UTDevelopment Construction on campus hints at UTD's bright future by mac hird There seems to be some construction on campus … actually literally all across campus. With the recent ground-breaking for the new Math, Science and Engineering Teaching-Learning Center (MSET) there will be even more new buildings on campus under construction this year. Everyone here should get used to the construction, because if everything goes according to plan, these buildings are only the first step on a long road of improvement for UT Dallas. The current phase of construction is just the beginning. In the quest to become a Tier One institution, President David Daniel has laid UT Dallas’ Strategic Plan for the next ten years as a school, and what an exciting ten years this will be. Over this time frame, UT Dallas will almost double the number of faculty, add around 24 new degree programs, and more than double the amount of research spending for professors on campus. To support these goals we need space, and lots of it. The plan includes a new arts and technology building, engineering building, science building, two new research labs and an expansion to the School of Management building, not to mention renovations to numerous of the other academic buildings on campus. In order to better serve students, there will be a new student services building, three new dorms, a new recreation center, expanded student union, events complex, parking garage and even a new power plant. If everything goes according to the Strategic Plan, by the time I am ready to graduate in two and a half years there should be eight new buildings on campus, with the rest authorized to begin construction. All these improvements come with a cost, and Dr. Daniel has a plan for that as well, based largely on the creation of a Tier One University Fund. This fund would be open to UT Dallas, as well as six other “emerging research” universities. Each school would get a part of this fund based on their performance in a variety of fields including amount of private giving, quality of students, and amount spent on research. The six other “emerging research” universities are Texas Tech, Univ. of Houston, Univ. of North Texas, UT Arlington, UT El Paso, and UT San Antonio and, with their support, this Tier One Fund should be created. It is hard for many students to imagine the impact that we can have on this university, yet every student can greatly assist in this process. Yes, each of us could write to our state representative and ask for their support for Dr. Daniel’s Plan because it is important, and each of us should, but each of us can do so much more. This past week some other students and I helped one of my professors put on the Gaseous Electronics Conference, which is the biggest conference in the world for low energy plasma physics. There were researchers from all over the world attending, and by the end of the week every one of them knew about UT Dallas and the caliber of research that we do here. The grad students who undertake research in the field got to hear some of the top researchers in the world speak, and were able to make invaluable contacts. Undergraduates who work in the labs got to listen to the lectures and learned more in that week than they could have imagined. One of the best ways for students can help UTD it to get involved. When I say that I don’t mean get involved with organizations on campus (though you should, especially A Modest Proposal) I mean get involved in some sort of academic research. Lots of professors would love to have eager students to help them with their research or help them host a big conference, and if there aren’t any opportunities, students in all disciplines can do independent studies. Doing research helps students. They learn how to conduct research and earn the possibility of getting their papers published. Getting to know professors during university is so important; the better they know you, the better their recommendation letters will be. However, having students active in academic research might help the university even more than it helps the students; one of the factors that goes into judging Tier One universities is the number of students that are involved in research. The general rule for students to help UTD is simple; be awesome. I’m serious. The more students get involved in research on campus, volunteer opportunities, or applying for prestigious scholarships, the better it is for the school and the students. It’s nice for the school to say “we have two Goldwater award winners,” but it’s hard to imagine that will help a student in their career more than being able to say “I won a Goldwater.” We are Tier One students here at UT Dallas, and once we start to showcase just how good we are, the university is sure to become a Tier One school. Oh, The Places You'll Go Mockingbird Station is the hip place to go off campus by connie kao College life is amazing. There are no parental constraints around anymore - no more stifling, nagging parents at your back interrogating you about how you’re living your life. Beer, wine, cigarettes, and hangovers all abound! One night stands, two night stands, a million new friends … but, for some reason, I haven’t experienced the Animal House inspired college life everyone nostalgically warns me about. And, I don’t think it’s just me missing out. UTD is definitely not known for being a party school. Especially for incoming freshmen living in the Phase VIII apartments. Not only is it not a party school, it does not offer much socially for all the adventurers out there who are looking to capture some of the experiences their parents and movies led them to believe were out there. General consensus has it that one may play pool, ping pong or DDR at the glorious Student Union, get a big bite to eat at the Comet Café, or the Pub, or eat at some nearby places such as Olive Oil’s, Canne’s Fast Food, Masala Wok, or the Chilis by Target. But other than that, many people are stumped about what to do. All studying and no play make Jack and Jill dull students. I have a couple of suggestions. One could venture out about 20 minutes from our lovely UTD campus and visit pleasing Mockingbird Station. For all us frugal student types, UTD provides a free annual DART transit pass. Mass transit can open up a lot of horizons, but the one specific destination that I love DART for is Mockingbird Station. You might wonder why Mockingbird? Mockingbird Station is beautiful, serene, hip area with an independent film center: Angelika. Angelika was founded in New York and Dallas is one of only four cities in the world home to their theaters. This provides UTD students with unique chances to see exotic foreign films, classy independent movies, and classics like La Dolce Vita and Lawrence of Arabia. I’ve seen German films such as The Counterfeiters, the Oscar winner for best foreign film, at the Angelika, as well as the French remake of James Bond called OSS 117, which was hilarious. Also, if you decide to venture over on a Tuesday, students get free popcorn. If you didn’t have a chance to make it on Tuesday, don’t fear because Angelika offers a student discount ($7 as opposed to regular $10 for adults). If you don’t have the time to see a movie, you can browse through any of the numerous nearby boutiques, as well as bigger stores such as Urban Outfitters and American Apparel. And if you get hungry, Mockingbird station is home to a ton of amazing restaurants. Among the incredible selections are restaurants like Spike, a classy eatery; Café Express which is classic and decently priced; and Trinity Hall, a rowdy Irish pub. Five minutes from Mockingbird Station, on Greenville is Granada Theatre. If you’ve never been there, then you’re really missing out. It’s a hip place and was voted best venue in Dallas twice by the Dallas Observer. Some of the cool shows they’ve had recently include artists like Salim Nourallah, who is known for recording in his home studio here in Dallas, and the gypsy (yes, gypsy) band Gogol Bordello. Recently, I had a chance to see Cut Copy and the Presets, two amazing bands from Australia. The night before those Australian bands, the Granada hosted a Canadian band called Sunset Rubdown. So, if you want to experience the culture and the music of foreign bands, you need to step no further than Granada Theatre. I’m recommending Granada over other venues such as Palladium Ballroom or House of Blues because is it is a lot cheaper. Even if you buy tickets online, the convenience fee is significantly less than the other venues. Also, it’s closer and easier to find. The Granada is on Greenville Ave. just off of Mockingbird. You can get tickets for all your favorite artists for under $20, with most tickets costing something more like $12. If you’re trying to decide who to see for your first show, the Polyphonic Spree is performing a holiday extravaganza December 13 with both an early and late showing. If you want to be super ultra cheap you can be like me and listen to Radio UTD and win tickets. You’re only eligible once per semester though, so make a good choice! The environment around the Granada theatre is nice and a lot of