's and the P). Anyway, this is more of a general response to what Dave Hall wrote to me last night in my guestbook, which yes, I check 3490876576346458 times daily to see if anyone actually signed it (likewise, I am disappointed 2398674567034 times during the day).

I realize how Dave doesn't understand this, but the reason Dave wouldn't get it until after some "deep" thought (ahahaha, still love you man, call me...) is because Dave doesn't go to UMass. While I gave a short preface to give people some background to the story, you really cannot get a feel for what has been going on here unless you actually have been here. It's not as if this was some minor blip in the news these last few weeks; this has truly been THE talk on campus, and that is why I am disappointed in my feedback or lack thereof. I wouldn't expect some writing dingus in Iowa to expect me to know exactly what he was talking about if he wrote satire on the government's tariffs on his corn and other crops, because frankly, I really don't care (and I'm pretty positive that's not a real story anyway).

In the last two weeks, the Massachusetts Daily Collegian, my paper, has printed at least six stories on the front page covering the issue. This ranged from first reporting the story, to reporting the protest ALANA did on the student union steps and how they stormed the SGA office, to reporting that Jared Nokes, the SGA speaker, pulled a somewhat shady move in getting the vote in for the elimination of the seats. This doesn't include the two editorials Emily Duggan wrote about how Jared Nokes sucks (I think she is a dimwit but that is besides the point), or the column Yousef Munayyer wrote about how both sides are idiots, or the unsigned editorial on how the issue should be resolved peacefully and quickly. Of course, SGA senate elections were held yesterday, and Questions Two and Four on the ballot concerned the appointed seats for the ALANA caucus. Did I mention that David Carr, the SGA president, paid to have a letter of his put in the paper telling the student body he didn't have much to do with what Jared Nokes declared? While this was an overkill of information, I think it was needed in giving you all an idea of how big this was at UMass.

Likewise, in my article, I think I put out some extremely clear correlations between the situation and my snowboarding theme. For instance, I said that the SGA didn't represent snowboarders like ALANA said the SGA didn't represent minorities. I made up a pseudo name for racism, calling it "anti-borditism." I made up a fake prostest like ALANA did to rally the cause, and then said the boarders would storm the office like ALANA did after the demonstation. I even said that I should have an appointed seat on the SGA for the so called "snowboarding caucus." The point of my article was to say something completely stupid and outrageous as to make people correlate that to how stupid and outrageous ALANA is being.

Gilad Skolnick, who happens to be my favorite writer at the Collegian (although I have yet to meet him), recently wrote this article, which I found to be hilarious. Everyday some dimwit Massachusetts liberal manages to find a way to write a completely unoriginal column on how stupid and awful and heinous George Bush is. While I agree with them in some respects, and disagree with them in others on Dubya, Gilad managed to write satire on US foreign policy. He never mentioned that he was writing satire, or that he was kidding, which made the article all that more excellent. Comically enough, the next day this Letter to the Editor appeared in the Collegian (making me wonder if Erika, my editor, thought that Gilad was serious, or was doing it to make the writer look that much more stupid).

The template I am following for my satire is off of arguably the best satire in history, A Modest Proposal, by Jonathan Swift. While the text is brutally disgusting and repulsive, I am sure it made a lot of people think about their actions, and I'm sure Jonathan also had some dimwit's tell him what sicko he was, like my dimwit's who told me I was stupid for writing such an obnoxious piece. Satire should make you think, it shouldn't tell you at the end that it was "just kiddin.' "

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-09-24T16:08:00.000-07:00

I will admit that it has been quite a while since I have posted something on here regarding some random personal thoughts or such, but here goes.

My editorial ran yesterday. The whole point of the editorial was to make a mockery of ALANA and their business with the SGA. I remember looking in the back of my textbook in 12th grade when Mr Liegel asked for the definition of "satire," and it said "A literary work in which human vice or folly is attacked through irony, derision, or wit to inspire reform." In truth, I think the only thing I inspired was stupidity, as cased by the feedback I got online about my article. Pete wrote to me:

"I almost forgot to do this today. A friend of mine showed me this article today, and well, I couldn't believe it. Someone actually has to pay money to keep this paper running, and they waste that money by posting articles like this in it?
This kid sounds like a whiney little child, I mean seriously who cares about the fact that Mad River Glen doesnt allow snowboarders? More power to them, if I could ride somewhere without snowboarders around I'd love it. They're all cocky little bastards who think they're the shit because they can do a sloppy ass frondside 360.
Mad River Glen has always been know as a skiers mountain. If Zach knew anything about that place, he woudln't want to ride there anyways. It's skiing terrian, 99.9% of the little punk ass jibber snowboarders these days probably couldn't handle it anyways.
Please don't waste my time and money by publishing such garbage. All this is is some little kid whining about how he thinks skiers hate snowboarders and with no substantial argument to back it up. As Zach has proven, snoaboarders are a bunch of immature kids who want everthing their way. I think he should go hop back on his handrails and leave Mad River Glen alone.
Oh, and by the way I am a snoaboarder, I have been since 1990. Zach my friend, you were probably about 6 years old when I started so don't try to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. I've watched the direction the sport has gone, and I don't approve of it. I've ridden all over, from New England to Colorado . Snowboarders are the same everywhere I go. They don't have the skill to back up their attitudes, they just get in my way. If there's one place they don't belong, it's Mad River Glen. I can guarantee is a much more pleasant environment than Wachusett Mountain, which is riddled with "worthless, self-absorbent, obnoxious snowboarders". Have a little respect for the skiers and leave it the Glen alone.
So, I close by saying. Zach, shut up and go ride one of the other thousands of mountains in New England. Seriously Zach, you sound like such an ass it actually makes me mad. You shouldn't be on a snowboard, go get some snowblades. You're article shouldn't even exist, never mind it actually getting published. SGA has no obligation to lift a single finger in this matter, nor should they. It's pathetic.
"My people the snoaboarders", "Anti-boardite SGA leading scumbag". I mean honestly, come on. Can you actually say things like that without feeling like a complete idiot? Man, go home you suck.

pete"

All I can say is wow. I wanted to laugh and say, "This guy should have 'dumbass' stamped on his forehead." While that is true, I was saddened by the fact that I put a lot of time and effort into that article, and I think nobody got it.

I pride myself on being a good writer. I used to deny it in some sorts in my mind because I thought it would be boastful to admit being good at something, but after a little thought we all have our gifts, and writing is one of mine. Conversely, I suck at many things too, like speaking coherantly (another reason why I like to write because it's hard to screw up understanding me if it's on paper). Regardless of that, when I write what I feel was a damn fine piece of work and this guy above thinks I'm trying to get Mad River Glen to permit snowboarders to use their mountain, it just sickens me.

I originally had the line "No, I am not talking about ALANA" in the text but deleted it because I felt it would weaken the article to subtlely point out what I was truly talking about. The article as a whole would have been better to have been completely outrageous without actually saying to the reader "HEY, I'M TALKING ABOUT ALANA!! I'M NOT SERIOUS ABOUT MAD RIVER GLEN!!"

It's making me a little bit of a narcissist, truthfully. I don't want to have to dumb down what I write because 99% of the campus population only cares about how they are going to get trashed the next night and doesn't care about even the most major things happening right next door. Likewise, I want people to know what I'm talking about, so should I stoop to their level hoping that maybe they will have a clue? Or will another article of mine go completely to waste like this one did?...

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-09-19T14:20:00.000-07:00

A little background for those of you who don't attend UMass...last week the student government association (SGA) told the minority group on campus (ALANA) that the appointed seats they had on the SGA were no longer going to be recognized. This was clearly the right thing to do, since the seats were given to ALANA and the people filling those seats didn't have to go through the process of being elected like the other 66 senators did. Essentially, what that said to minorites on campus was "you are too retarded to actually go through the voting process like evryone else, so in order to have diversity in our field we need to give you guys a break." As we all know that is clearly not the case, and as one senator pointed out it is not hard to get elected, as he got on with two votes last year (yes, that's correct). Regardless, ALANA has been screaming and making a mess because they think that "democracy" is being attacked here, when clearly it's the other way around. Here is the article I wrote for the Collegian which will be seen on Monday:

Democracy Belongs on the Mountaintops, too
By Zach Oelschlegel

I demand democracy!

