The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for September, 2007

Volume 4, Issue 3 Game Page Answers

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

If you would like to see the solutions to the fun and games section of Volume 4, Issue 3 simply click the image below.

Thanks for playing!

Posted in Game Page Answers, Volume 4, Issue 3 | Leave a Comment »

Welcome to the U.S., Mahmoud. Now Go Away.

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

By the time you read this, one of the most catastrophic blunders in the history of US diplomacy and homeland security will have taken place. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, the Iranian president who for years has been one of the most outspoken and vitriolic enemies of the United States, will have been allowed to enter American soil to address the United Nations General Assembly. And while the UN is technically not considered American sovereign territory, I’m sure Mr. Ahmedinejad will go for a stroll through the streets of New York City to grab a bite to eat at some of their world-renowned delis, while being guarded by dozens of Secret Service agents — paid for by the graces and auspices of American taxpayers to provide security for a man who hates this country with every breath he can muster.

To add insult to injury, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad has been invited by Columbia University in New York to deliver a speech as part of their World Leaders Forum, addressing faculty and students alike. The university, under the guise of academic integrity and freedom, thumbs their nose at America in a despicable elitist demonstration of disrespect that boggles the mind and defies logic. In a town with such a large Jewish community such as New York, the man who claims that the holocaust was “a myth” and wishes Israel was “wiped off the map” is received with open arms by the intellectual pseudo-elites of that magnificent brick-and-mortar monument to moral relativism.

It may sound strange to some of you, but I actually defend Columbia’s decision to allow Ahmedinejad to speak. No – defend is perhaps too strong a word. It implies that I have a vested commitment in some level to their decision, which I do not. My position is more of indifference than support, of ‘un-amusement’ than outrage. The fact of the matter is, the overwhelming barrage of leftist rhetoric that oozes from academia nowadays demonstrates their complete and utter disregard for the morals and worldview of the majority of Middle-America, which they despise for their lack of finesse and acculturation. To somehow demand that they uphold our national interest in a higher degree would be an exercise in futility. So the outcry is that Columbia University should cancel Ahmedinejad’s appearance and listen to the voice of common sense on the issue. My reply is, they have yet to behave in such a way, so why start now?

But not all ears are shut to the voices of reason: the NYPD Chief of Police has warned Ahmedinejad that he is not welcome to pay a visit to Ground Zero, which the Iranian president had planned to do. Even more defiantly ironic was Ahmedinejad’s plan to lay a wreath of flowers at the site. I believe I am not alone in saying this, but the world will be a better place when a wreath of flowers lays over Ahmedinejad’s grave.

Ed Lima

Posted in Ed Lima, Israel, Volume 4, Issue 3 | 5 Comments »

Petraeus Report: A Military and Political Equation

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

The report that the country has been waiting for has arrived. General Petraeus has made his report and item number on his list- the surge is working, the military objectives have been met. General Petraeus reported that attacks and civilian deaths are down, and it is because of the surge. His report also stated that the military would be able to reduce the troop force levels to pre-surge levels by late summer next year. Two thousand troops will begin to come home from Iraq by the end of this month.  The main decrease will start in January. What are the areas of improvement in Iraq? Not military objectives, but political objectives and political stability.

The government is in a paralytic state, unable to govern itself effectively due in large part to the relations, or lack thereof between Sunni and Shiite’s. This is something we have been hearing about for some time, it seems that strong leadership and compromise between these two groups is the only answer. A summary of the most important part of the report, the military is doing great, they are achieving their objectives, but General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker need more time to assess the political side of the equation.

Reactions to this report have been mixed. I would like to think that the majority of Americans would feel good about hearing that the surge is working, and that the military has been very successful, it’s just the political side of the equation that needs more work. Still this positive news did not stop the group and the New York Times from attempting to turn this into a failure for America. As General Petraeus was presenting his report last week printed an ad in the New York Times portraying Petraeus as General “Betray Us”.  This was a gross and disgusting act by this group.

Here is how it should be, this is America- disagree with whoever you want. Intellectual debate is what it is all about. We all have opinions, and we all see the world differently. My point is that disagreeing with the General’s assessment is one thing, but slandering him and questioning his integrity is another. I am humbled by the service of all the men and women in our armed forces past and present.  Those who serve have my respect, gratitude, and should be given the benefit of the doubt. Those who attack anyone who served in our armed forces (like deserve nothing and should be regarded as the scum of society.

In an attempt to ad injury to insult, the New York Times assisted post the ad by cutting the price of the ad by more than half.  The New York Post reported, “A spokesman for confirmed to The Post that the liberal activist group had paid only $65,000 for the ad – a reduction of more than $116,000 from the stated rate.” This was no surprise, the New York Times has a political agenda and they are very blunt about it. They are so far left that the majority of their editorials cannot be trusted. I truly believe in our armed forces, I have friends and family currently serving and I will not waste my time reading garbage that mocks them. I hope you all do the same.

As should be expected the Senate voted to condemn the ad with a 72-25 vote. It is interesting to note that Senator Clinton and Dodd voted against this measure, while Obama and Biden did not vote.  Republican Presidential candidates, Sen. John McCain and Sen. Sam Brownback joined every other Republican senator in condemning the advertisement. I read this as Clinton and Obama showing their true colors. Clinton supports the left wing of the Democratic Party more than the military and Obama trying to use the same strategy that helped him with the original vote to support the Iraq war, not having made a vote at all.

In the end it is uplifting to see that America’s military has once again succeeded. Let’s all just pray and hope that the political environment can catch up. It is also good to see some of America’s finest be able to come home and enjoy some much deserved rest. Expect to hear more in March 2008 as General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker return for an update from Iraq. 

Marcus Vigil

Posted in Marcus Vigil, Volume 4, Issue 3 | Leave a Comment »

Throw the Bums Out!

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

Last summer we saw the American people rise up and put an end to the amnesty bill that was up before Congress. The overwhelming majority of Republicans and Democrats polled made it clear that most people did not want amnesty for illegal aliens. After that long battle, “our betters” in Washington D.C. have been trying to sneak amnesty back into various bills.