clubs and restaurants nearby. If you are a fan of Mediterranean food, try Café Izmir. They have the best hummus I have had. While I might not be the most qualified hummus taster, I found it better than Ali Baba’s and Fadi’s, which are good restaurants in themselves. So with some new sights, new transportation lines, cultural movies, music, and a full tummy, you’ll find UTD is more exciting than you thought. Just remember to get some studying done! SPEAK! Why UTD's language program no es bueno, and what you can do about it by kenny gray Learning another language grants individuals greater insight into their own language (helping them understand others better), economic and technological advantages (opening up business and collaboration opportunities with other societies), and personal intellectual benefits (broadening horizons and cultural understanding). In the modern world of globalization, the importance of such knowledge cannot be overstated, and it is inexcusable for any university in this day and age to neglect these issues by neglecting its foreign language program. So why does UTD, a university which strives not only to be Tier One, but also to be an international presence, have such a small, underdeveloped language program? UTD currently has course prefixes and numbers for Arabic, Chinese, Greek, German, French, Spanish, and Vietnamese (though Greek and Vietnamese have not been taught for a while). The university also offers Japanese, but for some reason this language (and even others with their own prefixes and numbers) are offered under the LANG prefix, which is reserved for languages taught in irregular intervals. This despite the fact it is one of the strongest, most consistently demanded courses. Each of these languages, except Spanish, is set to have four courses (beginning I and II and intermediate I and II), and Spanish is the only language with a minor available. However, it is rare for intermediate courses not to be cancelled, and Arabic suffers from cancellation too. The end result is that UTD offers the possibility of tremendous breadth, but no depth. UT Arlington fares much better, with majors available in Russian, French, Spanish, and German and with four classes in Greek, Latin, and Portuguese. Compared to our Aspirational Peer Universities (relatively small, leading research institutions President David Daniel uses to create goals for future expansion), we have next to nothing. For example, the University of Virginia (one such institution) offers majors in Chinese, Japanese, French, Spanish, German, Russian, Portuguese, the Classics, and Arabic and has three or four language classes in Korean, Tibetan, Hebrew, Persian, Sanskrit, Hindi, and Urdu. Georgia Tech gives its equivalent of minors in Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Russian, and Spanish and has 4 language courses (plus some culture, literature, etc.) in Arabic and Korean. It even offers higher level courses taught in the language of study for some of those. UTD isn’t even really on par with Collin County Community College, which offers about the same amount of courses in the languages we have (except for Spanish), but also courses in Russian, Italian, American Sign Language, and conversation. It’s not as if UTD lacks the resources for the development of foreign language opportunities. UTD has a budding Office of International Education (fifth floor Jonsson building), which has exchange programs with universities in many countries around the world including China, Germany, France, India, Ireland, Israel, South Korea, Mexico, the Czech Republic, Scotland, and Spain. If that’s not enough, the office recently gained the ability to use the Universidad Tecnologico de Monterrey’s exchange agreements (a great addition to our repertoire), and is in talks to allow all UT system schools to share exchange programs. Another gem (much less publicized) is the Center for Translation Studies (fifth floor Jonsson building, next to OIE), a research institution, and the only translation center of its kind in the country. According to Director Rainer Schulte, they are a graduate-focused group that approaches translation as a process of creativity, endeavoring to raise the quantity and quality of translation into English. The center publishes two journals to that end, and develops new methods of teaching for the School of Humanities. The Center is also the headquarters for the American Literary Translators Association (ALTA). These two institutions provide respectively opportunities for students to expand their language skills and upper-level support for students whose language interests are cultural and translational (did you know we have graduate translation classes?). Given that UTD also has the Student Government Academic Affairs Committee working to find ways to expand the language program, it would seem the time is ripe for expansion. I recently sat down with Dr. Dennis Kratz, dean of the Arts and Humanities School, to discuss why the university doesn’t have a stronger language program. Dean Kratz pointed out that the university’s program has some exceptional aspects to it. For instance, UTD offers more Chinese than any other North Texas University. We also have the Confucius Institute, established to enhance American understanding of China and the Chinese culture and to develop a mutual relationship between UTD and China’s Three Gorges University. He adds that once some of the campus reorganization is complete, there will be an entire wing in the Johnson building devoted to language, and has proposed that a center to help international students with English be placed there. However, Dean Kratz also recognizes that our language program is limited in many ways and wants it to expand. According to Dean Kratz, despite the usual difficulty of finding professors qualified to teach at the accredited university level, there are professors here who want to teach upper-level language. The biggest hindrance to expansion is enrollment. Not enough students enroll in the language classes, and almost none enroll in the most advanced courses. Dean Kratz sees this as a reflection of the tension between getting an education and getting trained. The most popular degree plans (science/engineering and management/business) are too crowded, leaving little room for electives - EE only has 9 hours’ worth. Many students lack proper time for such worthwhile pursuits as second language acquisition. Compounding the problem, students with solid language backgrounds often sign up for beginning classes to earn an easy A. Giving all degrees language requirements is an option, but that tends to reduce overall quality of the classes (as high school demonstrates). Dean Kratz appreciates UTD’s scientific and business focus and aims for a humanities for the 21st century (as exemplified by the ATEC and EMAC degrees). He suggests that required hours in crowded degrees be reduced and elective hours be increased so that students have time to broaden their horizons and gain valuable skills. He would also like for upper-level language classes to satisfy degree requirements for humanities credits. Most importantly, Dean Kratz wants students to enroll in upper-level language courses so they can expand to enough classes to offer minors in each language UTD offers. For many students, the UTD foreign language program is too small, too shallow, and too inconsistent. Many issues combine to prevent enough classes being created, and to force the cancellation of higher-level courses. Students don’t know whether certain languages are offered or can’t be confident that the classes will make. Some don’t even know we offer language classes. Trying to find them is confusing because they are offered under different course prefixes at different times, sometimes under their own prefix, sometimes under LANG. Lack of enrollment not only exacerbates these problems, it undermines the quality of the class. When it is so difficult to get an intermediate or advanced class, no one can afford to put struggling or under-prepared students in a lower level. All of these factors force our language program to stagnate and keep students from taking advantage of the opportunities college provides to expand cultural horizons and gain valuable skills for the globalized world. We as students have the power and the responsibility to turn this situation around. I propose a Three step plan. Step 1 is to increase awareness and organization. All RHET 1101 classes should be required to have discussions about the foreign language program, the value of learning a foreign language, and the Office of International Education. Something should also be done to make it easy to find and register for language courses. All courses should be listed under LANG, or LANG course descriptions should provide an outline of each level of study and list all languages the university offers and their prefixes. Step 2 is to petition and survey. Real change has been accomplished on campus when students have gathered evidence of support for certain classes, policies, or developments. This method has already successfully expanded the foreign language