What kind of country do we live in where people are still discriminated against because of what they believe and stand for? More importantly, why does a 1.7 million dollar conglomerate that calls itself the “Student Government Association” at a prominent university like UMass have the right to show favoritism to the majority of its students, and ignore the whimpering minority that I am?

Last week the outrageous dictator Jared Nokes declared that there would be no more appointed seats in the SGA. While this was an appalling abuse of power on his part, the real heart of the matter is that ninety percent of the SGA are white males, and I’m willing to bet that not one of them is a snowboarder in this so-called “representative democracy.” I might as well try and tell you that I date Heidi Klum.

I like so many others once thought the days of hating snowboarders was over. A glorious day we all dreamed of with skiers and boarders alike sharing the mountain in peace, where we could ride the same rails, frolic with glee as we roamed the mountaintop, and engage in lengthy chairlift chat. If only I knew how so, so wrong I was.

Cackling in the vile state of Vermont is the anti-boardite mountain they call Mad River Glen. Staring the face of progress down to the ground, this mountain has made it cool to hate snowboarders. I will even quote from its website: “Mad River's 250 inches of annual snowfall combine with uncrowded slopes free of snowboarding, and a pristine mountain environment to create a skiing experience like no other.” What they really meant was “Mad River’s 250 inches of annual snowfall combine with slopes free of worthless, self-absorbent, obnoxious snowboarders (who we feel should be exterminated in the slow and painful process they deserve to make the world a better place), to make a pristine skiing environment like no other.” Anti-boarditism at it’s worst; Mad River should be demonized for being so despicable, yet, around the skiing hubs of campus they are practically celebrated, as I have heard some spew their hate speech with utterances like “Mad river is a wicked awesome mountain; old school chairlifts and not a snowboarder in sight,” or “Snowboarders are like a disease. You let the first one in, after that you’re sharing chairlifts with them, then one day you wake up and your favorite mountain is owned and operated by a snowboarder and your daughter is about to walk down the aisle with another.”

And what has the SGA done to combat this? Instead of boycotting and denouncing the Mad River folk, they commemorate those anti-boardites and even allow the Ski and Board Club, a campus RSO, to make annual trips to the mountain while leaving us snowboarders at the dregs of Sugarbush. To think the SGA’s propensity towards skiing had nothing to do with allowing hate.

Therefore, I am here to press my case that there should be exactly twelve appointed seats in the SGA for the snowboarding minority. My people the snowboarders don’t have the time to run for elections like everyone else or get those twenty-five signatures. I would wager that most of my people would fail to achieve the goal of a nomination because of the anti-boarditism that runs rampant throughout our beloved campus. Even if one of us were to get elected, I would anticipate the overzealous skiing governor Mitt Romney to make a stand at the steps of the Student Union impeding the entry of any snowboarding senator at an SGA meeting.

Mitt Romney an anti-boardite, you say? The answer to that is obvious when you consider the political pressure, or lack thereof, Romney has imposed on the so called “great” state of Vermont. Even more shocking is that Romney staunchly supported a member of his own Republican party to be unfairly elected, yet still would balk at the notion of passing off twelve seats to the snowboarding caucus here at our fine university.

All of this week is National Snowboarding Awareness Week. I urge you to meet me at the Student Union steps promptly at noon this Friday for our annual “Boards, not Bombs” rally, as Ross Powers, gold medalist and snowboarding activist will be speaking. If you care one bit about what it truly means to be an American, if you want to stand up for what is right even if others may look down on you, and if you care about showing that anti-boardite SGA leading scumbag Jared Nokes what UMass is truly about, then you will be there. SGA office storming and cupcakes will follow the rally, because we all know in our hearts that democracy doesn’t end at the chairlift.

2003-09-11T16:06:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking a lot over the last day or so about the possibilities of this coming semester. There are so many things to think about and ponder upon...what my capabilities are, what I'm going to do, what I can do. For instance, last night I figured out that I can pull off sport management and journalism majors with a minor in economics in only 125 credits. Which, to tell the truth, somewhat blew me away that it would be that short to get so much in.

2003-09-09T14:39:00.000-07:00

A Collegiate embarrassment

by Zach Oelschlegel
September 09, 2003

Man, did we ever tear down the goalposts after we thoroughly beat Central Connecticut State senseless on Saturday. Everybody was into the game, people were screaming their heads off, and I swear, I couldn't go more than two minutes without hearing a "Let's go U-Mass!" chant. I don't think I've ever been more proud to be a Minuteman than after that game.

Truth be told, I'm a filthy liar. Pinocchio's nose would have made its own disaster zone by now if he had tried to tell that one. What really happened, of course, was a huge win for the football team, to the tune of a forty-four point margin. More importantly, and unfortunately more depressing, was that I'm not sure anyone on campus actually cares or not, as I doubt I would have needed both hands to count the number of people who stood and cheered during the entire game.

Although, when I think about it, the football team shouldn't take it personally because it's not as if they're the only squad on campus who gets the cold shoulder from the student body. The hockey team felt this pain last year before it was kosher to attend their games, the basketball team has been feeling it since the days of Calipari ended, and no other team gets any love anyway, so I'm sure they're used to it.

I've asked people why they don't attend games, or why they don't care, and I've gotten everything from "I had a lot of homework to do" to "I'm not a (insert sport) fan." But there's one that just gnaws at me, like a rat chewing its way through my stomach. "They haven't given me anything to cheer for."

That's the worst of it right there. It shows that UMass students are a bunch of fair weather numbskulls who will show up or make an attempt to care only if a team is in the race for a conference championship. It shows the true heart of the student body, that no one really minds the school being on the downslope. Why this is even more surprising is that the entire student body bleeds for an 84-year old loser the whole year, yet can't make it to a two hour game.

Of course, everyone expects the problem to fix itself, which eradicates just about any chance of having any decent sports team in the future. What does an empty Mullins Center say to a high school athlete torn between UMass and one of our rivals like Maine or Temple? What incentive have we the students given an athlete to play for UMass as opposed to a school that roots for its teams consistently, whether it's another banner year or another rebuilding year?

Lastly, everyone here on campus gripes about the budget cuts, including myself. Of course, we always pass the buck and put the blame squarely on the state, but what reason have we given the state to fund the school more than it has? Or, more importantly, what reason have we given to rich alumni to donate money back to the school? People never want to see their money go down the crapper, which is a colossal reason as to why the school is getting less funding. We the students have been lazy, party-hardy slackers, and we scream at taxpayers that we don't care by showing them the empty crowds at sporting events, the lack of general school pride, and utter apathy towards UMass. Think there's a reason why the majority of Massachusetts thinks Boston College is the state-run university and not us? We get ticked off at the state for screwing us over, when we really need a swift kick in the ass for digging our grave, closing the coffin, and practically begging the BC's and the UConn's of this world to shovel the dirt back on top. Shame on us. Funding is a two-way street, and we whimper and cry over how ruthless the state has been, as if to say we were angels ourselves.

It's a pity, really. It's complete sheer embarrassment to have a hockey team on the verge of Hockey East domination, a basketball team that just recruited one of the best players in the nation, with lacrosse, soccer, and football teams coming off of great seasons, and no one will know or care to. I guess I had better get used to games like the one on Saturday, or find one incredible shrink.