The latest attempt is with a bill called “The Dream Act”. This bill would allow an illegal alien, no matter how old, to claim without verification that they have been in the country since they were 16. If they signed up to go to college they would get a temporary immigration card and after two years that card is eligible to become permanent. The obvious problem is that someone could have walked across the border yesterday and today claim that they have been here since they were 16. The result would be more waves of people crossing our border illegally. This would also allow those same illegal aliens to receive subsidized in-state tuition rates.

According to Kris W. Kobach, Professor of Law at the University of Missouri, this amnesty works in four main ways:
There is no upper age limit. Any illegal alien can walk into a U.S. Customs and Immigration Ser­vices office and declare that he is eligible. For example, a 45 year old can claim that he illegally entered the United States 30 years ago at the age of 15.

  • There is no requirement that the alien prove that he entered the United States at the claimed time by providing particular documents. The DREAM Act’s Section 4(a) merely requires him to “demonstrate” that he is eligible—which in practice could mean simply making a sworn statement to that effect. Thus, it is an invitation for just about every illegal alien to fraudulently claim the amnesty.
  • The alien then has six years to adjust his status from a conditional green card holder to a non-conditional one. To do so, he need only complete two years of study at an institution of higher edu­cation. If the alien has already completed two years of study, he can convert to non-conditional status immediately (and use his green card as a platform to bring in family members). As an alternative to two years of study, he can enlist in the U.S. military and spend two years there. This provision allows Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) to claim that the DREAM Act is somehow germane to a defense authorization bill.
  • An illegal alien who applies for the DREAM Act amnesty gets to count his years under “condi­tional” green card status toward the five years needed for citizenship. (Section 5(e)) On top of that, the illegal alien could claim “retroactive benefits” and start the clock running the day that the DREAM Act is enacted. (Section 6) In combi­nation, these two provisions put illegal aliens on a high-speed track to U.S. citizenship—moving from illegal alien to U.S. citizen in as little as five years. Lawfully present aliens, meanwhile, must follow a slower path to citizenship.
  • It would be absurdly easy for just about any ille­gal alien—even one who does not qualify for the amnesty—to evade the law. According to Section 4(f) of the DREAM Act, once an alien files an application—any application, no matter how ridiculous—the federal government is prohib­ited from deporting him. Moreover, with few exceptions, federal officers are prohibited from either using information from the application to deport the alien or sharing that information with another federal agency, under threat of up to a $10,000 fine. Thus, an alien’s admission that he has violated federal immigration law cannot be used against him—even if he never had any chance of qualifying for the DREAM Act amnesty in the first place.

These repeated attempts to buck the will of the American people have me totally fed up with both parties. The parties simply don’t respect the will of the people and now they are trying to sneak things passed and hope we are not looking. Enough is enough; it is time for a purge of both political parties to get some new blood in D.C. The latest approval polls put Congress at 11% which is the lowest in recorded history so they claim. Throw the bums out.

Chuck Norton

Posted in Chuck Norton, Volume 4, Issue 3 | 32 Comments »

Dear Chuck Norton: A Reader’s Response

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

Dear Chuck,

It is unfortunate that your “editorial” opened with commentary concerning an incident that was an attack on an unfortunate fellow male’s ego, (Who was this poor unfortunate fellow? You? Maybe?) by a decidedly “uncivil” act perpetrated by an obviously immature, poorly educated, ill mannered, egocentric, young “lady” ( “young” is an assumption, since I cannot imagine a mature women acting like this, and “lady” is used in deference to the over used description of a female dog usually embraced by these so-called ladies ).

Chuck you asked, “What is it with so many people today?” I guess maybe the answer is whether you only see the ones like the aforementioned young lady or the ones who unlike her go out of their way to be nice to their fellow human beings. I would prefer that we see and hear about those whom return smiles and have a nice thing to say to the clerks at the local super market, or to passersby on the sidewalks of campus. Then again that was not the intent of your editorial now was it? No your editorial became a rant against the so-called left-wing. A description used to label any person who is not in line with the ideologies of the right-wing activists.

You use the word “tolerant”, a blatant dig at those whom you call left-wing activists, when you make the claim that, “…the more “tolerant” among us repeatedly vandalized it.” “It” being the College Republican display board. You have made an assumption that only those with left leanings would “defile” the said board, the implication being that a “heavy” burden was put upon the College Republicans. I do not know what was done to the board but your “vandalism” may have been the perpetrator’s version of the “right to free speech”, a tenet of the U.S. Constitution the “Vision” rightfully spoke up about and defended in its first edition. I in no way condone vandalism of a destructive nature but if a specific branch of the so-called left-wing were to acquire their own display board I am sure they would have to put up with “extremists” of the right-wing “vandalizing” it.

Chuck you then spoke to us about the “hate mail” you receive that spews, “…a litany of warm and fuzzies…” and “…the myriad of colorful metaphors…” WAHH!! (read here’s your pacifier). I don’t want to read about your whining because people are sending you hate mail, if you continue to write exclusively right leaning dogma expect those who disagree with you to write emails full of vitriol back. What I care about is the infinite number of email that piles up in my “spam” file of Viagra ads, Nigerian scam lotteries and the like. Why doesn’t somebody filter these before they get into my email files? My Yahoo account does not seem to have a problem doing that? Oh, and by the way, isn’t suspending the posting privileges of any person to the Vision a form of restricting their right to free speech? (I know, I know I’m arguing semantics here.)

It was unfortunate that your editorial became a rant against the media and even though you did not come out and say it, the “liberal” media. Right, Chuck? I noted this at your displeasure of the awarding of a Pulitzer to the AP. You stated, that an AP reporter was only a few feet away from the murder of three Iraqi election workers by insurgents. Before I am willing to fully accept your version of the events described I would have like to know your source for the information that the AP was tipped off and were in complete safety. You imply that the AP reporter should have done something to prevent the atrocity, but you did not say what it was he should have done. Should they have alerted the U.S. military to the actions of the insurgents? As a journalist, are you saying if you were in that particular reporters position you would have alerted the military? Do we know the full story about the how’s and why’s the reporter did not tip off the military? You mentioned previously that newspapers, “argued in a lively manner as to why their point of view was correct and the other papers were wrong.” Resulting in the, “average citizen that was exposed to debate…with an applied critical thinking process…” Then you expect me to take at face value your displeasure of the actions of a AP reporter. Where’s the other side of the story?