program. Intermediate Japanese I was offered for the first time this semester because a student (Alan Davis) circulated a petition to have the class. However, these petitions and surveys are most effective when specific. Surveys that ask whether students would like to see certain courses have some weight, but, when combined with a petition that states that everyone who signed it will take a certain class if offered, say, next semester, they gain considerably more power. Longer-range petitions (students will take multiple courses if offered) have even more power. Step 3 is to enroll. If you want to learn a certain language, but don’t think the class will make, enroll. It only takes 10 people to keep a class open, yet in spite of this low number, language classes get cancelled. The university cannot change if we do not commit to these basics calls for action. Students are creating a Facebook group called UTD Foreign Language Survey to host a general Survey Monkey survey about how students feel about various solutions or incentives to solve this problem. It will also try to gauge which languages students think should expand first. Please take the effort to spend a few minutes finding and completing the survey. If you would like to start a survey or petition of your own, use the group to organize it. Let’s work together to tackle this problem. Generation Rx Stranger than fiction: The chemical lobotomy of America's youth by stevin george The Smiths, a young middle-class couple, were elated to discover that their goal of starting a family would soon be fulfilled. However, that joy turned to anxiety when the fetus started revealing unusual behavior. As time progressed, the behavior worsened. Said Mrs. Smith of her child: “On some days, he would kick violently in my side again and again. Sometimes he’d just lie on his side for hours on end, sometimes he’d spazz out and try to turn over – it was really erratic and sad to witness. The little bastard was acting up; I knew something must be wrong.” The results of several ultrasounds were inconclusive, and failed to shed any light on the nature of the affliction. After much angst, the parents-to-be found solace when the fetus was diagnosed with Unborn Manic Depression, an emerging disorder that, according to Dr. Rita Lynn, associate chair of the Fetal Psychiatry Department at the Mayo Clinic, can develop as early as the 28th week of pregnancy. Last month, Lynn’s observations were validated by a CDC report that showed an exponential increase in new diagnoses every nine months since discovery of UMD in 2001. The increasing disease rates have prompted many obstetricians to demand immediate action on research and analysis. Dr. John Schmedrick of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology posits that recent estimates may woefully understate the real picture. “Listen, it’s impossible to know just how many more fetuses are at risk. Thousands more? A hundred thousand more? To the untrained eye, the disorder would appear to be just normal aspects of a pregnancy. It’s not. Our unborn are genuinely sick. We’re going to need to establish standards of practice to handle UMD; however, this can’t even approach feasibility without dependable screening procedures. The general recommendation is going to be immediate C-section. However, we need to appear that we’re being scientific with this problem. For the purposes of screening, I suggest we develop some sort of machine that goes PING.” Dr. Lynn concurs. She argues that giving a fetus lithium bicarbonate, the standard drug used for treating manic disorders, isn’t ethical. “As much as we’d like to, we can’t force a fetus to ingest lethal medications; we can, however, force expectant mothers to ingest the pills.” “Unfortunately, lithium bicarbonate doesn’t pass through the placental barrier readily enough to work in many cases. It’s easier to force medication on infants than the unborn, which is why we suggest delivering the baby a few months in advance so that a regimen can begin as soon as possible. Once they’ve escaped their uterine imprisonment, we can begin real treatment.” Doctors subsequently met with the Smiths to discuss continuing avenues of treatment. The general prognosis was that the child would require a lifetime of continuous treatment. Speaking about the chances of survival and functionality, Dr. Lynn was blunt. “Look, we can never be too sure with Unborn Manic Depression. There’s no absolute guarantee that the child will function properly. As responsible physicians, we’ve got to operate on the assumption of risk. If we begin with lithium, introduce a few antipsychotics around kindergarten, continue with Ritalin in the preteen years, follow up with Prozac around high school, and top off the cocktail with an extended period of Paxil, a high level of success is expected.” “The point is this: The last great American fiction is that our children are normal and healthy. There are no healthy children, only sick kids in denial. We can’t sit around indifferent to disorders, real or imagined, while our children are potentially suffering. We can’t gamble on their health. And in regards to concerns of overdosing or dependency, the Smiths needn’t worry. Very little evidence exists that our regimen is habit-forming. In the unlikely event of an addiction, we simply counteract said addiction by implementing a high-dosage schedule of another drug to mask the side effects. All is right and well. The Smith baby is in good hands. In light of our medical infallibility and potential to remedy any chemical harm, why so serious?” To allay concerns of drug rejection in the future, Dr. Lynn suggested a new experimental medicine to be taken in conjunction with the existing regimen. The medication, Notadrugatall, works specifically to combat mood swings and depression brought about by overconsumption of prescription drugs. As stated on infomercials: From the makers of such antidepressants as Eublisstra and Melancholix comes a revolutionary new non-drowsy drug that counteracts the harmful chemicals in an infant’s mind that lead to things such as free thought, logic, and individuality – without any side effects. Dr. Lynn considers Notadrugatall to be a godsend, a testimony to the triumph of preventive medication. "I’m just amazed at the ingenuity of the pharmaceutical industry. Before, we’d have to wait for an illness to engineer a solution; now, we can wage a preemptive front. It’s now possible to anticipate pharmacological solutions to problems that don’t even exist.” “This is science on the cutting edge. In the past, illness would precede a remedy. Now people have the opportunity to be medicated … and then get sick.” “Absolutely amazing. Is this a brave new world? No, this is America. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of the wonder drug – this is medical democracy at play. I see no reason why our children should be excluded from the experience, from partaking of the fruits of the Pharmer’s Market.” Mrs. Smith is scheduled to deliver her baby this Monday, approximately four months premature. The couple was initially distraught, but now they’ve come to grips with the situation. “Sure, our child may be miserable from all the side effects, but it’s worth it for the drugs he needs. He may never live a normal life, but we’ll love him all the same,” said Mrs. Smith. Added Mr. Smith: “I’m glad that this nightmare is finally behind us.” Soccer Woes Why America will never compete in international soccer by liam skoyles America is preeminent in the world- our economy is more powerful, our culture is more prevalent, and our Olympians are just more … Olympic? Why then, as a nation that prides itself on competition and athletic endeavor, does the United States continue to make a fool of itself in soccer, the only truly international sport? Soccer represents the highest level of organized international sport, period. The World Cup exposes the fact that the “World” Series is a self-congratulatory lie. Super Bowl games are great but foreigners are always asking why everyone keeps stopping the rugby game for a 45 second break. The world cup finals are viewed by 715 million people. That’s more than twice the population of the United States. International soccer is the most captivating and exciting sport on the planet, and anyone who disagrees should watch the 1966 world cup final between England and West Germany that went into extra time. Professional leagues have nothing even close to that amount of drama. For the past 30 years, everyone who plays, watches, or even vaguely understands soccer has been waiting expectantly for the American teams to play up to their potential. If nothing else America can claim to have the world’s best athletes; Usain Bolt is the fastest man on earth, but the United States still has 15 sprinters who are nipping at his heels. Talent can’t be the problem either, the American Youth Soccer program is extremely active and soccer has worked its way into our society at younger levels. “Soccer moms” can attest to the popularity of soccer and the hundreds of thousands of youngsters who play as kids. So what is the problem? America must have