2003-08-31T10:34:00.000-07:00

Well, I moved in to my new residence on Friday, and I must say, I feel spoiled. The room I lived in last year was among the smallest on campus, and even though this room is among the second smallest on campus, it feels so much bigger. For instance, there are thirty extra square feet of room here. Then there are the dressers, whch save thirty square feet in themselves. And finally, there are actual people. Dave and I were running down the list of people we knew last year on our floor, and I think it amounts to less than half of the floor. Maybe that says a lot about me (doubtful), but it sure says a lot about Sylvan and the prison that lies there. Ah well. I guess I didn't have to walk up a flight of steps there to take a dump, or brush my teeth (if that was any comfort).

Then there's the fact that I have to walk exactly fifty feet from the dorm entrance to the dining hall. A time saver if I knew one. A wellness center on the nineteeth floor, a game floor somewhere around here, just all around sweetness. The one drawback is that there are only three elevators for twenty two floors, and none of them ever seem to work right, and only one stops on the sixth floor. Too bad for those suckers on twenty.

AND WE WILL HAVE A FUTON IN A WEEK. A really sweet one.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-08-24T11:03:00.000-07:00

Well, Friday was somewhat interesting. Me, Davis, and Beth (I really had the urge to write it that way even though they're both Davis) made the drive to Princeton and had lunch with Kaley, our old high school government teacher. The odds that eighteen months ago that Kaley and I would be friends today were 84960646347 to 1 (with a 3 1/2 point spread), and these odds were only compounded when Kaley revealed that she thought I would amount to a college dropout and sell FHM magazines door to door for the rest of my life (with maybe some crack cocaine on the side). Regardless, a time was had, as we were served some esparagus for the apetizer (it really isn't as bad as advertised), then some spaghetti (which can potentially ruin a person's good standing as a classy eater), and some coffee with a cold dessert of some kind, which was delicious. That said, reconciliation can get you some good food (and good times too).

Friday night was my fantasy football draft, and despite one poor pick, I think I did okay. My picks and thoughts are as follows:

1 (2nd overall). Ricky Williams-a fine pick here, but what I really wanted was to get a lower pick so I could pick higher in the second round and get two second-tier running backs instead of a one and three-tier back.
2 (23rd overall). Corey Dillon-not a bad pick here, but the tandem I wanted from the start was Shaun Alexander-Travis Henry, not Williams-Dillon.
3 (26th overall). Eric Moulds-I needed a wideout and he was the best available, and I knew I could get away with it because QBs are severely undervalued in this league (for instance, Brett Favre went in the 7th round).
4 (47th overall). Correll Buckhalter-the worst pick in the draft besides someone taking Matt Hesselbeck in the second round (a sleeper, but not a 2nd round sleeper). What made it worse was that the first thing I read when I got home was "Duce Staley to end holdout," meaning Buckhalters value gets diminished two fold.
5 (50th overall). Mike Vick-a real ballsy pick here, and I'm glad I did it because he was a top five pick before he was injured, and he is still going to play eleven or twelve games. His value gets even better because this year he has Peerless to pass to and maybe the Falcons will use that running back tandem of theirs usefully. Plus, to start until Vick is injured, I took
6 (71st overall). Steve McNair-to start the first four or five games till Vick makes his triumphant return. Still, I wished I had taken Tom Brady with this pick.
7 (74th overall). Charles Rogers. I know he's a rookie, but Joey Harrington was taken third overall for a reason, and Rogers was taken 2nd overall this year for a reason.
8 (95th overall). RAVENS DEFENSE. Defenses were going like hotcakes right about now, and I needed one before they were all gone.
9 (98th overall). Josh Reed. My big sleeper of the year, and I think he can step right in and do just about what Peerless Price did last year, and if he doesn't, I think he can get 1,000 yards with 8 TDs.
10 (119th overall). Randy McMichael. This I feel was my best pick in the draft, since I got the fifth ranked tight end on my list this low. This year, a tight end is required and doesn't just count as another receiver, and everyone was taking these guys in the third round, which was stupid because tight ends DO NOT get a lot of points (despite the uproar he made last year, Shockey still only caught two touchdowns, which is not worth what turned into the 25th pick in the draft).
11 (122nd overall). Adam Viniateri. I'm happy with this pick because he's one of the best and was the seventh kicker taken, but sad because this means I may have to cheer on the Patriots at times this year.
12 (143rd overall). Larry Johnson. This was my heartbreaker pick. I wanted Ashley Lelie so, so bad with this pick, and Carmen took Ashley seven picks prior. Carmen still needs a good defense however, and I might be willing to give up one of mine for Lelie, who I was considering taking instead of Josh Reed in the eighth. Still, LJ could turn into gold if my premonition about Priest Holmes keeling over and dying on the field because of his hip come true (I hope).
13 (146th overall). Antonio Bryant. I think this guy could be really good this year, although I'm not entirely sold that Terry Glenn won't have his spot (and his catches).
14 (167th overall). Keenan McCardell. There is no way he should have dropped this far, but I'm not sold on the idea of my taking him either. Still, 60 catches and 800 yards with six TDs is feasible.
15 (188th overall). COWBOYS DEFENSE. This is my trade bait in my lust for Ashley Lelie.
16 (191st overall). Marc Bulger. This could turn into gold if Kurt Warner still sucks, like he did last year.

Looking back, this is a potential team, and not much of a sure thing. I'm taking some chances here with Reed and Rogers as my 2nd and 3rd wideouts, and many of my picks are banking on a star getting hurt (LJ and Bulger). Plus, Buckhalter was pretty bad in the fourth. Ah well.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-08-18T17:38:00.000-07:00

Having kids is an embarrassment these days. People are so caught up in getting the next promotion or attaining another doctorate that when they see a nine or ten person family, they snicker to a buddy and utter something along the lines of, "Guess he forgot the ole rubber ducky, eh?" or "Dude needs a vasectomy." As if they weren't supposed to have that many kids, or were completely careless in the bedroom without thinking about the consequences. It just really goes to show that having children isn't the honorable or noble or amazing thing it once was.

I always get funny looks after telling people that I'm going to have a beautiful wife and five or six kids. As if there was something wrong with some good ol' fashioned hanky panky. I remember Mr. Kunkle telling us in Bible 12 that we shouldn't be thinking of things in terms of what we want to do, but in terms of calling. I truthfully think that while God may be calling me to be a sport manager/marketer/writer/whatever, he's definately calling me to be a father, and I think we forget that sometimes calling isn't referring to your job.

Nowadays, it's humiliating to be a "housewife." Women who stay at home with their kids are always looked down upon by the women who work a nine to five. It's a domestic faux pas to be a stay at home dad. No one cares about your kids anymore, what really matters is that you have two kids who are provided well enough so they can wear Tommy Jeans when they are seven and have their own car when they are sixteen.

I can't even imaine what my life would be like if I had only one sibling. I remember my dad telling me that he would have liked for me to drive down with my brother to vacation and not with my him and my mom and sister. Sibling comraderie was the reason, and he was so right. When my brothers are home and we all sit down for dinner, we have the potential to ruin it (and we normally do). Sure, we tell jokes and laugh and alienate the rest of the table, but that's what it's supposed to be about. We're there for each other, we stick up for each other, we give each other jobs, we beat each other up, we lend him a buck or two without asking for it back.

I want my kids to have it the same way. I want my youngest daughter to know that she has an older brother who will beat the crap out of any boy who messes with her, and I want her to have an older sister to take her to the mall and be a buddy to her. I'd like to have my boys play on the same team in soccer at one point, like I did with Erich when he was 14 and I was 11. I want family to be at a premium like it usually is with big families, as opposed to smaller families who tend to alienate themselves from one another.

When I think of teachers at PMCA who have had a deep and profound influence on me, Mr. Liegel always comes to mind. He said to the writing class one day that he and his wife firmly believe that life is work, and he lives to that testament in that he is a teacher (a full time job in itself), does the drama program and all of the costumes for that, runs endless productions throughout the year, has his own business, and makes time to watch a Simpsons episode while raising ten children.

