Category Archives: Opinion

The Opinion section is not only our voice, but yours as well. We encourage all currently enrolled U of L students as well as faculty and staff to use the Cardinal as a soapbox for the issues that are important to you.

Every weekend, Fourth Street Live! is flooded with people trying to dine out and enjoy the nightlife.

Dress code debate turns into battle for equality at Fourth Street Live

By Tyler Mercer–

Fourth Street Live!, a major tourist attraction in Louisville, has recently come under fire by social justice activists for its dress code they deem racially exclusive.

Every weekend, Fourth Street Live! is flooded with people trying to dine out and enjoy the nightlife.

Racial discrimination is hardly a thing of the past, but it is still baffling the lengths people will go to prove something is discriminatory. I’ve met many people who wouldn’t waste a second to blame someone for anything at all. If racism is truly happening, I see no problem with calling it out. It is 2013, it’s high time everyone recognizes our God-given equality as human beings.

That equality doesn’t transfer well to society because divisions are still a huge part of how we see the world. We are inadvertently taught by the media, literature and things like video games, that not everyone is equal. While our generation has come a long way from when our parents were our age, it is still common to see prejudice and discrimination today. Last Monday, Jan. 21, protesters gathered at the entrance to Fourth Street Live! to rally against the dress code currently enforced for the entertainment complex. Protesters argued that the dress code was racially discriminatory and that it should be altered immediately.
The dress code is laid out simply on the venue’s website at: It reads as follows: “Smart casual attire recommended: clothing that is fitted, neat and appropriate. The following is not permitted under the Fourth Street Live! dress code: profanity on clothing, sleeveless shirts on men, excessively torn clothing, exposed undergarments on men (including undershirts), full sweat suits, sweat pants, excessively long shirts (when standing upright with arms at your side, the bottom of your shirt cannot extend below the tip of your fingers), sunglasses (after 9 p.m.) and athletic shorts.”
Personally, I wouldn’t think wearing a sweat suit or sweat pants would be appropriate for a night out. Most of the rules seem pretty understandable for anyone who regularly goes out with their friends. You wouldn’t wear athletic shorts to a club, would you?
It seems that common sense would prevail, but obviously not. Dress codes are not uncommon for establishments and are generally used to maintain a level of professionalism and to help provide patrons with an experience they enjoy and want to have again. If every other person who walks by has their underwear hanging out or bold print of their favorite curse word across their chest, most people will think that’s inappropriate. Don’t blast the color of your underwear to everyone. We do not care whether you prefer Hanes to Fruit of the Loom. It’s called under-wear for a reason.
These rules aren’t racist; they are rules. It is as simple as that. If you wanted to eat at a restaurant that was a button up and tie kind of place, you would wear a button up and a tie. If not, you wouldn’t eat there.
Admittedly, some of these rules could be found discriminating, but I think it all comes from your state of mind. If everyone stereotypes a style of clothing to be worn by a certain group of people, then anything that shines that clothing in a negative light is going to be considered discriminatory. Stereotyping will never be fully stopped, but if we as individuals work to stop stereotyping people in our minds, then that will transfer into our actions.Stereotypically, we think all people of a race dress and act the same. For those who don’t fit into those specific stereotypes, people will say something along the lines of, “Oh, you’re so white.” That isn’t the case, though. Everyone is an individual and should be treated as such. Each person leads a completely different life and therefore can’t be expected to fall into certain guidelines. Building on that idea and the fact that entertainment venues can refuse service to patrons who don’t follow guidelines, it is clear that the problem doesn’t lie with dress code at Fourth Street Live! The problem lies with how everyone is approaching the subject. We teach children that rules are rules and we must abide by them. That lesson hasn’t changed. If you want to enjoy a night at Fourth Street Live! you’re simply going to have to follow the rules. One night with a belt on and your underwear securely under your clothes will not hurt you. I promise.
Photo: Courtesy of Flickr/timothyj

Women have been fighting in combat for years, but will now finally have the chance to be recognized.

Sending reinforcements: women in combat deserve recognition

By Rae Hodge–

Women have been fighting in combat for years, but will now finally have the chance to be recognized.