among of its 300 million inhabitants a few athletes who don’t play basketball, football, or baseball and can become decent soccer players. Three main causes for the continuing embarrassment can be found in American society. Title IX All of the talent that is built up by the youth of America playing pee-wee soccer crashes against a wall of misplaced social guidance in high school and college. Title IX is an attempt to ensure gender equality in school sports; functionally, it ensures that for every dollar spent on male athletics, a similar dollar must be spent on a female athletics. Because football needs so many scholarships, many of the “less important” male sports had to be axed to meet the regulations. Among the victims are male gymnastics, male track and field, male swimming, male soccer, and basically anything not named basketball, football or baseball. With few collegiate programs for the best soccer players to strive for, most of the skilled Americans leave their aspirations behind as they go off to college. This starves the professional leagues of talent and destroys whatever benefit America’s vibrant youth program could provide. Americans Hate Losing A huge hurdle blocking the development of soccer is that Americans hate to see America lose. Because America currently could field a pack of demented donkeys as their starting lineup, they rarely beat decent opponents. This leads to plenty of crushing, embarrassing defeats. Nobody wants to watch their team get beat by Trinidad & Tobago. If nobody wants to watch international soccer, who would want to play it? Perhaps this is a part of the American psyche, but England has managed to lose constantly for the past decade and still loves the sport. Americans had no problem falling in love with female soccer when they invented the women’s world cup. America trounced its opponents, who were thrown together by foreign countries in confusion, and the popularity of female soccer soared so much that soccer is currently seen as a largely female sport. Americans Hate Foreigners This last block facing soccer is a tough pill to swallow, but unfortunately it explains much of the American attitude toward international athletics. Traditionally “American” sports such as football and baseball are direct descendants of their European predecessors: rugby and cricket. The rest of the world doesn’t seem to have a problem with these sports, but in America they are made faster, stronger, and punctuated by unnecessary, awkward pauses, but definitely more American. Americans like American games, and anything else is viewed as inferior. This bias leads to the conception that “dirty Mexicans” play soccer or “stuck up Brits” play cricket, while most Americans don’t even know how to play. America has everything it needs to be a competitive force in international soccer. Most people here would love it if they would sit down and watch a match or two. Soccer is the one sport that everyone can play, whether kicking a can between backpacks or playing in 100,000 person stadiums. Everyone, it seems, except Americans. America is content with just patting itself on the back every year for beating the one foreign team (Canada’s) in each of its major professional sport leagues and parades around like the king of the world, ignoring the real challenge. If America would get over itself enough to play those horrid foreign games, it would find some real competition, some real emotion, and some real pride. The Bailout $700 billion of nothing new by alex garcia topete The U.S. Government’s infamous bailout of the banks has seized not only the attention of the news, but also the interest of the people because their money is at stake: savings, investments, retirement, and now their tax-money. There’s uproar amidst the crisis. Why a bailout? Maybe because, in author Robert Reich’s words, the United States has socialism for the rich, and capitalism for everybody else… The objective, non-partisan explanation is that a bailout is the way to deal with such a crisis. The term bailout was not invented recently for the media headlines. Sparing the economic jargon, a bailout consists of a higher entity, such as the government injecting money into institutions with cash troubles, such as banks, so that these can pay debts and function; meanwhile, the bailer gets oversight, profits, or both from the rescued institutions. This phenomenon saved capitalist economies throughout the 20th century enough times to add bailout to the dictionaries of economics. However, the fact that crises and bailouts keep occurring doesn’t mean that the same process happens over and over again. More specifically, this is not 1929 version 2008 (although, 1929 could become the First Great Depression if we don’t make it through the slump). In 1929, a combination of financial and environmental factors was to be blamed. Namely, people did not want to borrow and spend money after Wall Street crashed, which killed manufacture markets, and that farming collapsed on account of a drought in 1930, which prompted the downward economic spiral of depression. Today is different. This recession can be blamed purely on mishandled finances (meaning the toxic mortgage loans) that popped the bubble of consumption and investment in the housing market. It’s not that Mother Nature and free markets are screwing the economy over as was the case in 1929, but that human nature and financial speculation are sending the global economy down to hell in a hand-basket. The current situation resembles more the crises endured by nation-specific economies towards the end of the past century. Japan had the exact same housing-market crash in the early 1990s. The banks were in trouble because of bad loans, resulting in the Japanese government’s handing over billions of dollars to the banks to keep the economy afloat. Mexico also had a similar bank crisis in 1994. Pretty much like the current U.S. situation, the approval of the bailout was the center of controversy among political parties from the left and the right, even when the $55 billion ended up still being handed to the banks. In this case, luckily, the Mexican president happened to be one of the country’s top economists. Today in America, there is Ben Bernakee, who happens to have earned his doctorate studying the Great Depression, as head of the Federal Reserve, the guy knows (hopefully) what to do. Bailouts are such a standard solution to market (or corporation) crashes that, as mentioned, they’ve been used in the past and are being used in the present throughout the world. The $700 billion United States bailout (euphemistically billed as The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008) was just the first of a series of bailouts by different governments to prevent their economies from following the U.S. down the hellish path of recession--because having a globalized economy means that if one goes down, everyone else is dragged along. Europe, as the other wealthy half of the Western world, was the first to be affected and to react accordingly. The United Kingdom, the closest United States ally, saw its Scottish banks and Icelandic investments collapse, so an $692-billion-dollar rescue plan was devised and implemented in a matter of days. The European Union had its member countries agree upon new financial rules to prevent a more devastating domino effect among banks and markets while France, Spain, and Germany announced national rescue plans of billions of Euros, with other nations following these steps soon thereafter. One very important difference between the European and American bailouts, though, is that the US is being tame with the greedy or incompetent CEOs that allowed their companies to crash and burn, whereas the European homologues are getting fired, sued, charged, or, if lucky, just forced into early retirement. The US definitely loves its capitalists more. Meanwhile, with cheaper imports and regular exports, Asia is stable overall (mostly China, of course); Australia is using budget surpluses to shield itself; Latin America has been shaken by the stock-market slumps, but not gravely; and Africa gets less aide from hurting nations. Recessions and depressions are natural risks of capitalism, with bailouts being the quick, sour remedies to such mishaps. Is it unjust to rescue the companies with taxpayers’ money, while abandoning the debtors, the real people losing their homes and savings? Yes. It’s a capitalist principle. What would capitalism do, after all, without capitalists to keep it running? My Country 'Tis of Me How our boundless sense of self entitlement has caused the current crisis by richard badgett If you listen to the presidential debates or any of the candidates’ speeches, you’ll hear both McCain and Obama (and a slew of senatorial and congressional candidates) talk about the American Dream of owning a home. You’ll hear both candidates decry the awful greed of those unscrupulous Wall Street executives who wake up in the morning and plot a dozen ways to prevent Americans from fulfilling that dream before their corn flakes even have time to get soggy. You’ll hear the right and the left shrilly proclaim