Now, Mr. Liegel has accomplished a lot in his life, but if you were to ask him what he was most proud of, it'd be his ten kids. Not the fact that he puts on amazing plays, or has taught countless students (like me) what life is all about, or how he can tap dance. Raising kids is one of the toughest things to do in this world, and it's also one of the most rewarding. I don't want my son to tell people during my eulogy how well I could close a deal or how many degrees I had accumulated throughout my life; I want him to tell everyone that I was a damn good father and helluva husband too.

Unfortunately, I think the rest of the world wants it the other way.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-08-16T19:07:00.000-07:00

I have truly missed my computer these last couple weeks. First off, our internet/Verizon/general computer knowledge sucks, so the DSL to my room was out of comission, and I have had to deal with the CRAPPY computer that resides on the second floor of our house. Why it sucks...the internet is slower down there, the keyboard has really fat keys so typing is somewhat uncomfortable, and then half the stuff that's installed on my computer isn't on the other, and I'm too lazy to install it (slang for "I don't know how to"). Regardless, it made what has been a mostly crappy summer even crappier. I have been lamenting and whining to everyone about how this and that sucks, and while I have valid reasons, I'm sure it's wearing on the lamentees (if that is a word).

First off, socially, anything that could have gone wrong this summer didn't always go wrong (fooled ya, you thought I was going to say EVERYTHING was wrong). But a lot has gone wrong, although not everything. First off, Johnny left for the summer to play around with eight year olds, which I'm not against, as I posted about two months ago. Still, John leaving was a major hit to my social life as I spent a lot of time over at his house wrestling him and eating his food. Then, Dan got too cool for school and took a job toying with sound stuff at Eastern, so he's out of the picture. Jordan moved back south ending knee football nights at his house, Joey works nights and is only available on weekends, Seth is in Harvey Cedars, and I don't hang out with Rachel anymore. So maybe, it's really because last summer was so incredible that this summer pales in any comparison. That, or I realized where true freedom lies (UMass) and I want to blow this popsicle stand I call home. Ah well. Neil would say, "Toughen up, Nancy" as I have told him many times. I guess it's not like everyone has left for the summer, as many friends come to mind (JC, Beth, Bacon... so all isn't lost).

What also makes UMass so enticing is the year I have planned for myself. As you all know, I'm writing for the paper, which is exciting because I'M WRITING FOR THE PAPER, and the fact that the only thing college students read are the editorials, or what section I'm a part of (although I would like to help out the sports page sporadically...). There's the clubs I'm going to be an ever present part of, which include the ski and board club (the best deal on the planet), and the hang gliding club (how sweet is that??). My goals for those two are to go snowboarding thirteen times this year, and go hang gliding four times. There are the sporting events this year, and I plan to attend every soccer, football, basketball, hockey, and lax game available to me (around forty five games). I will be doing intramurals two days a week in the fall, and hopefully spring as well. I'm living in a much better dorm this year and escaping from that prison I call Sylvan, which means many new people and many new friends. Plus, there's all the old buddies I have to see, the Crusade gang and all the goodness that comes from them, and Dave, my roomate. I will say that I've missed sitting in my room and the word "Awwyeah" oozes out of my mouth and no one is there to return the favor, so that's another plus. And then there's the WINGS menus. This year is gonna rock.

Yeah, I really have elaborated on why the future looks bright.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-08-13T09:17:00.000-07:00

Awwwyeah, here is the first article in the newly published works of Zach Oelschlegel (TRADEMARK). Hope UMass likes my flagrantly liberal views (is that not possible?).

Land of the Free?
By Zach Oelschlegel

We need the government. We need it to tax us so we can have schools, roads, and other public services needed for basic civilization. We need it to pass laws so that we can live in a protected society without fear. Most importantly, we need it to ensure that the rights of Americans will always be guaranteed and never compromised. Unfortunately, according to federal law, homosexuals have different rights. So much for that whole “All men are created equal” comment.

The Supreme Court finally took a step in the right direction a few months ago when all sodomy laws were officially abolished, with massive implications in terms of American justice. What sodomy laws basically said was that a person did not have the right to do as he wanted in his private life, in some cases applying only to homosexuals and rendering them second-class citizens, and in other cases to all Americans. Your freedom depended on what state you lived in, especially the farther south of the Mason-Dixon you were.

Since the first battle has been fought, the next logical step would be to grant homosexuals the same rights heterosexuals have that are supposedly “guaranteed” by the U.S. Constitution, which decrees that equal rights belong to all citizens regardless of race, gender, or sex. By not allowing homosexuals to legally marry, Washington is really declaring that homosexuals aren’t citizens, even if they are law-abiding, pay their taxes, and don’t rip the tags off of their mattresses.

Now, a couple married in, say, Nevada, has the guarantee that every other state will recognize the marriage, whereas a Vermont marriage will not always be recognized by the other forty-nine states of the Union. The entire issue here stems from Article IV of the Constitution, which maintains that “full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state” (read: marriage is one of these). This brings in the idea of state’s rights, an issue that has been heavily debated since our country’s inception. Each state can regulate who and who doesn’t get married, wherein the problem lies: for all states to recognize all marriages, marriage must be a federal status and not a state jurisdiction. Allowing some states the failure to recognize other marriages from other states is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, what we have now threatens complete chaos, making our country a confederacy and not a Union, as if to say people residing in New York were New Yorkers and not Americans.

Specifying marriage so that it is between a man and a woman (which many states have done to combat the “threat” of gay marriage) is furthermore unconstitutional because it is sex discrimination, although the underlying factor to why this discrimination is permitted isn’t its legality, but rather a religious import. While I pray to the same God that George Bush prays to, the whole notion of banning an act simply because it may or may not be immoral is absurd. Just because I think the Ku Klux Klan and the ideas they spread are completely outrageous doesn’t mean that I am going to Congress to demand a law that should be passed outlawing their hate speech, since I respect the Ku Klux Klan’s constitutional right to think like jackasses. Likewise, because the religious right-wing believes that homosexuality is wrong, it shouldn’t have the means to force the creation of laws based on its version of morality. If people had that right, Prohibition might still be in effect, certain states could still ban inter-racial marriages, and our Constitutional rights would be in the dumpster, alongside the moldy banana peels and last week’s want ads.

While many carry out marriage as an aspect of their personal beliefs, the United States defines marriage as a civil union. Disallowing the right to a civil union for same-sex couples doesn’t only permit discrimination; it prevents particular considerations that heterosexual couples take for granted. For instance, one may not being able to see an injured partner in the hospital simply because they aren’t “married.” Pension continuation after the death of a partner will be denied since there is no legal union tying those two people together. Simple things like joint tax returns can be rejected.

Homosexuals, then, as they once were not allowed to have sex in many states, still aren’t allowed to be citizens with the anti-marriage laws that cloud our nation. They aren’t the criminals or perverts society once saw them as, rather, they are our brothers, sisters, friends, and co-workers. Let’s not sit here and let the tradition and morality of a few rule the nation, instead, let’s stand up for the Constitution, and what it truly means to live in the Land of the Free.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-07-28T21:17:00.000-07:00

Today was a very exciting day. I got back from a long Main Line trip at about 6:15, and since Ian was twiddling his pinkies trying to explain the logistics of TELNET computing systems in the A: drive to a customer having more mental handicaps than Courtney Love, I decided to empty my bulk e-mail box. What was different about today was the fact that there was also e-mail in my regular Inbox. Usually I would see "You have unread e-mail!" and under it the words "Bulk (375)." But today, I had actual e-mail, so it said "Inbox (2), Bulk (375)." So I open it up, and low and behold its the Massachusetts Daily Collegian, FINALLY returning my e-mail, with the following message:

Hi Zach,

I am pleased to tell you that your submissions were excellent;(i especially loved "ASimple Solution"). You will be a great asset to the Collegian staff. I do think that your school spirit piece will be perfect for the back to school issue. The sooner you can finish it up and send it to me, the better. Ideally, I'd like to have your piece by Aug. 11th- the 15th at the very latest. Congratulations, I look foward to working with you.