The good ol days are here again. As voices rise in opposition to Leon Panetta’s recent decision to allow women to openly serve in combat roles, all the old arguments against women being in direct combat come fluttering down from our collective memory like so many bats from the attic. These arguments haven’t seen much use in the past few years; they’re in near-perfect condition after their storage. In fact, it’s as though the last 50 or so years never happened at all.

Reading the arguments is like slipping a record onto the turntable and re-living the good old days when women knew their place, men did the heavy lifting, and all was right in heaven and on earth. All the greatest hits are breathed back to life in the hands of the newest players: religious opponents cite Biblical passages about the appropriate role of women in relation to men; would-be psychologists use outdated data to pronounce women unprepared for the mental rigors of combat; tee-totalers number the average differences in physical performances between the sexes; all while a chorus of neo-con women plead a case for sexism in their complicity with male military dictates, shaming female soldiers for ruining all the fun.

I guess, despite articles and documentaries from the New York Times, Washington Post, Huffington Post, National Public Radio and the Public Broadcast Service, no one heard the news: U.S. women have already been serving in combat positions for many years without training, recognition, proper compensation or psychological after care.

*Record scraaaaaatch*

Arguing that all women should be restricted from combat is just as pitifully behind the times as arguing that all women should be stay-at-home mothers. It’s almost impossible to take these arguments seriously when they’re built entirely on moot points. If these arguments should be taken seriously at all, it should be because of the willful ignorance and flippant disregard they display for the tremendous sacrifices made on their behalf by female soldiers.

Women soldiers are leading convoys in Afghanistan, raiding encampments in Iraq, and serving multiple tours of duty all over the globe with honor and distinction. They’re engaging enemies in firefights, hauling the limp bodies of wounded male soldiers out of red zones, operating heavy weaponry and daily enduring unending physical and psychological trial. To claim that they endanger the lives of male soldiers ignores and insults the work they’ve done to save our sons.
By lifting the paper-only ban on women in combat, Panetta has not inserted some lone corset-wearing, 90-pound Barbie doll into a boys club; he has started a process of ensuring that the many women who endanger their lives for our freedom on a daily basis are allowed the proper training to prepare them, and the proper medals that they’ve risked their lives and earned. Those opposed to this preparation and compensation don’t get to tie a yellow ribbon around any of their arguments: supporting the troops means supporting all of the troops, not just the ones that live in their imaginary Arlington of hetero-masculine war heroes.

Worst of all are the writers and pundits who banter on at length and feign concern for the delicate condition of women, the frail sex. All the precious chivalric sentiments of those who pretend to place women’s lives on a pedestal (far above the deadly reaches of muddy male combat) wither feebly in the face of the flat truths: Where is the pedestal when women attempt to escape rising sexual assault rates in their non-combat military positions?Where is that pedestal when women require elevation in rank and pay?

Serving the United States of America in armed combat is either an honor or it’s not. If it is an honor, then no one in this country has a right to take that honor away from women.
Photo: courtesy of Flickr/expertinfantry

At sit down restaurants, like above, should you tip in relation to the service or your personal idea of a standard tip?

To tip or not to tip: service is the question for most

By Tyler Mercer–

At sit down restaurants, like above, should you tip in relation to the service or your personal idea of a standard tip?

I recently went to a nice Chinese restaurant on Bardstown Road to celebrate a friend’s birthday. We arrived a little late, within thirty minutes of the kitchen closing, but the manager handed us menus and seated us anyway. As we sat contemplating what we wanted to eat and chatting about whatever came to mind, the time between our arrival and our last chance to order before the kitchen closed was dwindling down steadily and without much notice from our party.

Our waiter, who, I must add, took a little too long to bring our drinks finally, came to our table to take our order. While we were going around the table placing our orders and adding or subtracting things from our meals, the manager very rudely barked at our waiter that the kitchen was about to close and we needed to hurry up. At first, I was simply taken aback that the manager would act so rudely to his employee at all, but especially in front of customers.

Up to this point, our waiter hadn’t really paid much attention to us and frankly wasn’t impressing me with his customer service skills. It was the end of the night, so I was willing to give him a little slack – even more willing after watching him get yelled at in front of everyone. He submitted our order and after another long wait, our food finally arrived. Sounds awesome, right? The food is here; we’re hungry and ready to eat. Wrong.