that with proper oversight this mess could’ve been averted. With better management from the government, none of this would have blown up, and we would all be rich, happy and living the American Dream. Horse manure. The problem wasn’t too little government intervention. The problem was exactly too MUCH government intervention. Now before you accuse me of going all Ron Paul, let me explain what I mean. Let’s zoom back in time to 1938. America is having trouble emerging from the depression because of a lack of liquidity; people can’t start businesses which make money, because nobody has the money to loan them to get things going. FDR creates Fannie Mae in order to infuse cash into a moribund mortgage market. Because of relaxed rules about how much cash it had to back up, and because it enjoyed access to immeasurably large government coffers, Fannie Mae succeeded brilliantly. By making government capital available to individuals, Fannie Mae was able to help America overcome a crisis and restore faith in its markets. Now let’s go forward about 30 years. America’s economy is booming, the post-war years are a time of unparalleled growth, and our economic future couldn’t be brighter. LBJ converts Fannie Mae into a publicly owned corporation because there’s no need for the federal government to manage it. A few years later Nixon creates a competing organization, Freddie Mac, in order to stir up the market even further. Thirty more years now. It’s 1999 and the American economy is an unstoppable juggernaut. But not everyone is riding the bandwagon of success. Fannie and Freddie are told by the Clinton and Bush administrations that they need to make more money available to high-risk, low-income borrowers in order to allow more Americans to experience The Dream. With so much money out there, goes the reasoning, it’s downright criminal that some folks are being left behind. Bush and Clinton take this literally, and pass a series of laws mandating that Fannie and Freddie allocate huge sums of cash to give people with poor credit an opportunity to obtain a mortgage. Never mind why they have poor credit, if they’re Americans, then this is their dream too! While the symptoms of the disease may not have manifested for a few years, it’s at this juncture that our economy became infected. When politicians (of both parties) dictated to Fannie and Freddie with whom they could deal and on what terms, those institutions became ticking time bombs. The subprime mortgages didn’t happen because of corporate greed, they happened because politicians used home ownership as a political expedient. Fannie and Freddie began making more and more money available to lending institutions which specialized in high-risk clients. These people were more likely to default on their mortgages, but with home prices appreciating continuously, it wasn’t that big of a concern. The banks would just re-sell the homes to other at-risk clients. If those new borrowers also defaulted, well no big deal. Foreclosure rates in America were never higher than about 4 percent, so even if everything went horribly wrong and that figure doubled the overall mortgage market would still be robust. Obviously, everything did go horribly wrong, and the numbers didn’t just double, they exploded. Foreclosure rates at sub-prime lenders rose to as high as 30 and 40 percent, absolutely destroying the resale value of the homes. With no income from borrowers who had all defaulted, nobody to purchase the assets the loans were for, and no way to loan out money to new borrowers, the whole economy collapsed like a house of cards. More government oversight would not have forestalled this problem. Government oversight WAS the problem. Think back to where this article started, with McCain and Obama talking about the American Dream of home ownership. McCain even described it as a fundamental American right. The reason everything went kablooey isn’t because those greedy fat cats on Wall Street got hoisted on their own petard. It’s because WE, normal every day Americans, tried to turn the government into an instrument of plunder. We looked at the American Dream and said “that should be mine.” We saw the world getting rich around us and asked “where’s my share?” We demanded that the government step in to help us get what we wanted. We can insist that more oversight would have stopped all of this, but it was our insistence that the government intervene that got us into the mess. The problem with oversight is that if we ask the government to watch business, we’d better make damn sure that someone is watching the government. The failure of oversight wasn’t Greenspan’s, it was ours. We demanded that our government to become a tool for theft and entitlement, and got exactly what we asked for. Part of the bailout negotiations involve stiff penalties for executives whose companies are now bankrupt but who walked away with millions. Yet, huge amounts of those “millions” were in the form of now worthless stock in defunct companies. The CEOs suffered the same as the rest of us. More importantly, though, every CEO’s salary of every failed investment company put together isn’t a 10th of a percent of the total figure involved in the bailout. The reason we’re targeting the CEOs is simple: We need someone to blame. I agree, someone is to blame. But it isn’t the CEOs, it’s us. Vietnam: Reflections on Our Past and Future by megan newman Last week, I took a walk with friends to the Vietnam Memorial in Washington, DC. At the Veterans Memorial on the National Mall, we paused for some emotional and humbling reflections on American ideology. One of the first things I noticed about the memorial was its reflective quality. The smoky black granite somehow sharply mirrored its surroundings. On its face, I could have either focused on each small gray name in succession or the changing background, that day a multicolored, crisp fall afternoon. I saw myself juxtaposed with each name, small in my sky-blue-and-buttercup striped sweater. I looked uncertain and lost in the background of fiery reds, mustard yellows, muddy browns, and other blurs of movement that passed along the wall. Reflecting on the tragedy of Vietnam was like being frozen inside the granite for a brief moment. It reflected 58,260 names. Unusual names like Steven E. Amescua, who was killed a few months before one of his best friends in 1968. On the web site for the Vietnam Memorial, http://thewall-usa.com, it says that 25,000 of those killed in Vietnam were 20 years of age or younger. Twenty years. Twenty-five thousand youth that were my age, your age, who will be “forever 20,” attested to by the laminated papers left in memory for those whose birthdays would have been this week. I felt an inexplicable, irresistible urge to touch the granite, to physically feel each name. As I ran my hand along the various etched letters on the reflective black wall, I thought about all the boys who became men only to die or lose their minds in a place where no one welcomed our invasion, in a place that was worse off after we left. We left Vietnam war-torn and bitter, taking our shattered forces and our shattered pride along with us. The youth and the sheer magnitude of the casualties hit me again as I looked at the bronze sculpture of the “Three Servicemen,” 20 feet from the Wall in a grove of trees. Their faces are young and frightened, though their stances are determined. The three of them stand together, looking into what must have been a dark unknown. It was a vulgar display to see those boys wrapped in their machine gun rounds like funeral shrouds. They should not have been required to learn how to creep through Agent Orange infested jungles, how to kill or be killed, how to withstand torture, how to deal with the psychological damage of such harrowing experiences. They should never have been sent there to die by the thousands for nothing. Nothing, that is, but broken hearts and minds and a broken American reputation. I relate this disheartening journey to bring up some important questions about the current state of affairs in our great nation. First, why are we repeating this cycle in Iraq? Who allowed this to happen? Why are our bright young men and women again being sent to die in yet another country that will arguably be no better off for our casualties or our ideologies? Has it ever occurred to Mighty America that perhaps democracy is not the answer for everyone? That perhaps the Middle East is unprepared if not downright unwilling to accept our ideologies? I know we cannot and should not justify fighting to spread those ideologies until they have played out to their fullest potential where they are supposed to be strongest. I know that here, in their supposed heartland, we have a failing economy, a crumbling infrastructure, an endangered education system, an energy crisis, a leper for a foreign policy, and a perpetual partisan clash unchecked by an apathetic public which enables avaricious arrogance on the part of our government. We must change, we must expect more than history’s repeated tragedies. President Lincoln once said that “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” Likewise, perhaps