Erika Lovley

I really, really, wanted this one.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-07-27T11:42:00.000-07:00

Last week, Philadelphia Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie announced that there would be a ban on outside food from the Eagles new stadium, Lincoln Financial Field. No, this wasn't a ploy to get even more money for the Eagles through concessions, this was a security problem. People would bring in their Wawa bags with hoagies, iced tea, and guns. Swiss Army knives if you were lucky. Possibly the dreaded box cutter.

People can still bring in their purses, handbags, and bookbags, mind you. People never would think to conceal a weapon in one of those.

You can feel free to say what you want about Lurie, but instead I will comment on Angelo Cataldi.

Cataldi, the most popular sports analyst and DJ in Philadelphia, said last week that "he expected that if the Eagles were to choose security for the new stadium, they would have swastika's on their arms." WIP, his employer, suspended him for two days.

This bothers me in a few ways. First off, WIP pays Cataldi to be offensive. It's a given fact that if you aren't a shock jock, your ratings will be in the toilet. This is why the typical Howard Stern morning show goes something like this:

Howard: Lemme see your boobs.
(Pause)
Howard: Wow. Wow. Those are nice. You have beautiful breasts, sweetie.
Woman: Really???
Howard: Yeah. I'd do ya.
Woman: Omigosh!! Then I'll see you later, right Howard?

Like Howard Stern, Cataldi is supposed to offend. What also irritates me about the actions taken by WIP is that Angelo's comments were taken completely out of context. The reason why he was suspended was that Jeffrey Lurie, the Eagles owner, is Jewish. For the station to have any plausible reason to suspend Angelo, the line of thinking must have been something like this.

"Swastikas on arms means Nazis. Nazis mean Hitler. Hitler means Holocaust. Security guards mean stadium. Eagles play in that stadium. Jeffrey Lurie owns the Eagles. He is a Jew. Therefore, what Cataldi implied by his comment was a horrible sinister joke against all Jews and other people massacred in the Holocaust, and he must be punished."

Of course Cataldi never meant that. He was referring to a stupid law and what the people who would have to enforce that stupid law wuld have to be like (read: Facists/Communists/anyone completely crazy).

And poor, poor Jeffrey Lurie. How could he ever defend himself against the likes of big bad Angelo after Angelo told him off about his new rules?

This is exactly what Lurie wanted. A distasteful comment from a popular media icon to cover up the fact that Lurie is a dick. A perfect way to hide the fact that Lurie screwed over a city that paid for his stadium, gave him exclusive rights to the revenue he would gain from that stadium, a city that adores his team, sleeps and breathes the Eagles, a city that Lurie never could identify with and never will be able to. So instead of showing his thanks to a city that filled his wallet to the breaking point, he pushes the envelope and tries to get even more money from us by making us buy his food.

Asshole.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-07-21T19:24:00.000-07:00

I was delivering out east today and was about to cross the Boulevard when I saw a sign in front of a store with the word printed "God Bless America." I turned the music down and thought about that for a while.

America has turned into the Yankees. I know that I'm completely unoriginal in that analogy, but we are the Yankees in a different sense. Everyone jumped on the bandwagon. After 9-11 happened, all you ever seemed to hear were the popular slogans "We will never forget" and "God Bless America," apparently because everyone's nationalism had "gone through the roof." You saw in the local news how tie stands were out of American flag ties, the flag stores out of American flag, and even the car industry got into the action with "Keep America Rolling." I distinctly remember my mom buying a few American flags and setting them on the front porch, so she could get be a patriot too.

The difference now? I don't hear the "God Bless America's," and I'm positive all those American flag ties are in the backs of closets due to the fact that those ties aren't fashionable, in the sense that they clash with the rest of your clothing, and nationalism isn't cool anymore anyway. Oh, yeah, and my mom took down those flags after Halloween. She was tired of them. Kinda tacky.

The perfect way to describe my mom's "nationalism" and the rest of America's would be the 2001 Sixers. They were the Cinderella team in the NBA and all throughout the playoffs, people were buying flags and putting them on their cars to show their Sixers spirit. My mom, as the Sixers entered the Eastern Conference Finals, decided to buy her own flag and put it up on the car, because she wanted to show she was all about them winning too. Of course, if you asked my mom anything about the Sixers three weeks prior, she may have been able to tell you that Allen Iverson played for us. Naturally, when the Sixers lost in five, the flag went in the back of the closet, like those American flags did four months later.

Aaron McGruder, who writes the comic strip The Boondocks, took a one week hiatus from the normal comic strip and had "Flagee and Ribbon," poking fun at the people who used the flag as a shield for everything wrong with the America, politics, etc, and once the threat of more terrorism was over, Flagee and Ribbon were back in the closet, and George Bush was once again mortal.

Nationalism is like profanity. You listen to those people who f-bomb more often than they breathe, and the word loses complete meaning. There's a reason your mom told you it wasn't good to say those words, because they have such a deep and profound meaning, so that when they are said, you listen up. Instead, as people become more and more profane, the words loses its meaning, and become as generic as an other word (and making the speaker sound like a complete jackass). Likewise with "nationalism." You pick your battles. The American flag means something, as does "The Star Spangled Banner," along with The Pledge of Allegiance. The more it's rammed into our heads, the less we care. It becomes a formality, and even annoying.

The Simpsons lampoons this when Homer becomes a boxer. The announcer tells the crowd who is fighting, and then says, "Now, due to popular demand, we will skip the singing of the national anthem. Leeeeeeeet's get ready to Ruuuuumbllllle!"

As singing the national anthem has lost its meaning, so does America with all of this pariotism. If you want to really be a patriot, go volunteer somewhere. Join the Marines or Navy. Actually appreciate your freedoms instead of saying you do. Go vote.

Don't tell me you love America because it says so on your shirt.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-07-20T18:08:00.000-07:00

I realize that I haven't posted on this thing in about 10 days, and even the last post was pretty lame. Ah well. Anyway, I went to Six Flags the other day with whom I would describe as the oddest group ever assembled. I had a lot of fun, and it was nice to catch up with the people I didn't normally hang out with much in high school, namely Buddy, Todd, and Curtis. The coasters there were indeed world class rides, although after walking through the rest of the park I was thoroughly disgusted with the place.

I've been to my share of amusement parks, and Six Flags was clearly the worst managed park I've seen. I understand that Disney and Busch Gardens set the bar pretty high when it comes to amusement parks, but this was outrageous. First off, the park stank. Trash was everywhere, obviously there for days, and I saw no promise of it ever being picked up. Fresh air is a wonderful thing you'd like to take for granted when you're waiting inside a crowded Skull Mountain line with little ventilation.

Next big problem was the lack of enforcement for all rules. One of the best things a park can do for itself is to ban smoking in all areas, which it obviously wasn't. It's a huge turnoff to all of the non-smoking guests, and really just leads to lots and lots of cigarette butts littering the ground. Another rule that wasn't enforced was the line jumping rule, when seven, count 'em, seven kids walked right past us in line while we were waiting for the Chiller. Now, I can understand one or two kids jumping just to meet up with family, I've done the same before, but this was a freakin' brigade that passed by.

Another thing that bothered me was the whole idea of how good the park could have been and how good it really was. For instance, between The Chiller and Doctor Doom's Drop was this huge space of empty concrete, with a hideous building behind it disguised as an amphitheatre. The lack of theming left me bemused as well. For a place that claims to be a theme park, the only ride that impressed me with the theming was Batman the Ride (which is the most underrater ride in the park). The Chiller had some cool looking structures the trains were shot out of, although they had fell into disrepair (as had the Batman train on The Chiller). Superman had some interesting profiles of comic heroes and villains, but nothing else to make the ninety minute wait seem shorter. Nitro had absolutely nothing in the realm of theming.