Not only did our food come out at different times, but the restaurant only brought us two bowls of rice for four people. When one of the people in my party asked when the rest of the rice was coming, our waiter told her that we were supposed to portion the rice between ourselves. It was our understanding that each meal included rice. Either way, I was wondering why any restaurant that was being run by intelligent people could possibly expect its patrons to not only share a small bowl of rice, but expected us to portion the rice out for ourselves.

This is a small issue in the big picture and I’m not too worried about it. However, it made me wonder something else. When other people tip their waiters, do they simply give them the percent that is socially acceptable for that time of day or do they let the waiter’s performance determine the amount?

When I was growing up, I watched my parents tip our waiters on what I assumed was their customer service skills. I can remember my mom saying something like, “She was on top of things tonight! She refilled our drinks without us asking and checked in a lot. Let’s tip her well.” While sometimes my dad would say that he wanted to write on the back of the receipt, “Here’s your tip: Get a new job.”

I know they always tipped our waiters, but it seemed that for a job well done, they were always more keen to tip a little extra because they thought our server deserved the extra. He or she had earned that money. If you worked in a furniture store that paid you partially on commission, you would work hard to sell a coffee table or couch. You knew you would have to earn that commission money. Now I know that most restaurants pay their waiters less than minimum wage and most of their earnings come from tips. I get that. That doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t work hard for your money regardless.

Those who work in restaurants work a customer service position: you serve the patrons of your employer. If part of your pay is coming from the customer, it seems that everyone would treat the customers they are serving with care and respect. If not, why would you expect them to pay for unsatisfactory service? Would you do the same?

Now, take a look at the standard way of tipping. Say you have a general rule of thumb that you will tip 15 percent during the week, but 20 percent on weekends. This means that for a bill of $25, during the week the tip will only be $3.75 and on the weekend it would only be $5.

If you’re a waiter, you know that some nights you simply don’t have that many customers. If each table is only leaving the standard tip amount, you aren’t going to make much money at all. If you had the potential to make a tip of $10, wouldn’t you want to work as hard as you could to make sure you earned that $10 in the eyes of the customer? They will be the one giving you that money, so why is making sure they enjoy their meal such a big issue?

What about the people who simply are not satisfied with the service from their waiter? If they are angry enough, they might not leave you a tip at all, which could mean they won’t return to the restaurant.

So the question still stands: Do you tip in relation to service or your own personal idea of a standard tip? Final Jeopardy: What is both? Servers need tips in order to keep a roof over their head sometimes, but I think that if that is the case they should be willing to earn their money. So while I support tipping everyone, I can’t help but keep their service in mind when deciding whether to leave a few singles or a five.
Photo: Arza Barnett/courtesy of the Courier Journal

Because of the UofL radio station, Jewel grew to love having an on-air voice.

On-air voice wants to be heard on campus

By Aimee Jewell–

Because of the UofL radio station, Jewel grew to love having an on-air voice.

I began disc jockeying for the U of L student-run radio station, WLCV, in fall of 2009. There was little organization in the small, dark studio, located next to Papa Johns in the SAC, but I got to play the music I wanted to play – a mix of genres that were being neglected by local stations – and that was what was important to me.

Having visited numerous college radio sites at other universities, I saw that our station was less invested-in and not taken good care of, something that still bothers me to this day. A university-run radio station should be a station that builds campus awareness, includes students, and informs the audience about the dozens of campus events that go on each week. Instead, our station was mostly neglected, unorganized, and poorly run, something that ultimately led to its demise in Fall 2012. I still meet people to this day that never realized we had a university-run radio station. Why? Was it because of the lack of organization on the administration side or the lack of university funding?

It was because of the UofL radio station that I grew to love having an on-air voice. I could suggest music, have others listen, and communicate with the audience through social networking sites. It was U of L radio that drew me to pursue a career in radio and drove me to apply at Main Line Broadcasting, where I currently work on-air and behind the scenes. I would have never realized my passion for radio without knocking on that UofL radio station door the first day of my sophomore year in Fall 2009.