a house built from the strongest of materials but renovated in a repetitively shoddy manner will someday fall. I am a history major, and have been derided more than once for my study of the “useless past.” But the past is not useless. Vietnam should have taught us something about foreign engagements that we are still struggling to learn 40 years, 4186 casualties, and 565 billion dollars later. There is something we can do about our prior mistakes now. We can inform ourselves on the current state of affairs in the United States and in the world, and we can exercise our influence as a large demographic and vote. A feasible way to change the current situation, and my greatest hope for America’s future, is an informed youth movement that cannot be ignored by our leaders, telling them unequivocally that we have had enough of history’s repeated mistakes. We can express our views the way our parents or relatives did when their friends, loved ones, and neighbors were dying by the thousands in Vietnam—we can protest, become involved in politics, or even simply (let me say this again) VOTE Remember When This War Had a Face? by billy easley When the War on Terror first began, the American people were informed about the sacrifices made daily on their behalf. I remember when the national broadcasts were punctuated with a somber report about the lives of soldiers who had died. I remember when we were reminded about the human cost of our policies in a manner that was personal and penetrating. It was 15 seconds given each and every day that seemed to span a lifetime; each time, it reminded the American people of the lives that had been cut short so we could enjoy the freedoms we hold so dear. We were given more than the numbers of the dead or the wounded. We were given insight, however small, into their lives. But now, all we have are numbers. The War is book-marked with statistics rather than stories of the sacrifices that have been made. Somewhere along the way the American people encouraged the media to engage in the greatest of all possible sins for a country is at war; the sin of omission. There was an omission of the toll that War has on the American psyche, and what it demands from the American people; sacrifice. Even before the War started, we began to move on with our lives. The Bush administration certainly helped push the American public in that direction. We were told to go shopping, instead of encouraged to sacrifice for the brave men and women serving in the Armed Forces. We were told that we could keep the Bush tax cuts, not reminded that we never had cut taxes in war time; we’d rather borrow the money from China than sacrifice our own comfort. We were told that there was no reason to see the coffins of the hallowed dead come from abroad, not reminded it was that kind of insight into the cost of War which drove the American public to become more involved in the Vietnam War. In our effort to live comfortable lives, the sense of duty which has always prevailed in America began to be perverted to mean we could have war abroad and maintain a sense of peace at home; as if nothing had ever happened. The face of War became obscured until all that remained was statistics and politics. For a long time, the War we have engaged in has ceased to be a matter of personal sacrifice for the country and instead a mere political issue. The lives extinguished in the name of this country’s security have been reduced to talking points used by the politicians rather than reminders of what we’ve lost. I’m just as guilty of this, but I remind myself everyday how easily I could have lost someone in my life to the tumult of war, and it brings me down to earth; it grounds me in the sharp reality that one must tread lightly when speaking of lives that were lost on your behalf and on behalf of your country. When the few are burdened with sacrificing so much for the many it shouldn’t be forgotten, it should be etched in the annals of history. When this election season first started, terrorism and the War on Terror were first in the people’s mind. Barack Obama was selected as the Democratic nominee partially because of his opposition to the war when he was in the Illinois legislature. John McCain’s credentials in national security and support for the surge made him a viable candidate on those issues. Now, both these candidates find themselves placed in a difficult position, as the economy has replaced these critical issues in the mind of the public. During the first Presidential debate, which was supposed to be focused on foreign policy, the economy took precedence. When people are asked what issue is most important to them, the War on Terror is no longer as important an issue as it should and used to be. We can recover the money we have lost, but we can never recover the lives that have been lost. When you walk into the voting booth November 4, don’t vote against McCain or for Obama; vote for the person that you feel is worthy of the responsibility for the sacrifices this war demands. Politics Is No Joke Wait - yes it is. And it’s absolutely hilarious. by alice post What do spinach, bars, and politics have in common? There are plenty of jokes about all three. One of the traits of funniness is encountering the unexpected. Our cognitive frameworks map out all the different directions an idea should take and then a joke finds something to completely jar our expectation. You probably would not expect my favorite spinach joke to include anal sex … but it does, and it’s hilarious. Everyday situations are thrown into scenarios outside our scope of “normal” and turn, if not fascinating, funny. This might explain both the zeal of Jon Stewart on the Daily Show and Dr. Greg Thielemann and Texas politics. One points out the ridiculousness of politicians in the news, the other studies the ridiculousness of politicians in order to be able to understand their actions. The comedian embraces the fact that politicians operate in a completely different world than we know. The scholar studies with good intentions until the magic is ruined. The wizard steps out from behind the curtain and the horrible surprise that we’re all doomed settles upon him. Politics as narrowed to the specific realm of elected office, not the universal application to family, work and church, is horribly fascinating for one reason alone: It’s a world made up by humans which resembles a world of animals. In a race for king of the jungle the lion kills its competitor, he doesn’t give him a power sharing agreement. Politics is an all or nothing game. (Ok, in Canada they allow for proportional representation: sissies.) The candidate either wins or he loses. A candidate is elected by popularity contest (ok, in theory by the good they could give society) or they get shoved into the dark recesses of failure. Those with 49% of people’s votes (unless you are running for president in 2000) return home in abject defeat. The higher cognitive functions that enable humans to compromise, share, and listen to those weaker than us are ignored in the world of politics. Due to inherent human inadequacy, politics creates a world of all or nothing, black and white, red and blue, and forgets that the real world is not so easily defined. This inconsistency is why blunders by politicians become news, or better yet, scandal. “News” in politics means either something in the status quo has changed, or another ridiculous “scandal” occurred. As a kid I was highly confused about the ritual habits of watching the evening news and going to church and the idea that “polite” conversation excluded both religion and politics. Are political conversations uncomfortably personal? Is it dangerous to represent a minority party? Do people really think less of me for how I vote? Should anyone be offended if I try to convince them to vote like me? In theory the answers should be obvious: No, no, no, and no. Oftentimes, the real answers are terribly different. “Yes politics is painfully personal, my tax money is not your shopping spree.” “Care to scoop up all the dog poo next to my Obama yard sign?” “I certainly think less of anyone voting for Palin.” And “I’m offended you don’t want to vote like ME!” Even political spectators devolve (for those that believe in evolution) to a species only concerned only with their personal wellbeing. My mother solved this problem by teaching me to avoid senseless conversation about differing ideas. Naturally, I became a political science major so I could legitimately, though perhaps annoyingly, discuss these things with whomever I pleased. I also enjoy studying politics because it is hilarious. Humor immediately turns apathy and disinterest into a craving for information about the subject of any good joke. Everyone hates the awkward explanations for why a political joke is funny; everyone especially hates having the joke explained to them. I write from personal experience. At worst, a political joke slanders the name of an elected official. At best, that same horrible joke makes that bloke’s name known to the world. Exposing the strange world of politics through humor invites people to actually think