Some people say it's all about the little things, and Six Flags had a swing and a miss on this one too. One thing you appreciate while waiting in long longs is shade, and no canopy hung over top the lines to keep patrons cool as there were at Cedar Point. The park had an urban feel to it too, partly because of the crowd, and mostly due to the lack of beauty and ambiance the place had. I didn't feel like I was in my own little world, I didn't see enough gardens, shrubs, and trees to create an optimal environment for the people.

In managing their parks like this, Six Flags has completely alienated what is a more profitable white collar crowd. By being completely cheap and putting money only to future thrill rides and nothing else, Six Flags loses a lot of potential money. Some people just like to go to a place to catch the atmosphere, like at Busch Gardens, which is a truly spectacular park. I realize that Six Flags will never have the theming of Disney, the beauty of Busch Gardens, or match the nostalgia at Kennywood, but what it should be striving for is a CedarFair (Cedar Point, Dorney Park, Knott's Berry Farm) type atmosphere, a place that indeed has the thrill rides to keep the coaster enthusiasts and blue collar types happy, a place that isn't too hard on the eyes to keep upper class families coming, and lastly a place that can stand up to the critiquing of future managers (me). People treat a park acording to its standards, as in, someone is more likely to throw their trash away if they see no trash on the ground, or not smoke if the place isn't covering in cigarette butts, or act in a civil manner if everyone else is.

Sadly, the park has been taken over by white trash, thugs, and other socially unacceptable personalities.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-07-08T14:25:00.000-07:00

Apparently I am a democrat now. Or me and Joe Lieberman are one with each other.

1. Lieberman Senator Joe CT - Democrat (100%) Click here for info
2. Bush, George W. - US President (99%) Click here for info
3. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (99%) Click here for info
4. Kucinich, Cong. Dennis, OH - Democrat (90%) Click here for info
5. Gephardt, Cong. Dick, MO - Democrat (83%) Click here for info
6. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (79%) Click here for info
7. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (77%) Click here for info
8. Libertarian Candidate (76%) Click here for info
9. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (71%) Click here for info
10. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol IL - Democrat (57%) Click here for info
11. Graham, Senator Bob, FL - Democrat (57%) Click here for info
12. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (18%) Click here for info
13. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (-13%) Click here for info

Who should you vote for?

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-07-08T10:46:00.000-07:00

During vacation, my Dad and I were flipping channels, trying to get the Phillies game that supposedly was on ESPN. Naturally, Murphy's Law came into play and reality set in as we found out that ESPN was really airing women's bowling. Now for one, it was a women's sport, which, call me sexist if you will, sucks in comparison to just about any men's game except maybe tennis. Two, it's bowling. To top it off, ESPN2 was airing poker.

"What is the world coming to when the biggest sports channel airs two clear cut non-sports?" I cried.

"Bowling's a sport," my Dad shrugged. I'm betting the reason he feels this way is because of his Tuesday night bowling league, where he and his bowling misfit buddies try to beat other bowling misfits.

"How can you call bowling a sport?" I grumbled. "Look at that woman. She's at the least, two hundred pounds overweight. Plus the fact that they're doing the same thing every single time!"

"Well, golf is a sport. They're trying to do the same thing every time, aren't they?"

I won't finish the story about the argument which I clearly won, but I will give out some stipulations for what really constitutes a sport.

1. Athleticism. Think about it. How much of a sportsman can one be when he is confused for Fat Albert? Those idiots who call fishing and hunting a sport, I say, wow. You sit in a boat or tree all day, in all likelihood completely wasted, and that's a sport? Gimmme a break. This stipulation rules out so-called sports such as bowling, hunting, fishing, and eating.

2. Variation, variety, and diversity. Something in which the athlete must use quick thinking, make the right decision for a thousand different situations, and do it well. In football a quarterback must be reading the defensive scheme while thinking about which receiver to throw to and how much time he'll have. Baseball outfielders make the decision to throw home and get the runner while thinking about the hitter who's just reached first base possibly going to second. In golf, what iron to use, the break in the green, etc. Suffice to say, this rules out monotonous sports like running and biking, where the same thing is being performed, the whole time. I do not deny that these people are ridiculously athletic, but, hence the phrase I spewed towards the cross country runners in high school, "Your sport is my exercise."

3. How you win. Any activity where the winner is judged and there is a question of who should have won cannot be a sport (Olympic figure skating, anyone?) A sport needs to have a clear-cut winner, in the sense that the Phillies beat the Red Sox 9-0, the Rams beat the Titans, 20-17, or I skied down that hill in a faster time that you did. Anything where a panel of five judges with different scores and opinions determining the winner cannot be a sport.

In conclusion, this leaves only a variety of sports left, which include soccer, baseball, football, hockey, golf, basketball, downhill skiing, and possibly swimming (I'm somewhat biased on that one). And yes, golf DOES require athleticism (how does Tiger hit it so far?). Snubs for sports include snowboarding (halfpipe anyway), biking (sorry Lance), running, and NASCAR, which is quite possibly the dumbest activity known to man.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-25T16:36:00.000-07:00

Okracoke Island has come, and the time has come for me to leave. Don't expect anything out of this crappy website for the next 10 days or so, as I will be sitting on the beach drinking slushies without you. Suckers. Feel free to laugh when I come back with really bad sunburn and die from melanoma in ten years.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-22T11:00:00.000-07:00

Well, last night was kind of a bummer. I called Davis since I hadn't seen him in two weeks and turns out he's going to be a camp counselor at this place in upstate New York for the rest of the summer. Being honest, I was kind of ticked off at him for about five minutes and then realized that the jerk was me.

I was thinking about this sort of thing lately, just about how if you really want to be a friend and love someone, you let go. You don't hold them back, you don't guilt trip them into doing something just because you want it that way. You let the person spread their wings, go out on their own. The biggest example of this is the family, and letting go in that area. The two most important women in my life right now are my mom and my sister, but the fact of the matter is that once I meet my wife she's going to be number one, no doubt about it. I wouldn't look at this as being some sort of demotion on my family, it's me leading my life, and they would realize that. Their trying to get in the way of my decisions would be completely selfish, and the same would go for me with Heidi once she meets Mr. Right. I couldn't expect to have the same relationship with her once she finally meets her husband.

Or my parents. I'm completely positive they were sad to see me leave for college, but trying to hold me back and keep me around Philly just so they could see me a few times a month would have been horrible. It just goes to show that truly loving someone means that you may have to let them drift away, because simply, it isn't your life. I don't run John's life, I don't make his decisions. I'll miss him, though.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-17T19:30:00.000-07:00

I felt like being a comedian today. I always enjoy giving other people a piece of myself or some sort of joy, so I made the trek to the gym this morning.

"GYM??? What's a GYM?? Ooooooh, a GYM."

First chuckle came when I "ran" on the treadmill. One thing I've noticed is that I am advantageous when it comes to distance running because of my huge gangly legs, so I'm really moon-walking more that I am running. Like when little kids run away from me because of some trepidation, I can catch up by taking one stride. Suckers.

Then I tried to stretch and that was even worse, as I struggled to touch my knees on the sit and reach. Then when I was doing arm circles I thwacked some innocent passerby due to the ape arms connected to my torso. At least the arms and legs match.

Finally, it was time for the meat and potatoes (tofu and beans for you vegans) of the workout, the bench press. I think I was somewhere around eighty pounds for 12 reps, which is great for me, while suicide-inducing for the typical male. Good thing that I know that what really matters is what's on the inside ("That's just something ugly people say"). I do remember sitting on the inclined bench and making some funny faces for the people that were supposedly "working out" but really there for my second act.