Chuck and in an almost ironic twist, your last narrative is about a professor who was censured by Ashland University where he was employed because of his work, writings, etc. related to his research concerning objectivism. But yet you expound about the suspension of the posting privileges of a professor on this campus. (I know, I know we have already gone here.)

Chuck if you must rant about the “wonderful” life of the right-wing, do not couch it in an article supposedly about the incivility of society. Society is not uncivil albeit there are individuals within society whom are uncivil and as such do need to be reported, reprimanded, etc. by their fellow human beings and they must be reminded that we are a community of people and as  such

“C’mon people now 
Smile on your brother   
Ev’rybody get together
Try to love one another right now Right now, right now.”
– Youngbloods
Or is that too liberal for ya?

Rick Kiefer

For the record and in the interests of full disclosure there is no Rick Kiefer enrolled at IUSB this school year – IUSBVision

Posted in Contributors, Volume 4, Issue 3 | 10 Comments »

Do Not Be Ashamed, Your Faith is Taboo.

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

Faith in the 20th century carries with it a strong degree of shame. This is not only implied in the medium of the Christian faith. The notion of a higher being has become a terribly uncomfortable topic to discuss. The seriousness of this cannot be emphasized enough. The existence or non-existence of God is very important to each individual; it can be the crux of an individual’s entire existence. 

Let us evaluate for a moment the question “Does God exist?” It is a complex question and has been asked in the entirety of human history, yet is rarely discussed even with best friends and family. If the answer to the question is “Yes” then some new questions will need to be asked. Who is this God? What does he want? Why did he make us? What happens when we die?  Does he judge us? Does he care what we do at all? If the questions are not asked, then one cannot possibly live their life according to the one who created it. To never know the one who created man may have eternal consequences. That is, of course, if the answer to the question was “Yes”.

The issue, really, is that exploration of personal faith is dead. If it is not dead, it is extremely taboo. If an individual is exploring their faith it should be celebrated. Questions should be freely and happily answered and received. After all, the answer to such a question has the capacity to change a person’s life forever. Christians who scoff at those reading or attempting to understand their faith and others do not remember where they once were. At any given point in life, a Christian can doubt the accuracy and truths of the Christian faith. This is typically the process of exploring faith: one faces trials, they get questions or doubt, then they look for answers and the answers should hold true over time. If the answers do not hold true, then one must re-evaluate where the answers came from or perhaps explore the answers further. If we as Christians believe our faith to be the truth, then we ought to have faith that those truly looking for the truth will find it in Christ. When we do not, our lack of faith tends to intervene with God’s work.

More often than not the Christian believes they are in the business of saving people. What is easily forgotten is God is the one who saves. Perhaps it is better illustrated that Christ is in the business of salvation and Christians are simply his employees. The Christian does not create the product; he simply learns all he can to explain what it is and does his best to use it himself. Many times they need to return to the manual and the business owner for more information. If people see the product results in love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness… (Galatians 5:22), they will find far more interest in it, and be more inclined to seek out the business owner to get it for themselves. The Christian represents God in everything they do. Because of the human condition, many times this results in shame and poor representation. No longer should one be ashamed if they possess questions about faith.  Take comfort in knowing they have been asked for thousands of years.

Craig Chamberlin

Posted in Craig Chamberlin, Volume 4, Issue 3 | Leave a Comment »

Simply Sydney: Is it Worth Losing A Friend?

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

Recently, a friend and I were hanging out and discussing what is going on around town and she mentioned that one of her friends had recently com out, acknowledging, accepting, and appreciating one’s sexual orientation and/or gender identity. After giving this topic so thought I decided to look into maintaining relationships after a friend comes out.

The first step is for people to remember that, in actuality, very little has changed. The person has not mutated into an unrecognizable form. The only difference is that now more information is known about the friend. Also consider that your friend has just admitted something very personal to you. They, obviously, felt as though they could trust you with this information and that you would not judge them harshly while they are just trying to be open and honest with you. They are probably feeling a little insecure or vulnerable at this point.

The second step is to acknowledge your own feelings. A friendship is a two-way street. If something makes you uncomfortable with the situation talk to your friend about it. Often you will realize you were worried over nothing. Often people do not even know that they have an issue with sexuality and/or gender identity until they are confronted with it. Nevertheless, do not jump to conclusions about the friend. For example, coming out is not saying they have a crush on you. There are many rumors and myths that are out in society about this topic that are fictitious or over stretched to the point of being false.

Step three involves educating yourself. Look into the Human Rights Campaign and articles related to this issue. If you do read articles make certain that they are from scholarly sources. Do not assume that just because something was published that it is a fact or valid in the modern world. Before the Kinsey Institute there were probably people that believed certain “immoral” acts caused natural disasters. There are many other steps to consider but it is best to start with these three.

Remember that companionship is an important aspect of being human. A friendship should not be lost over a difference such as this. The sign of a strong friendship is continuing to maintain it instead of letting it end.

On a different note, if you have questions email It is completely private. Any question asked may be featured in future columns.

Sydney Chase

Posted in Sydney Chase, Volume 4, Issue 3 | Leave a Comment »

Local Businesses Help IUSB Students Succeed

Posted by iusbvision on September 25, 2007

Have you ever considered the possibility that you may be an entrepreneur? Over the past four weeks and over the next two months, Indiana University South Bend has the privilege to have local entrepreneurs come in and speak of their experiences in the process of their business development. The second seminar included Mark Turner himself, the president of South Bend Chocolate.  On top of the fantastic lecture, he actually brought everyone in the room chocolate. Even though some of these highly successful entrepreneurs did not require a graduate degree, they have contributed thousands of dollars to the local community, created jobs and now are driven to inspire local students to do the same.