The University of Louisville urges students to do what’s important to them, to create RSOs if you can’t find one you want to join, to be apart of the campus life, and WLCV had already established itself – somewhat. The studio was sound, the station was sent out via Internet Explorer (and played over Microsoft Media Player – sorry Mac users, that meant you had to download an extra feature), and there were DJs willing to pick up the slack. But we were never heard. When I first joined WLCV, the station was played over the speakers in the SAC. But as time grew, the station was silenced, and we were left wondering where the support was. There was love behind WLCV, a passion that came from students who believed in the power of music, of voice, of radio. And yet we were not heard.

With a growing local culture, Louisville has come leaps and bounds artistically, musically, and architecturally. We’re #1 on lists all over the country as “The Foodiest City,” “The Top Travel Destination of 2013,” and our local pride is growing daily. My Morning Jacket, or MMJ as many avid fans call them, has truly laid stepping-stones for many local musicians these days, such as Ben Sollee, Daniel Martin Moore, and A Lion Named Roar. Along with building campus culture, we could be supporting local acts too, giving them airtime and a way to advertise. We could be building on Louisville’s flourishing culture.

New Albany High School, found just across the Ohio River, and Fern Creek High School both have great radio stations. Each station has great content and an actual frequency that you can pick up on your radio, rather than having to drag your laptop everywhere. If local high schools have the tools and ability to bring students’ voices to life via radio signals, why doesn’t the University of Louisville?
Photo: Flickr/wot nxt

President Obama references Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall in his recent inaugural speech.

President Obama addresses the Millenials

By Cailtlyn Crenshaw–

President Obama references Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall in his recent inaugural speech.

“For we remember the lessons of our past,” President Obama declared in his second inaugural address last Monday.  Most notably, Obama remembered the lessons of Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall; however, these lessons seem to be more forgotten than remembered.

While some media outlets are proclaiming that the inclusion of the mention to Stonewall is a landmark for LGBT rights and activists, the cultural reference seems to be lost on the generation who it matters to the most: the millenials. During my Modern American Culture class after the inaugural address, the professor bluntly asked his 30 students, “How many of you know what all three of those references are?”

Not one hand went up. In a college classroom of millennials, not one hand went up knowing the significance of the president’s remarks.

When the women of 1848 assembled at Seneca Falls to fight for their rights or when civil rights demonstrators marched on Selma, Alabama for their rights or when the Stonewall riots sparked the modern fight for LGBT rights, no one imagined that these events would hold the cultural significance that they do today.

What does it matter if the president makes the first inclusion of the word “gay” in an inaugural address, when the generation who his policies affect the most are not aware of history as it ’s happening?  Obama assumed that his audience possessed a knowledge and awareness of current and past cultural events. In reality, we have lost a sense of cultural literacy, not only for the present, but also for the past.

It is this cultural amnesia, especially that of the millennial generation, that controls the future of our country. It is not only the absence of knowledge of important cultural events that calls for concern for this country’s future; it is the absence of a thirst for this knowledge.  What does it say about our country when we as a society are more concerned with what’s on someone’s mind on Facebook, rather than outside of our computer and in the world around us?

In response to the inaugural address, the media has concentrated on the landmark inclusion of the word “gay” and the recognition of LGBT rights, rather than the issues Obama rose in directing our nation towards for the next four years, such as healthcare, alternative energy sources, foreign policy and immigration. A Huffington Post headline reads “By Linking Stonewall with Seneca Falls and Selma, Obama Reminds Us That LGBT Rights Are Civil Rights.”

Obama said, “Progress does require us to act in our time.” To act in our time, our society must possess a knowledge of cultural literacy that highlights not only the past, but the present – significance of events such as Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall, so that civil rights, women’s rights and gay rights are more than news stories and political marches.  It speaks as a milestone for society when the policy against women in combat is lifted or when the 40-year anniversary of Roe v. Wade occurs; however, these milestones will not speak for themselves in the future.  We must continue to fight for these rights, as millenials in our twenties and millenials in our forties.

“With common effort and common purpose, with passion and dedication, let us answer the call of history,” Obama said. But first, let us be aware and possess a knowledge of not only events that affect our pockets, but our society’s rights.  If the lessons learned in the past are left in the past, our present will remain in the struggles of the past. Will we continue to fight and uphold the same battles because we forget the past so easily?
Photo: courtesy of


Violence Against Women Act stalled at House, GOP’s reputation deteriorates

Violence Against Women protesters in Washington D.C.
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

By James El-Mallakh–

In another humiliating and despicable decision by the Republican-controlled House leadership, Congress failed to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, or VAWA, in 2013.