about what just happened. By physically laughing at Tina Fey’s impressions of Sarah Palin, we alert ourselves to wonder, “Why did I just think that was funny?” Watch the flash video “The End of the World” several times. You can laugh the first time, but I hope you eventually recognize the importance of not inciting nuclear Armageddon. In this way, horrible truths can be confronted with laughter. Poli-tick tock Time is running out for the Republican Party by ryan henry The American people want change. They want change in Washington, change in the economy, change in our foreign policy, and change in the way things are done in government. It follows that both parties are claiming to be the proper agent for that change. The current administration does not represent the will of the American people, as evidenced by its historically low approval rating. Even some high-profile, long- time Republicans are breaking away and voting Blue. In particular, one incredibly influential African American has me thinking that perhaps the Democratic Party can give people who desire change a reason to hope. (I’ll give you a hint … I’m not talking about Obama.) The Republican Party is in shambles. In the past few months, many high profile Republicans have come out and said they will no longer follow traditional party lines and will be voting Democrat in the upcoming Presidential election. Christopher Buckley, a long time writer in the conservative publication the National Review, and Michael Smerconish, a Republican talk show host, both stated that they support Obama in his presidential bid. Buckley lost his column because of this public endorsement, and it will be the first time in 28 years Smerconish will vote blue. Scott McClellan, the former White House Press Secretary under the current administration, said in a CNN interview that he will be voting for the candidate that will do the most to change how things are run in Washington. He is voting for Obama. McCain is also taking his lumps in the media. Every time I turn on the TV there is something new about the dire straits of the McCain campaign. Also, if Hollywood actually has its fingers on the pulse of America as it would like us to think, then McCain is in big trouble as many actors have given their endorsements to his opponent from Illinois. Even the conservative media is hopping on the Obama bandwagon. The Chicago Tribune is backing a Democrat (Obama) for the first time in the paper’s 161-year history. However, the most important defection from the Republican camp is that of Colin Powell. General Colin Powell is a US Army veteran and served as Secretary of State under current President George W. Bush from 2001-2005. He was born in Harlem and attended City College of New York. There he participated in Reserve Officers’ Training Corps and was granted the rank of Second Lieutenant after graduating in June 1958. He achieved the rank of General in April of 1989. His import goes further than just his rank. He was a voice of reason in the early years of the Iraq war, and he was many people’s choice for the Republican nomination before he pulled his own name, so he could spend more time with family. But why do we listen when he speaks? Because, he is one of the few people from the current administration that has not lost all credibility. Not only is he the embodiment of the American dream, having grown up in a poor neighborhood as the son of immigrant parents, but he has also stood by his convictions as others have gone astray. Gen. Powell’s endorsement came after the final Presidential debate and shows exactly how far the Republican Party has fallen into disrepair. Why would a long time Republican who has seen combat in Vietnam and the Persian Gulf throw his support behind Obama instead of McCain, a fellow veteran of the armed forces? It goes much deeper than a competition between the Army and Navy. Gen. Powell endorsed Obama because he believes Obama will be the person to bring about what the people want most ... change. I have tried to stay away from the political banter that commonly finds its way into conversations between my friends. However, I believed that I would vote *gasp* Republican. Throughout this election, I have become equally disenchanted with both parties. People are tired of hearing about Joe Sixpack, Joe the Plumber, and the Straight-talk Express. People are also tired of pundits likening Obama to the Messiah and hearing his supporters constantly repeat three words that sound like the inspirational speech from a Disney made-for-TV movie (Yes we can). In fact, come Election Day, I will be weighing the promised change found in Obama/Biden or voicing my equal disgust by casting a write-in vote (maybe Mickey Mouse). Either way, on Nov. 4, get out and vote, and I urge you to consider the reforms promised by one Barack Obama. No matter what, though, the most important thing is that your voice is heard, even if you are going to vote for some crazy write-in like Mickey Mouse or Ron Paul. Oklahoma Is Not OK Partisan proscriptions penalize peripheral parties by jonathan coker Indecision is the word of the presidential election season and understandably so. Most voters will have many viable and serious candidates to choose from when they enter the voting booth on Nov. 4, and if those options aren’t enough to satisfy, the write-in slot ensures every single registered voter can place their vote and confidence in the person they feel is most qualified … Unless you live in Oklahoma. Oklahoma’s unreasonable, unfair, draconian presidential election laws have left me feeling disenfranchised. I’m registered to vote in Tulsa, but I don’t intend on making the four-hour drive from my UTD apartment just to cast my ballot. So, I sent in for my absentee ballots in early October, eager to exercise my right to vote. Like many, I’m displeased with the way the nation is going right now and with the current political system, so I opened my absentee ballots with the intention of writing in or voting for a third-party candidate. My hopes were dashed when I saw that my only two options were Barack Obama and John McCain. Not even Bob Barr was on the ballot. I searched and searched for a write-in area and could not find one. Confused, I went to Google and asked for explanation and comfort. I found neither. The truth was disheartening. Oklahoma is one of a handful of states that doesn’t allow write-in voting. To add insult to injury, Oklahoma law requires an unreasonable amount of signatures for candidates to be added to the presidential ballot as an independent. A candidate needed nearly 44,000 signatures to be added to the ballot this year. That’s a sizable percentage (2.1%) of Oklahoma’s 2.1 million registered voters. So, for the second election in a row, Oklahoma voters have two options, and only two options. I’ve always hated the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils. That’s why we keep getting more of the same in DC and why politicians act with impunity. But in Oklahoma there is truly no other choice. I can vote for Obama or McCain, neither of whom speaks to me as a voter or matches me well ideologically. Or, I can not vote at all. All of my options are distasteful. Something about this feels undemocratic. I think I understand the intent of the no write-in candidates law, if the law was actually written by sincere lawmakers and not by evil partisans who just want to keep pesky third party candidates from stealing their votes. The noble idea is to keep tax payers from wasting money paying people to sort through thousands of write-in votes, most of which will be tossed out anyway. I’m not particularly upset that people can’t cast their votes for Mickey Mouse. However, when the law is paired with unreasonable signature requirements, serious, legitimate candidates are kept off the ballot, and there’s no way to vote for them. Bob Barr is the Libertarian Party candidate. The Libertarians are a very large third party, and Bob Barr is a serious candidate with a lot of Oklahoman supporters. But he unsurprisingly couldn’t collect 44,000 signatures in Oklahoma, so he missed the ballot. Without a write-in slot, Oklahomans are left with no way to vote for him. Something in the checks and balances seems to have broken or become tipped entirely toward the two established parties. I wondered how this could be constitutional and apparently other people have too. Bob Barr sued to be on the ballot after his party was unable to collect enough signatures for the 2008 election. Unsurprisingly, a Republican judge in the Oklahoma court denied the injunction. Some Oklahoma lawmakers have tried to enact legislation allowing a write-in vote, but their efforts have stalled out in the past. With this election year and all the fervor surrounding it, I think it’s imperative that Oklahoma voters make sure their state representatives know how important the write-in vote is to them. I for one plan on writing Governor Brad Henry and my state representatives and demanding to know why Oklahoma has such backwards voting laws. (I’ll probably throw in a few comments about the roads too.) Oklahoma voters can find their state representatives’ addresses at http://www.capitolconnect.com/oklahoma/default.aspx. Governor Brad Henry’s office address Office of Governor Brad Henry State Capitol Building 2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 212 Oklahoma City, OK 73105 Whether you’re Republican, Democrat, or Independent, your ability to choose should matter to you. So, fellow Oklahoman UTD students, write your representatives! King of Terror Five movies based on Steven King’s novels by john harding Until Thanksgiving in two months, it’s high time to update your Netflix queue. To assist with this, I present for your consideration the top five film adaptations of Stephen King stories, not all of which are of the horror variety that you might expect. 