The series, presented by Lake City Bank, is held every Thursday at 7:00 PM in room 1001 of Weikamp Hall. It is open to the public and the series will continue all the way through November 11th. Each speaker is specially chosen to illustrate a different aspect of the growth, plans, organization, daily struggles, personal life and contributions to the development of their business and to the development of themselves and entrepreneurs. The IUSB website describes the series as follows: “Get tips on setting up a business plan, finances or a business strategy at an Entrepreneurship Lecture Series sponsored by Indiana University South Bend’s School of Business and Economics.”

I’ve personally had the opportunity to attend the first four seminars of this series, and have found the information presented within it is priceless to any student considering an involvement in the business environment. Even if one has no interest in creating a business, they can get a better understanding of how the decision making process is done from the presidential and managerial level.   The series also allows a significant opportunity for students considering startups to learn local networking skills from people who have done it themselves for years.

In the first week of the series the topic of systems re-engineering was discussed. The entrepreneur brought the students through his experience of restructuring an inefficient inventory based system within his company as well as implementing a micro-managing strategy for his workers on the factory floor. The inefficient system was made efficient by the use of a scanning technology which would track all parts that were used and checked out from stock and re-ordering parts once they have reached a certain level. The micro-managing strategy was giving his workers on the factory floor more autonomy to work as a team and manage their particular quotas for the day together instead of through the use of a manager. Both systems turned out to be highly successful after overcoming several expected setbacks.

In week two, Mark Turner from South Bend Chocolate discussed the importance of an entrepreneur’s ability to network. He had not realized early on in his career how much he networked with his clients and how this had affected his business. Mark is a very personal networker, and writes hand written letters to his clients thanking them for their patronage. These are just a few of the many unique business practices students can pick up by attending this fantastic series.

A person interested in the creation of their own business needs to anticipate all of the possible setbacks within their control they may experience during the process of development and growth.  There is no better way to learn than to learn from the mistakes of those who have been through it themselves. If one goes through the same struggles and must attempt to discover their own way out, it is no different than re-inventing the wheel. If you are remotely interested, this is a must see.

All lectures are followed by a question and answer session. Students are more than encouraged by guest speakers to participate in the discussion as much as possible. They sometimes are so excited about the subject that they will go on for a long time giving the student the answer they may have been looking for. Afterwards, they are very receptive to students giving their thoughts and opinions on the information presented within the lecture.

There are some things that can be learned out of a book, and there are some things that cannot.  Learning how to juggle personal life, family, friends and loved ones is one of those things. Many involved in the series are happily married with children while maintaining a business with accumulated worth of up to millions of dollars. They serve as an example to students who are getting involved in the world of business that it is possible through hard work and dedication. I hope to see you all there!

For more information contact Christine Pochert by e-mail at, Linda Shedd at (574)237-4133 or by fax at (574) 237-4866 or Staci Brettin at

Craig Chamberlin

Posted in Craig Chamberlin, Volume 4, Issue 3 | Leave a Comment »

Are You Sexy Enough to Talk to Me?

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

“Oh no, you are not even sexy enough to talk to me!” This was one of the first things I heard at IUSB after I enrolled as a student.

I was walking in front of the SAC where I saw a short, slightly overweight man walking toward a young woman in a mini skirt. He had made eye contact with her while they were walking towards each other on the sidewalk and he said hello softly as a courtesy…… and the above was her reply. I have written about civility before and it is time to write about it again.

What is it with so many people today? There seems to be a greater lack of civility then ever before. The above act of viciousness is not the only one I have witnessed since enrolling on campus. I saw a left-wing activist student cuss out a member of the College Republicans over a minor disagreement over the position of a sign. The College Republicans here at IUSB had to get a plexi-glass covered and locked display board because some of the more “tolerant” among us repeatedly vandalized it.

There is also the hate mail that has been sent to student publications. Some of it is just unbelievable. Some of the hate mail sent to me has been a litany of warm and fuzzies like, “you better shut up Chuck,” “you better watch your back Chuck,” “you better watch your mouth,” and not to be left out, the myriad of colorful metaphors (read cuss words). The Vision had to suspend the posting privileges of a professor for repeatedly posting cuss word filled rants. By the way, I love hate mail so please send more.

We cannot have an article about civility at IUSB and forget to mention the parking lot. I witnessed a man side swipe a car in the parking lot and just drive away (yes I turned him in). There was also the rash of “support your troops magnets” that were repeatedly taken off cars, including my own.

Incivility is not just a problem at IUSB. I have a stack of news articles in my archive that tell of campaign offices being attacked and vandalized, college student groups being attacked physically by other students while administrators sat on their hands, and a disturbing trend of increased anti-Semitism on campus across the country. I have even run across a few anti-Semites on our campus.

Why is this happening? It’s not just the old folks acting this way it’s the young as well. It has been my experience that many students and some professors are simply incapable of being on the losing end of a conversation or debate without losing their temper or walking away. Too often they simply do not have the skills to understand an opposing argument or effectively articulate their own and still behave in a civil, adult manner.

We did not have this problem to this degree 150 years ago. Each town had two or three partisan news-papers and they argued in a very lively manner as to why their point of view was correct and the other papers were wrong. The result was an average citizen that was exposed to debate and argument with an applied critical thinking process every day. The Founding Fathers debated every facet of our society vigorously face to face and in letters to each other and still had great respect for each other. We have lost that in today’s society.

One of the worst acts of incivility has been brought to us courtesy of the Columbia School of Journalism. Colombia awarded a 2004-2005 photo showing the execution of three Iraqi election workers by insurgents. The Associated Press (AP) reporter was a few feet away snapping the photos in complete safety because the insurgents tipped off the AP to be there at the right place and time. This slaughter of the innocent could have easily been stopped if the AP had a residue of humanity; instead they chose to exploit the murder of three innocent people and were rewarded for such revolting behavior with a Pulitzer Prize from the Columbia School of Journalism.