VAWA primarily increased funding for law enforcement agencies to help them prosecute rape and abuse cases. It also improved support for victims and provided funding to increase education about sexual violence laws. The bill first passed in 1994 and has passed in 2000 and 2005 without dissent.

The best part of all is the bill actually worked. A 2012 report from the US Department of Justice said, “From 1994 to 2010 the overall rate of intimate partner violence in the United States declined by 64 percent.”

The reason that some House Republicans opposed the bill, primarily Eric Cantor (R-V.A.), was because it sought to expand protection to the LGBT community; immigrants, both legal and illegal; and Native American women living in reservations.

You would think that after such a bruising election year, House Republicans would at least try to appear as though they cared about their minority constituencies. After all, women and immigrants were among the most sought-after voting blocks in the 2012 election and Mitt Romney didn’t get the majority of either, which helped Obama win the election.

If those in the House think it is justifiable to deny extending human rights to anyone, even if they are in the country illegally, they are fooling themselves, as well as further damaging the party’s poor image. Furthermore, being opposed to the law due to its inclusion of the LGBT community is simply bigotry.

The reason that House Republicans would say they opposed the bill is because it would have given Native-American reservations the ability to prosecute rape and abuse cases. According to NPR’s Carrie Johnson, “tribal courts in Indian country currently are not empowered to hear (rape and abuse) cases, which involve offenders from non-Native American communities.”

This is a legitimate concern. The issue of jurisdiction does need to be considered when creating law. However, it’s the only shred of legitimacy that the GOP can claim for stonewalling the bill. This weak excuse comes nowhere close to justifying their blocking of a bill that has done so much to reduce violence against women in America since its creation.

I suppose basic freedoms and human dignity were not enough to spur the do-nothing Congress to vote on the bill. The timid House leadership didn’t even vote the bill down; they simply didn’t take it up for a vote and let it fade away. This is a political strategy, because voting against the bill would have generated a larger backlash and exposed them for what they truly are: anti-women, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-Native and anti-justice.

Fortunately, this isn’t over. There is still the likelihood that the VAWA will be re-introduced in the future or that a new bill offering the same services will arrive. Let’s just hope that when a similar bill comes around again, House Republicans will have come to their senses.


When you have class and they don’t: Over-population of Kardashians and naked people

Photo courtesy Ny Daily News

Extreme Operation
When surgery isn’t stressful enough for patients, doctors enjoy hiding surgical objects in our bodies. Over in Germany, a lawyer is claiming that a possible total of 16 objects were left in her client’s body. The patient involved was having surgery for prostate cancer.

Nude Run
After what was undoubtedly a very heated argument with his boyfriend, a 45-year-old Louisville resident sprinted off through a field to a law office on South 4th Street The best part is that upon arrival at the law office, it was discovered that the man was naked. According to WLKY, he is now being charged with criminal trespass and indecent exposure.

Flammable Footies
When it comes to the safety of children, pajamas are now at the top of the list. Target has recently recalled several children’s pajama sets because of a burn hazard. The pajamas, which were manufactured in Cambodia and Vietnam, were reported by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission to not meet the federal flammability standards.

When you just can’t hold it
After driving under the influence of alcohol and failing to follow a posted no left turn sign, a Louisville man exited his vehicle in order to relief his bladder. He continued to urinate in front of passing traffic as police officers arrived at the scene. WLKY reported that the 61-year-old man is being charged with operating a vehicle under the influence, reckless driving, improper turning and indecent exposure.

Baby Kimye
If you haven’t had the chance to tune in to the E! Network lately, you will surely have missed some breaking news about Kim Kardashian. Although her divorce still isn’t final, she is expecting a child with music man Kanye West.

by Cris Ritchie

Kentucky community faced with loss after shooting

Emergency personnel remained on the scene of a shooting at Hazard Community and Technical College on Tuesday after three people were confirmed shot.
Read more: Hazard Herald (KY) – BREAKING Two dead one injured in shooting at HCTC

By Tyler Mercer–

School shootings have become a part of society we may not be accustomed to, but we are unfortunately familiar with them. Recently when we think about a school shooting we think of the young children of Sandy Hook. Last week on Jan. 15, police were called to Hazard Community and Technical College in Hazard, Ky. This news hits much closer to home for everyone in Kentucky and especially for us here at U of L.