5. The Mist Adapted from the novella of the same name included in the anthology Skeleton Crew, this movie takes us to a small town in Maine that has suddenly been enshrouded in a deep, otherworldly mist. Initially the townspeople aren’t concerned, but the real surprises occur when supernatural beasts begin to emerge from the mist to devour people. The film takes place almost entirely in a small grocery store and is as much about the people in the store as it is about the monsters outside. The director, longtime King collaborator Frank Darabont, does a great job of showing the slow meltdown of the people in the store as they start to turn on each other and give in to their growing sense of dread and cabin fever. The ending is of a sort you rarely see in major motion pictures and will absolutely surprise you. The special edition DVD also comes with a black-and-white version that’s even creepier. 4. The Shining Stanley Kubrick brought this book to the screen in 1980 to great critical acclaim, but disdain from Stephen King and fans of the book. It was, in many ways, more a re-imagining of King’s work than a carbon copy style adaptation, with changes to key plot points and character motivation. In fact, the movie’s most memorable moments, from the twins in the hallway, to the blood in the elevator, to even the “Here’s Johnny!” line, weren’t even in the book! However, that doesn’t change the fact that this is a really good movie and an absolutely terrific horror film. Jack Nicholson is amazing as always, and this is also one of my favorite Stanley Kubrick films. 3. Creepshow When a movie is written by Stephen King and directed by George Romero, you know it’s going to be cool, and this film does not disappoint. The film is an homage to old fifties comic book horror movies like Tales from the Crypt and contains five “jolting tales of horror” for the price of one. Though it’s technically not an adaptation, we’ll let this one slide because King wrote the screenplay and two of the stories were old short stories he had published. At its core this is just a really fun movie, and great for anybody that loves cult horror films like Evil Dead and Night of the Living Dead - or pretty much any movie with the word dead in it. 2. The Green Mile Nominated for four Academy Awards including Best Picture, The Green Mile tells the story of Paul Edgecomb, a prison guard overseeing a death row unit in 1935 when a very unusual prisoner arrives. It is told as a flashback by the main character as he relates the story of his life to a friend in a nursing home. This allows both Tom Hanks and Dabbs Greer, in his final movie role, to act as the main character. It is not a horror movie by any means, but it will certainly keep you on the edge of your seat, and may even make you cry. Tom Hanks was great and Michael Clarke Duncan blew everyone away with an unexpected breakthrough performance. Frank Darabont directed this film as well, so you know for the future that if you see his name attached to a Stephen King movie, it’s going to be good. 1. The Shawshank Redemption Frank Darabont (surprise!) takes us back to prison for the best of all Stephen King movies, The Shawshank Redemption. This one was nominated for seven Academy Awards, though managed not to win any, as it was running against the juggernaut Forrest Gump. It is also probably the least Stephen King-ish movie of all the Stephen King movies, and I’d bet a lot of people don’t even realize this was based on one of his stories. The film follows the life of Andy Dufresne, a man who is given a life sentence for a crime of which he claims to be innocent. It starts with his trial and arrival at Shawshank State Prison. The film also delves deeply into the lives of the other inmates as well, such as Red, played by Morgan Freeman, and Brooks, sublimely portrayed by James Whitmore. There are no sci-fi elements or anything really weird or out of this world, but that only stands to show that King is no one trick pony. For a while this was my number one favorite movie of all time, and it still ranks in the rotating lineup of twenty or so movies that I call my top five. The Menu El Fenix goes down in flames and doesn’t rise from the ashes story by brady spenrath After being disappointed many times on our vacations around the United States, my family eventually came up with a culinary theorem: There is no good Mexican food north of San Antonio. Ok while I’ll admit that this is not a completely true statement (I’ve had some great Mexican food in New Mexico, for example) my experiences dictate that good Tex-Mex or Mexican food gets much harder to find north of the Alamo. Once in Dallas, I began to hear about the “Legend of El Fenix,” or more accurately, I started to see the adobe-colored billboards around town. Missing the most popular cooking style from my hometown (Three Rivers, Texas, home of the Salsa Fest), I decided to stop by the El Fenix on I-75 in Plano one day. My visit did nothing to challenge my family’s old theorem. Every Mexican food experience opens with the chips and salsa, and El Fenix is no exception. The chips are good and appear to be homemade, but unfortunately the mild tomato salsa is a disappointment (oddly enough, they sell it in jars at the front of the restaurant). Tortillas served on request also precede the meal, and aren’t bad. Unfortunately, after this introduction, El Fenix doesn’t deliver anything particularly noteworthy again. Opening the menu, your eyes are initially met with platters and dishes that all sound delicious. But a look at the prices shows off the restaurant’s weakest link. The food here is quite expensive. Some of it is literally twice as much as I would pay back at home for the same meal with the same amount of food on the plate, and it seems like most items range over $10. I thought the quality of the food would be above average, but I was wrong. I found the plates I tried at El Fenix to be far inferior to the much cheaper fare I grew up with. For instance, the Puebla Plate, which includes a sour cream chicken enchilada, a cheese enchilada, a cheese taco, rice, and beans, for instance, is pretty bland. In Mexican cooking, which is amazing because it’s full of flavor, spiciness, cheese, and marinated meats, it’s a cardinal sin to make flavorless food, and El Fenix commits this sin again and again. The fajita quesadillas are also simple and small, and even their Chili con Queso is boring. I thought it was impossible to blend rich cheese and salsa together and wind up with a boring combination. I mean, all you have to do to satisfy my queso craving is melt Velveeta with Ro-Tel for Pete’s sake. El Fenix somehow manages to make it taste more like bland cream than cheese and take away all hints of spiciness. The chili relleno (stuffed chili pepper) does offer a little more flavor, but I can’t say it’s a flavor I particularly enjoyed. Its stuffing is decent, but then fried in an egg batter, and for some reason, the egg taste never gets cooked out. In fact, what comes through the most is that odd egg aftertaste. Nothing I’ve had at El Fenix, even their jalapeños, is spicy, and the platters are neither bigger nor better than their counterparts down south. I consider the true measure of any Mexican restaurant to be in its enchiladas and fajitas, so I had to try El Fenix’s fajitas to know the full picture. Fortunately, they’re not too bad. I’ve had worse before, and they’re accompanied by a multitude of toppings to customize them with – my platter included sour cream, guacamole, grilled peppers and tomatoes, pico de gallo, salsa, cheese, grilled, and raw onions, and jalapeños. Unfortunately, neither their quality nor quantity are worth the price, but they are the best thing I’ve had from the restaurant. The service at El Fenix is no better than any other restaurant, and can be quite slow at times. To be fair, the restaurant offers lunch specials that, while still moderately high (around $7 each) are a better deal than the dinner prices. My food arrived much faster during the lunch hour than dinner, as well. Maybe El Fenix is better to those whose standards for Mexican and Tex-Mex aren’t as high as mine; the place is consistently crowded by customers. It is a family-friendly and casual atmosphere, as well. I can’t speak for all the El Fenix’s throughout the city either; I’ve only tried the Plano location. But as far as that location is concerned, I can’t recommend it.