Professors being persecuted for their political views are also a problem in civility that I could write about in every issue of The Vision. Professor John Lewis (no relation to our own John Lewis) at Ashland University in Ohio had received a $100,000 gift to the university to do research in objectivism, a philosophy that also has a political angle involving small government and free markets. Ashland U. was thrilled to take the money and Prof. Lewis received letters of praise from Ashland U’s president. When it came time for Prof. Lewis’ tenure he was denied:

…the Board of Trustees voted to deny your application for promotion because it was concluded that there had been a lack of support on your part for the University’s Mission Statement. … Specifically, concern was expressed at all levels of the process about writings, submitted by you as part of your scholarly activities in support of your application, that advocate for Objectivist views that are hostile to the University’s mission. (

Ashland’s published rules guarantee that professors are “free from institutional censorship or discipline.” Prof. Lewis asked the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education ( to intervene on his behalf.

Perhaps Bill & Ted were on to something when they said, “let’s be excellent to each other.”

Chuck Norton

Posted in Chuck Norton, Volume 4, Issue 2 | 3 Comments »

The Illegal Employment Loophole

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

How many of you are currently seeking employment, but are unable to find it? Do you believe your job is currently filled by someone working illegally? Have you ever taken the time to see why it is that businesses hire illegal workers? The secret is in the fine print.

Law abiding Americans are being scammed out of jobs by loopholes in the system of citizenship and employment verification. Here is how the scam works: There are certain people allowed in this country, but are not allowed to work, international students on student visas, for example. However, when a person applies for a job, in section 1 on the Employment Eligibility Verification Form (I9), an applicant can check one of three options: 1) A citizen or national of the United States; 2) Alien authorized to work; or 3) Lawful Permanent Resident.

The employer is required to ask for documentation proving the applicant’s identity. This can be any of a number of easily forged documents such as a social security card or a driver’s license, which by the way does not have “citizen” printed upon it.

However, according to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services website, under “Employee’s Responsibility Regarding Form I9”, it states, “The documentation presented is not required to substantiate information provided in Section 1. The employer must examine the document(s) and accept them if they reasonably appear to be genuine and to relate to the employee who presents them. Requesting more or different documentation than the minimum necessary to meet this requirement may constitute an unfair immigration-related employment practice.” 

This loophole allows for employers who are seeking illegal workers to hire them. As long as the documentation “reasonably appears to be genuine” then the business can hire that applicant. It is the subjective opinion of the Human Resources manager as to whether the documents reasonably appear to be genuine or not.

This loophole also allows an illegal applicant to bully the business into hiring them. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services website also states, “Requesting more or different documentation than the minimum necessary to meet this requirement may constitute an unfair immigration-related employment practice.” This means that if an employer challenges the documentation, a lawsuit could be in their future!

I spoke with one former HR associate who told me that the problem is widespread and well-known in the industry. Stereotypically, many Americans immediately point to Hispanics in the factories as the guilty party in this scam. While that does happen, it is not the only place. Another source explained that the Healthcare industry in South Bend is full of employees who have used this loophole to find employment. In that source’s experience, it is international students from Africa who are taking the jobs using the loophole.

This whole issue has created some strange bedfellows. It has brought together the conservative Wall Street Journal and the liberal New York Times. It has also brought together conservative talk radio and powerful liberal trade unions. Even here in South Bend, the mainstream media has ignored this problem. The same source who came to the IUSB Vision with this information gave the names of companies and the names of employees to WNDU, WSBT, and the South Bend Tribune. Remember you heard it from the Vision first.

Jarrod Brigham

Posted in Jarrod Brigham, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

Do You Know Who This Man Is?

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007


“Hay que endurecerse pero sin perder la ternura jamás”

You have probably seen the picture:  The ubiquitous effigy of the fervent revolutionary, looking solemn and pensive as Alberto Korda shot the photograph that would turn him into an icon. Pop culture has immortalized him, rock stars wear t-shirts emblazoned with his face, but only a few can claim to know who he was. Most cannot even pronounce his name correctly. His legend, however,  lives on.

But before Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara, the icon, there was Che Guevara the guerilla leader, the fearless combatant, The Butcher of La Cabaña who personally oversaw – and had the final decision upon – the execution of hundreds of his own countrymen. Before the romanticized Che, there was the bloodthirsty Che, the soldier who fought for the utopian socialist ideal and stopped at nothing to see that ideal become a reality.

“One must endure without losing tenderness”, is the famous quote attributed to Che – a far cry from the man who once claimed hatred as being “an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become.”

The dichotomy is perhaps the most telling feature of the cult of Gue Guevara, the icon: years of romanticizing by the media have turned the fiercest defender of authoritarianism into a symbol of liberty. He hated the West and its ‘money fetish’ and blamed Washington for the woes of South American peasants. He fought side-to-side with Fidel Castro to extirpate Cubans of their most basic freedoms and fundamental human rights and exterminated those who dare to stand between him and his ultimate goal: the destruction of capitalism and democracy.

Che Guevara, the sympathetic rebel lauded by the likes of Carlos Santana and Tom Morello, the figure whose physiognomy is known the world over, the most renowned symbol of social equality and freedom, was actually an enemy of freedom.

The adoring fans of the rebel free-thinking revolutionary, blinded by the obfuscating light of saint-in-waiting Che, seem oblivious to two inescapable truths: First, Cuba is in turmoil. It is a pressure cooker of social instability, aided by decades of military dictatorship and lagging growth that have rendered the nation’s economy virtually stagnated. Second, communism is dead. It has been proven time and again to be a failed system because it infringes on one of the most ingrained, natural tendencies of human beings: the desire of having more.

The Soviet Union, East Germany, and Albania, all have succumbed to the sweet bosom of el capitalismo salvaje that Che Guevara fought against. With Chaves’ Venezuela not-withstanding, Cuba and North Korea are the swan songs of an antiquated ideology that was predestined to fail. Even China is slowly waking up to that reality and opening up its markets to foreign investments and as a result it has become one of the fastest growing economies in the world. From raw materials to finished goods, the awakening Asian giant exports billions of dollars each year to their western counterparts.

Meanwhile, Cuba’s main export is, well…Cubans.  Every year, thousands of dissidents flee Fidel Castro’s little utopian Club Red in search of the ‘better tomorrow’ promised by Castro and Che Guevara during the Cuban Revolution. Yet, where are the t-shirts and the movies with the faces of these thousands? Is their struggle less important, their cause less ‘sexy’ than that of the Argentinean hero of the Latin-American indigenists, himself born with a silver spoon? Does Hollywood give a damn about them?