Lastly, since I was too lazy to work out my biceps, I went for a swim in the pool. And yes, to all of you ladies out there, I DID wear my Speedo, letting one see the outline of my extremely small and ridiculously slender ankles. There's something very funny about taking a dip in YMCA pools for lap swim. You always have the three sections, one for "leisure" and one for interval and the other for continuous. Being as oput of shape as I was, I took interval, and swam for about 20 minutes I'll say, doing 50s and 100s. It's just that, watching the leisure section "exercise" is hysterical, and you know exactly what I am talking about.

I swear, they always have these classes at every Y, where it's this forty year old woman who's at least one hundred pounds overweight, surrounded by ten equally out of shape women. And then they're "exercising," by which I mean I can lose as many calories as these women were by snoring. They have that 80s girl power music on and then the lady in the middle says "STREEEEETCH!" and they all start hopping on one foot while making a desperate attempt to hold on to their knee. And then the lady says "HOOOOOOLD!" and they hop on the other foot while pointing their elbow and pretending they're Cupid shooting an arrow. I mean, it's a freakin' pool! You barely press on the bottom and you shoot straight up! And by God, if I ever take an aerobics class my instructor better be mistaken for a Baywatch babe and not be in worse shape than the people paying for the class.

One other sight I saw today. On the other side of the "leisure" section, there was this one lady who I swear was power walking in the pool. In circles mind you. Now power walking in general is the dorkiest thing you can do for exercise, but I will admit that it's decent exercise for those of us who aren't quite adept at actual running. It's just that, it was a pool, meaning you can't really garner up too much speed because of the density of it and such, so that amplified her looking fatheaded that much more. I'm talking, she had the full strides going, she was even swinging her arms idiocy here. Ahhh geez.

That said, I think the lifeguards liked their show better than mine. Maybe next time everyone swimming will be in great shape and then my time to shine will come.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-16T20:33:00.000-07:00

Today reminded me a lot of Office Space, where Peter says that if he was a millionaire, he would do absolutely nothing. Which isn't my aspiration at all. It's just that, today, I did about as much work as a meatball sub from Wawa. My day consisted of waking up, going online and checxking to see if anyone had updated their online journals (they hadn't), watching deadbeat dads on Maury, eating Craisins, checking to see if anybody had updated their online journals (they hadn't), picking up Heidi from McDonald's, reading 80 pages from a book, and checking to see if anyone had updated their online journals (they hadn't).

There's a certain measure of guilt here. Usually when I am lazing around the house, I feel like I have a decent reason to...like I just worked ten hours and am beat, or just cut the grass (not all that productive but I feel good about it because it's not even my job anymore), etc. I feel as if I'm not pulling my weight around the house, as Ian toils endlessly, my Mom works nights, my Dad builds, and even Heidi did more than me today. Eh. It's an empty feeling.

Then there's the fact that I didn't even hang out with anybody, despite my endless calling in my quest to find a playmate for tennis, or whatever. I hate knowing that there's fun to be had and I'm not being a part of it. I'll take popularity or productivity or both, and I had neither. Ah well. Barney Gumble would say, "Don't cry for me, I'm allllready dead." ("Mr. Gumble this is a girl scouts meeting!!")

I need a new hobby. I think I'll bust out the Speedo tomorrow and take a swim at the Y and then let everyone laugh at me when I struggle to bench sixty pounds. Maybe I can be all muscular by the end of the summer instead of my typical gangly self. Because I looooove the ladies!!

But what to do now...I wonder if anyone has updated their online journal...

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-15T22:51:00.000-07:00

It's late Sunday night, I don't feel tired and don't want to go to bed since I am off tommorow, so I'll do a bonus post. I spent a little passing time writing this piece on the train rides back and forth from Pittsburgh and I'm really happy with the idea and don't feel like losing what I started out with, so I'll play with it and put down my second draft here for you to enjoy

(Recently overheard at the President's weekly radio address...)

"My fellow Americans. The recent terrorist attacks by evil doers in Saudi Arabia has given me a brevity of sleep over the last few days. My greatest fears have been realized; that the Axis of Evil has expanded from a mere three countries to four, and soon the entire world. If our fears of al-Qauda operatives living in Saudi Arabia are true, we have no choice but to declare war on the Saudis and the entire world.

"Secretary Rumsfeld and myself have already sent coalition forces across the border as we speak to liberate the Canadien people from the oppressive regime that dictates the country. Countless others will cross over the Rio Grande in the coming hours in what I'd like to call "OPERATION: Mexican Freedom," from the horrible disease we call "Montezuma's Vegence," a tale I've heard countless times as Governor of Texas.

"The coalition we already have stationed in the Middle East will spill over shortly to conquer the evil Saudi that killed those people, and kill everyone in our path that may or may not have weapons of mass destruction.

"Think how how much better the world would be after we leas this Crusade of evil. All the oil that we never accumulated from the Iraqis weill be forgotten after we show our iron fist to the Reds and Iranians. All the aid that we give out to other countries we could turn into profit by taking a Rwanda and meta-morphing it into a Nike sweatshop. All the human rights atrocities that occur in Libya and Sudan could be easily solved in the sense that there wouldn't be anyone left to atrocitize after we're done with them.

"We cannot stand by and not fight for our freedoms. Just think of a world with no dirty Frenchmen telling us off, no Germany preaching peaceful solutions, no neutral Swiss and Dutch, no British bad breath, no Canadien free-riding, and no more Polish stupidity. I forgot the best thing of all from this: no more Muslims.

"Thankyou, and may God continue to bless America."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(and I swear I'm not a Democrat).

As you can see it needs a lot of work. There's problems with the length (too short), ending (what ending), not enough "Bush-isms" here and not enough, and anything else you want to criticize.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-15T21:47:00.000-07:00

Since I haven't posted in more than a week, as Dave so kindly pointed out ("you ugly bastard don't shamelessly plug The Blackjack in your profile if you're not updating"), the abortion issue came up once again in my head, and how completely hypocritical I am when it comes down to dealing with it.

My brother told me last week after reading my homosexuality rant that he was pro-life, but wasn't about to go banning abortions. I said to him that I was in fact for the banning of abortions, and still am, I now realize how outrageous that view is for me when you factor everything in.

I say to people, "Yeah, abortion is homocide, that's killing an innocent baby (not freakin fetus!!!). You made the choice to have unprotected sex and you get what you deserved." And someone always comes in and asks me about rape and incest and that's where it gets sticky. I've told myself that in cases of rape and incest, abortion is neither wrong nor right; I'm neutral on it. I say I wouldn't condemn a woman who gets raped and then aborts a baby after ending up carrying the rapist's child. Of course that makes my views a total crock because I'm not against killing a still innocent baby in this situation. Despite my best efforts, I would still have qualms about throwing a woman in jail for killing her rapist's baby, making me look/sound as if I had somehow accumulated an extra chromosome or two.

Point two: the idea of stem cell reseach. I'm slowly becoming a bit of a Dream Theatre fan (I'd link Dave's influence on me again but I'm lazy)and was listening to the song "The Great Debate," a song about stem cell research. One line sticks out a lot: "Are you justified in taking life to save life?" Which to tell the truth, I'm also uncertain about. It's so easy to say, "Yeah, but look, they're just cells. In a petri dish for crying out loud." Then again I was once the same blob of cells (as was once my friend Nate at UMass who actually was a test tube baby). I can also try to say that taking life to save life CAN be justifued (war, anyone??), and that taking out some "pointless cells" will save my grandmother from cancer, or my mother from osteoporosis or whatever. Yet, how is stem cell research any different from abortion, which I claim to be despicable?

Lastly, the type of question that has been screwing with philosophers for ages. When is a baby a baby? Is a baby really a baby when it is only two cells? And where do I draw the line at this? Why is a baby at 3rd trimester more of a living thing then a baby at 1st? Why do I say to people that it doesn't matter yet in my head I know I'm not convinced either?