To all these dissenters, this is the legacy of Che the icon: not The Motorcycle Diaries, but a nation-island marred in oppression and discontent. To hundreds, perhaps even thousands that were victimized by Che Guevara’s rampant and egocentric wanderlust, he wasn’t a martyr or a saint. To them, his image does not symbolize a struggle for freedom, but rather it brings them back memories of the ruthless ‘supreme prosecutor’ appointed by Castro to execute their political enemies.

Yet, there he stands. The unmovable obelisk of communist rhetoric, becoming what he hated the most: a product for capitalist exploitation. That is, perhaps, the irony of Che Guevara: The man who spent a lifetime speaking against the tyrannical hand of the imperialist capitalist West didn’t live long enough to see his face adorning t-shirts and coffee mugs and being lauded by musicians, sports starts, and other pseudo-celebrities.

The iconoclast became an icon himself. And as he stares into the oblivion, the hundreds that were killed under his watch are again victimized by his ambiguous fame as a freedom fighter. His face may be a hot commodity, but the cloth of all the shirts in the world cannot cover the scars left by his legacy.

Ed Lima

Posted in Ed Lima, Volume 4, Issue 2 | 1 Comment »

My Attorney Insists I Offer My Most Sincere Apology

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

I am sorry, I was wrong. Does it really seem so hard? Remember when mom used to make you apologize to your sibling. It may have been a hard thing to do but that was supposed to teach us the lesson of how to be accountable for your actions. This is a lesson that seems to have been convoluted and lost in the lives of many high profile figures to the idea of damage control or self interest. The ironic part is that if these high profile people would just be honest in the first place, the damage would be far less severe.

I am talking about Larry Craig, Trent Lott and even Bill Clinton. All of them start with denial of the wrongs they have committed, and stop at nothing to avoid the blow to their careers. The truth is the truth, but we do not even see a shred of it from many of our public officials until they have no other choice. Even when many of our officials finally apologize, many still try to deny the truth, or the idea that they did anything wrong.

Let’s start with a recent case: Larry Craig. The Senator from Idaho was caught in a Minnesota airport bathroom using foot taping and other codes to solicit sex from an undercover police officer. The police officer was there to work an undercover sex sting set up.  Oops!

My point is not to focus on whether what he did was right or wrong (it was wrong) but on how he handled it afterwards. Craig first came out trying to say the police misconstrued his actions. We also found out that he had pled guilty to a lesser charge. His response was that he acted rashly and should have sought council before pleading guilty.

It was not until almost a week later that he had no other choice but to resign. Here is the part that bothers me the most:  “To Idahoans I represent, to my staff, my Senate colleagues, but most importantly, to my wife and my family, I apologize for what I have caused. I am deeply sorry. I have little control over what people choose to believe.” (emphasis mine) WOW, this guy has the audacity that even in his apology he puts it on what “people choose to believe.” This is by far one of the worst no-apology apologies ever!

In December of 2002 Senator Lott, the incoming majority leader, was celebrating the birthday of Senator Thurmond, who ran for president as a segregationist in 1948. While speaking at this event Lott made a remark about Thurmond’s run “We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years either.” 

The same guy went from saying this to just one week later saying “I apologize for opening old wounds and hurting many Americans who feel so deeply in this area…” Obviously not talking about himself. He started to end with “I’m not about to resign for an accusation that I’m something I’m not.”

Again, this is a horrible apology. He did not apologize for anything he did, just for the effect that what he did caused.  This is very similar to what Craig did. Are we seeing a pattern here?

Finally we end with the big one…former President Bill Clinton. I am sure everyone knows this story. Let me go straight to the main point. In January 1998 President Clinton strongly denied having sexual relations with Miss Lewinski.

He then spent the majority of the next year trying to play damage control. In the end, he had to discuss the ordeal eight times publicly. On December 11th, 1998 he said the following “What I want the American people to know, what I want the Congress to know, is that I am profoundly sorry for all I have done wrong in words and deeds.”

All definitions of the word “is” aside, (or any other disputed definition by the Clinton legal team) he directly lied to everyone at one point. It was bold, and he was caught.

My point is that our public officials know they have committed wrongs, and yet their first reaction is to lie about it, or articulate their words in a way that it was not their fault. The truth is the truth. I understand damage control, but it should never be at the cost of your integrity. The only time you even get the hint of an apology is when there is no way they can get away with their wrongful deeds.

In the end I wonder if these situations would have turned out better if each person had instead come out and publicly admitted the truth. I have no doubt that they would have. If they had told the truth then at least that aspect of their personal and public integrity would still be intact. Hey…if a five year old can tell the truth and be accountable for their actions, all of us should be able to.
Marcus Vigil

Posted in Marcus Vigil, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

Simply Sydney: Does This Mean We Are Breaking Up?

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

We believe in a world of make-believe. And most of the time it is because we are raised to. As children, most of the tales we hear end with the ever so cliché happily ever after. During our years of development, we are only given half the story. We see the initial tribulations leading to the beginning of the relationship between princess and shining knight and then it is over. Since we do not see the anything passed that point we assume that the birds are always circling over their heads. In many cases we see the struggles our parents endure, but our minds are already filled with the romanticized image, therefore we do not separate reality from fantasy.

What does this have to do with people in the real world? That’s simple. Since we already have the image of what we think is the “ideal romance” we assume that when the euphoria of the relationship wears off that the relationship itself is coming to an end. Often we do not realize that the stability that replaced the euphoria is a good thing. Nonetheless, when people see stability they end up thinking they are in a rut. And what do people do when they get into a rut? They try to spice things up. Obviously there is only so much spicing one can do before you end up with an undesirable mess. When people “save” their relationships by beefing up the physical they end up setting themselves up for a real problem. Instead of strengthening the couple they have become, they have just reintroduced themselves to a euphoric state. And obviously, those feelings do not last. If they started with small surprises that are great for getting the much needed “awe” response they might notice that the relationship is still there and getting stronger. Plus there is the added hint of the exhilaration they thought they had lost.

The onset of stability and being comfortable with each other in a relationship, no matter how old, does not mean the relationship has run its course. It is the perfect time to gain a real relationship with someone. The time when you can discover if you really care about the other person and if you are willing to let them care about you. For better or for worse, my little cliché for the week.

Sydney Chase

Posted in Sydney Chase, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

Toilet Tolerance: Asian and Western Styles

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

“Oh the bathroom! I wish it was the exact same as the Asian style!” screams one student from Japan.  A student from Taiwan adds, “It is a kind of embarrassing to use American bathrooms” and another student from Thailand says, “American bathrooms have no privacy!”  Some Asian students on campus complain about distinct differences between Western and Asian style restrooms. 

Visualize the restrooms at IUSB. When someone is in a bright red stall at Wiekamp, you can see the person’s legs, which means the door has a space to show somebody is in it. The space would be helpful for security reasons, etc; however, the door is one of the reasons Asian students feel uncomfortable. 

Most Asian bathrooms have full cover doors, which means that you cannot see inside and need to knock on the door to make sure nobody is in it. You may think that it is not good for security but there are emergency call buttons in most restrooms and stalls. If you are in a stall and a person knocks your door, you simply say, “Somebody is in here!”

Asian bathrooms promise a very nice private room with a music box, called Oto Hime. A Japanese bathroom company, To To Toilet, exploit noise problems and relaxation in the stalls. Some people are embarrassed when they make bathroom noises; therefore, they flush twice—before and after—using bathroom. The company produces the music boxes, which make the sound of running water, classical music, etc so when those sensitive people, when using the bathroom just push a button to reduce the noise. 

Moreover, some music boxes have emergency call buttons just in case something happens in the stall. These music boxes are popular in all kinds of public restrooms, even schools in some Asian countries, especially Japan. The music boxes decrease wasting water and promise users relaxation and a safe environment while in the restroom.  

In addition, one reason for the full cover doors are differences between Western and Asian style toilet seats. Western toilets are like chairs; however, some Asian toilets are not like the chair style. Users stride over a toilet and squat, so they need to hide themselves with the full cover doors. To keep those traditional Asian toilets clean, there is a sweeper in each public restroom, so in some Asian countries people tip the sweepers one to two cents after using.

However, if IUSB wants to adapt for those minority opinions—it may be difficult to exchange all doors for Asian students but they may be able to adopt the music box idea since people in the stall can feel more relaxed and safe— IUSB needs to budget about two hundreds dollars for each music box.  So if IUSB were to add this idea for the library, it would need at least fifteen music boxes. (Hopefully they could find some discounts for educational industries.)    

The most important thing is that bathrooms should be clean and safe. Some bathrooms at IUSB, especially some restrooms in Northside, may not be perfectly safe since not many people are around. If restrooms have enough toilet paper, soap, paper towels, sanitary maintenances, and security, the bathroom should be perfect. Flush away any cultural differences if you find the perfect restroom for you.   

Naoko Fujimoto

Posted in Naoko Fujimoto, Volume 4, Issue 2 | 8 Comments »

Volume 4, Issue 2 Game Page Answers

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

If you would like to see the solutions to the fun and games section of Volume 4, Issue 2 simply click the image below.


Thanks for playing!

Posted in Game Page Answers, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

How To: Rid your Dog of Fleas

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

Nothing is worse than a dog that scratches and bites its self all the time. My dog recently has been doing just that. One night she even cried while laying on our bed because it was so bad for her. So I was determined to relieve her of her suffering. 

First, I bought her a flea collar. It looked pretty cheap; but I thought that it might do the trick. Well it didn’t work, but I was determined to win that battle.  My next step was to give my dog a flea bath. According to some, flea shampoo is not necessary but I’m not taking any chances. 

So I gave my dog a bath.  I’m not sure if this is going to work for I just did it tonight. If this fails I have heard of some kind of pill that you give your dog for two months that will kill fleas through the medicine oozing out of their sweat pores. 

According to How to Get Rid of, “to help rid your dog of fleas you need to rid your house of them as well.” Fleas can hatch and live in almost anything, including furniture, carpet, and bedding. Wash everything in hot soapy water that your pet comes in contact with such as rugs, bedding, even curtains.  You will also need to vacuum your furniture and main area rugs. A great way to get rid of fleas is to not get them in the first place. There are preventive measures that you can take to be sure you don’t get fleas. 

One of the biggest ways to prevent fleas is to keep your house clean. Vacuuming weekly and doing a thorough clean of your home are vitally important keys to keeping your house free of fleas.
Sarah Chamberlin

Posted in Sarah Chamberlin, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

Listen To Your Mother

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

Ladies, let me tell you something. Listen to your mother. She says to you that you shouldn’t get married until you are ready. She tells you not to date this person or that person. She tells you not to move out on your own until you have to.

Essentially, it sounds like Mom just wants you to live under her roof until she is dead and gone. She wants you not to have a social life, and if you do, don’t let it be anything to serious. Let your social life be something that you can come home and forget about. Don’t worry about those boys. They don’t stick around for very long.

That’s not what she wants. She wants to save you and protect you from yourself and anything that might come out of your behaviors. I say this because mothers are normally right. They have been there and done that. They know everything you have done or will do, because, yes, they did it too. They just want to protect you.

I’m not trying to preach to you about listening to your mothers. I’m not trying to convince you that you have to agree with everything or anything they say. Rather, just listen to them.

This is something that has really hit home for me over the last few months. In April, you would have found me involved in Student Government, volunteering across the county, taking a full course load, working, etc… I could go on and on.

My mother reminded me that I needed to take a breather every once in a while or I was going to have some kind of melt-down. I wish I had listened to her then. It might have saved me some sanity. See, I ended up almost landing in the hospital because of the sheer amount of stress I had caused myself. It wasn’t until I got to that point that I even listened to my mother about slowing down. Yes, I am still very much active in most of the things I was then, but I don’t say yes to every task that I am handed. My mother’s advice might have saved me a lot of heart ache and grief.