Okay, okay. I've gone on enough about this. It's just that there are so many instances in the whole abortion issue that could sway me to go on either side (as for banning it I mean, on a morality issue I still and will always believe that it's wrong). Feel free to rip into me on this one.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-05T19:28:00.000-07:00

I'm hoping that this little ditty I wrote a month ago will get me into the Daily Collegian at UMass next year. Enjoy

There was quite a stir caused by the Republican Club last week. They made some wild pro-life rally, and those who disagreed with the rally tore down the crosses that littered the field the next night, then threatened the club with violence, and lastly wrote into The Collegian complaining about how insensitive the demonstration was. This whole pro-life verses pro-choice thing has been the cause of so much discussion, so many screamathons, and so many clenched fists. And the whole time, there has been such a simple solution to the whole mess!

The government should ban sex.

I figure, sodomy is already banned in some states, so why not go all the way and ban the whole thing, heterosexual and homosexual sex? The way it seems in America today, the cons of sex far outweigh any pros of intercourse, yet, people still love to engage in drunken orgies for some twisted apparent reason.

You look at me and say “That’s crazy! How will we procreate?” Well, my friend, haven’t you heard of a thing called artificial insemination? People can still have beautiful offspring without all the vigor and hard work of sex! Simply take a sperm specimen and egg, put it together in a Petri dish, and voila! You have instant baby. This also makes every side satisfied in the whole abortion debate. People will finally have no excuse when they hold themselves accountable to their actions thus negating the need to wipe out these baby parasites. And we can still have kids. Isn’t everybody a winner?

There are caveats to this idea, of course, is that people will not get that perverted pleasure from sex that they have been dreaming of since that magical age of puberty began. I say, like war, what is it good for? It’s been proven that we cannot handle the consequences of sex, so why should we be so ballsy (pun intended) to try it anyway? Then there’s the fact that there will be no more Jerry Springer, since every story on the show revolves around women and men fornicating with their bosses, parents, and religious leaders.

Now, we come to the simple duty of enforcing it. This will be an expensive task, but when you figure in all the budget cuts that the state of Massachusetts is making towards higher education, we can easily afford it. We will have the shaggin’ police force. Yes, every room of every house and building will be equipped with a video camera, along with cameras on every street and cranny. A group of ten officers will be present in the video room stationed strategically near the alleyways, parking lots, and airports (where people are most likely to be doin’ the nasty), checking screen after screen of footage to make sure no one is getting their nookie on. If someone is caught in the act, a group of three officers will be dispatched to the offending area to stop the crime, outfitted with gloves and dark sunglasses in case the couple is especially grotesque. Initially, a small misdemeanor fine will be given for the first two offenses, but the third time someone is literally caught with their pants down, the “three strike” penalty will be in effect and the offender will be jailed for the next fifty years for attempting to procreate without a license.

Of course, then there are the socio-economic pros to banning sex. For one, alcoholism would go straight down, since men would cease to have the need of getting their girlfriends drunk so they will sleep with them, and men themselves would stop drinking to make their girlfriends look better. Two, productivity in the workplace would skyrocket, since men and women wouldn’t be taking any time off from work to have so-called “nooners” and “quickies.” I also read that men think about sex on average at least once a minute, and outlawing the dirty deed would cause this number to be reduced drastically, hence mental output in men would be doubled at the very minimum.

Finally, people would use their money more wisely with the banning of sex. Men wouldn’t spend countless dollars on condoms and women wouldn’t have to spend the occasional $300 for an abortion or have to get their Pill prescription filled every month. I also read that a Norplant these days serves quite a steep price. All this money saved from the sex ban could be used to pay rent, or even, God forbid, pay child support, which is usually the result of good sex (is there such a thing?) gone bad. No more high-tailing it to the pharmacy for that “morning after” pill.

I think I’ve made it apparent that the world would be such a better place if there was no sex. We would all be better thinkers, better spenders, and much more responsible for our actions. I’m just baffled that there hasn’t been a vote in Congress on the matter.

2003-06-04T22:49:00.000-07:00

I saw a political cartoon the other day with a cariacture of Rick Santorum on it saying something along the lines of "I don't hate gay people...just fags" and it made me chuckle and hate Santorum and the Republican party that much more. I used to tell people that I "lean towards the Republican side" but recently all this conservative crap about gays and homosexuality is pissing me off.

When we were invading Iraq everyone conservative and Republican was spewing such stupid things about how "We are fighting for our freedom" and we "will give the Iraqis freedom." What freedom? It is utterly outrageous that there are laws in some states banning sodomy, even heterosexual sodomy. In Alabama, it's against the law to have oral sex even when you're married! What right does the government have telling people what they can and cannot do in the bedroom, or with who they want to sleep with? You say to me "Yeah, but that might be wrong." So what? It's legal to drink to excess, and we all know that's wrong. It's legal to swear, to slander, to scream obcenities, and we know that's wrong. The bigger issue isn't that homosexuality may or may not be wrong, it's that we as Americans claim to have the highest order of freedom in the world, yet still essentially ban homosexuality in certain areas.

This is also why I am strongly against prayer in public schools. Idiots like Bill Devlin give their two cents about how they think prayer should be back in schools, and I remember all the stupidity that came out of the mouth of the James Dobsons of the world after Columbine happened. The favorite of the time was "They took the prayer out of public schools, and look what happened!" As if two kids shooting up a school was a direct result of not praying before Trig.

I am a Christian, and I completely agree that prayer is a beautiful, beneficial, and necessary part of this life. But bringing prayer back into schools would be exactly the same as Constantine declaring Rome to be a Christian nation, or the same as people in Afghanistan having Islam jammed in their faces because of an oppressive government. Not to mention how token the prayer would be...

"Dear, oh, glorious...One, you who may or may not love us, who may or may not be here, who may care or may not, who may or may not exist..."

Back from that tangent, I have another thing to on my homosexuality stance. I always get a kick out of it when people claim homosexuality is a choice and not genetics, and to that I say, are you all idiots? Let's think about this for a second. Why would anyone ever CHOOSE to be gay? Fathers disown their sons over their coming out, society looks at them so much differently, the chances they have of fathering a child go way down. Yet people, mainly closed-minded Republicans (the kind that piss me off remember?) make it look like a guy goes and says "Hey, I think I will be gay from now on. Hope it works!" and leave it at that. As I myself am more prone to being an alcoholic because some of my grandparents are and were, Mike from Robertson's was more prone to being a gay guy because of his genes. If you asked him about life now he'd say it was beautiful, but ask him fifteen years ago how much he loved life and I bet you'll get a different story.

Closing up, keep in mind that this in no way makes me a Democrat, who I hate just as much as the Republicans if not a little more. I'll tell you about my intolerence for them on another day. Today was GOP-bashing day.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!

2003-06-02T18:30:00.000-07:00

Since some bastard decided to shred my old domain name by using one of these "viruses," which in my Compsci book is defined as "a program." Using this wealth of information I was completely worthless in my plight to save my website, which likely would've taken a lot of ">>=is back<" or "." So I went back and used BLOGGER despite my completion of Compsci 105. Now I can use UNIX and TELNET, and I have a minor in C++. Erich will like that one.

So I got back from Pittsburgh today after a week of playing SSX Tricky on XBOX and riding many, many sweet roller coasters. I suppose I've already announced this to at least every single person who I've ever contacted, but for redundancy's sake I will again brag and have you all sigh and moan over my riding of Top Thrill Dragster, which I can brag about. Here's a nice picture of me peeing my pants.

That said, since I've had a sabbattical (BECAUSE MY BROTHER IS FAT AND LAZY) to allow more useless thoughts to fester inside of my head, I have a decent amount of material to offend you with, starting with my views on sex. More on that later. I actually spent time writing that one.

As for the rest of you, So Long, Suckers!