So do yourself a favor. Listen to your mother, father, family and friends. They might save your life.     

Misty Perrin

Posted in Misty Perrin, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

From the Vice-President’s Pen

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

Hi all- I hope classes are going well for you so far and welcome new students! I’m Jessica Jackson. I’m from Mishawaka and went to Mishawaka High School. I attended Purdue my freshman year for Aerospace Engineering before coming here. I’m a junior and Criminal Justice/Psychology double major and I plan to go to law school when I graduate to be a prosecutor.

I am also interested in politics. I work at the Student Activity Center (SAC) in the mornings and have already met many of you there as well as through my job at the bookstore during “Rush.” I hope I’ll meet the rest of you around campus.

Last year was my first at IUSB and I confess I had no idea IUSB had a Student Government Association (SGA) until right before Spring Break when I saw a table asking for applications to fill empty Senate seats. I was embarrassed by my ignorance of the organization’s existence until I found that the majority of students don’t know the SGA exists and many who do don’t know what the SGA does. Only 475 of 7,420 students this year voted for the student leaders who represent you.

So what does the SGA do? Students are automatically charged a Student Activity Fee that goes to the SGA’s budget committee to allocate to, for example, Athletics, the SAC, Titan Productions, the Preface, the Health and Wellness Center, and every club on campus, including the Vision. Any student organization can request funds.

The SGA has three branches. The Executive branch consists of a President, Vice President (me), Secretary, and Treasurer. The Legislative branch is made up of 12 Senators and chaired by me, as I am also the President of the Senate. The judicial branch handles legal concerns, disputes within the SGA, etc. Funding and judicial requests can be submitted via forms outside the office or on the webpage.

Besides funding organizations, Executive and Senate members serve on academic committees such as Academic Personnel, Athletics, Budget, Curriculum, Facilities, Technology, and Student Affairs with faculty and administrators. If you have concerns or suggestions the SGA can present your ideas.

We also do things within the community like joining Notre Dame for the Gulu Walk, representing IUSB in AUSA (All University Student Association) and helping prepare for the Higher Learning Commission’s visit that will determine our university’s re-accreditation. I’m also the captain of the IUSB team in the Making Strides Against Breast Cancer walk on October 6th. The website ( is available to donate or join the team and I have a Facebook group.

These are but a few examples of what your virtually untapped SGA can do for you. To ask for assistance, request funds, or present ideas or concerns, visit us in our office on the second floor of the SAC, room 202 or visit our website at The SGA e-mail is and my       e-mail is We’re here for you but we can only be truly effective with your participation.

Jessica Jackson
SGA Vice President

Posted in Student Government, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

Are You Ready For Re-Accreditation?

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) is coming to IU South Bend November 12th, 13th, and 14th and you need to be ready.

Accreditation is important to your university, but it is also important to you. An accredited college, according to the U.S. Department of Education, is prepared fiscally, academically, and physically to meet the needs of its students.

Without accreditation your degree may not be recognized by employers, or you may be ineligible for federal student loans and government positions. IU South Bend is an accredited university and this fall the campus will undergo the rigorous process that will enable IUSB to remain accredited.

A working group of IU South Bend faculty, administrators, staff, and students have been preparing for the visit over the last few years. Co-chaired by Drs. Bender and Torstrick, they have put together an extensive self study document entitled Bridge to the Future you can see it in its entirety by accessing the HLC website .

The document focuses on five criteria that the HLC deems necessary for a university to be an affective learning institute. It covers such areas as 1) Mission and Integrity 2) Preparing for the Future 3) Student Learning and Effective Teaching 4) Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge, and 5) Engagement and Service.

The main purpose in creating the self study document is to take an in-depth look at the university. It is important for us to understand how we assess our programs, what our future plans and goals are, and whether or not we are upholding those future (strategic) plans and our mission.

In November a team of “Consultant Evaluators” representing the HLC will visit the campus after reading the self study. They will look for evidence that supports the claims of the self study; they will be having formal meetings with groups and individuals, they will also be speaking informally with people on campus including students. The team consists of seven people who are administrators and faculty of other colleges and have been trained by the HLC in accreditation.

It is important to you to know and understand all you can about this significant event. There will be many opportunities over the next few months to educate yourself about the reaccreditation process. There will be round table discussions and other public forums, articles in several papers, professors may talk about it, or maybe you’ll see a podcast or other media event. At the website you will also find links to important campus documents like the mission statement and strategic plan. So take a few minutes and get prepared, but most important of all, be here November 12th – 14th.

Article Contributed by:

Terri Vega
Student Research Assistant to the HLC Self-Study Committee

Posted in Contributors, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »

Club Showcase: The Poker Club

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2007

Perhaps playing poker should be some kind of club on campus. Wait a minute, it is! The IUSB Poker Club has been up and running for about a year now. This club’s main objective is to get the student body and the community involved in playing Texas Hold ‘em against each other.

Tournament Director, Mike Renfrow states, “The community, students and faculty are all more than welcome to join in any of the games.” In other words, if you can find the gaming room, you can play in the poker tournament; and don’t forget to bring your friends.

Winning money doesn’t sound like a bad idea. At least that is what most people who regularly attend these events seem to think. Every tournament has a winner and the winner walks away with $100 cash. No questions asked. The best part is that this entire club is free! That’s right, FREE.

There is no gambling allowed at any of these events. You simply win the money by being the best player at the event. Renfrow says, “The club doesn’t allow gambling. The definition of gambling is taking a chance with something that you have brought with you with the possibility of losing it for good.”

The winner of the tournament from August 31st was Andrew Ewald. He is currently the highest on the rankings on the club’s website,, where the club ranks players by points, determining who plays at the final table for the school year.

This website also lists the dates for all of the other events to be held throughout the remainder of the school year, starting with the next tournament which is to be held on November 2nd.

As stated above, Mike Renfrow is Tournament Director. Justin Matthews is Club President with Joe Spencer being his humble Vice President. These three fellows would love for you to join them at the next event where you have the chance to earn points, prizes and of course, free cash!

Misty Perrin

Posted in Misty Perrin, Volume 4, Issue 2 | Leave a Comment »