Police don’t believe the school itself was being targeted in the shooting. That news is in a way relieving. The situation remains sorrowful, but knowing that the shooter didn’t come in with the intent to wipe out a campus, makes me feel a little less like I’m in despair. Smaller situations are much easier to control, especially when guns are involved.

When tragedy like this hits, though, we always want to blame someone for the loss of life and rightly so. We look back and think about all of the things we should have noticed about the gunman beforehand. Maybe it is a comment he made or a recent inquiry that seemed a little off. Looking back doesn’t resurrect anyone.

We as students should begin to look forward so that if a day comes where we find ourselves in this situation, we will know what to do. Everyone should take time in the near future to identify safe areas around where they have classes and where they normally visit on campus. It may sound trivial, but in the world we live in today, every precaution could possibly save your life or someone you love.

Take the time to ask school officials what guidelines we follow at U of L for emergencies. Not only for school shootings, but for inclement weather and other disasters.
Photo courtesy Cris Ritchie/Hazard Herald


Guest column: Province resident speaks out about security

Cartoon illustration by Michael Layman/The Louisville Cardinal

 By Grace Theony–

Growing up, the police were often people children could look up to. We are taught from a young age that they protect us in times of emergency and are a vital part of the community.sThis view changes as one grows from childhood into the teen years and into young adult hood. The police are no longer perceived as a friend in the community, but more of a nuisance.

I’m sure many of you have heard about the recent cracg-down of the Louisville Metro Police Department in the surrounding Old Louisville neighborhoods. In the past few months, countless stories havegcirculated campus reporting various frat parties and other gatherings of the sort being busted by the Louisville Metro. The officers generally proceedtissue numerous underage drinking citations to those present at the party.

Citations are more of a headache than anything, with varying court dates and punishments depending on the prosecutorrof your assigned courtroom. These can range fromr court fees, includin, five to tenehours of community service and a citation fine.

As a current resident of The Province, I am well aware of the crime thatshappens here and around campus. In October 2012, there were several RAVE alerts reporting armed robberies that had recently occurred within the courtyards and parking lots of The Province.

With this known increase of crime, one would expect the police to make a few extra roundsewith officers patrolling the grounds at night. They are there for our own protection, which should be comforting, Right? That would be the case if the police weren’t beginning to seem like more of a problem than the people who could actually be dangerous.

A small party of less than 15 people in an apartment at The Province does not need to have six cops dressed in street clothes present to write citations and givr lectures on underage drinking. This occurred during the weeks of reported armed robberies, when the police were supposed to be patrolling the area, they spent over a half hour writing citations to college students.

A controlled party with the majority of attendees being a Province residenseis not very threatening compared to being robbed at gunpoint. After thit incident, it was hard to take the increased security as a blessing. The police are here for our safety, but they also usd it as an opportunity to crack down on parties within The Province and surrounding areas.

The dynamic that exists between police and young adults has drastically changed from childhood, and you can see that from both ends of the spectrum. The police are still there to protect us.eThe law is the law and as young adults, we can’t deny that as truth.

In comes the idea of mutual respect. I personally have more respect for the cop who is going to treat me with respect and not just like a silly kid. I wish we could still live in a world where we could look at the police as people to trust and not people to fear. The police are here to serve and protect, but this idea seems to be skewed in some situations.

Many underage college students are breaking the law every weekend, but the increase in citations is honestly not going to stop that. Parties are going to happen, whether it’s a frat party or not, and the police could continue to spend as much time and energy as they do busting these parties, or they could realize that underage drinking is not the biggest problem around this city. I don’t have a problem with parties being busted if there are noise complaints or if the party is blatantly getting out of hand. If that’s the case, you’re just asking for it, but this becomes a problem when undercover cops are being used to find and break up these parties.

The officers patrolling in street clothes could easily be implemented in some other part of the city dealing with real crime. The majority of these partygoers are hard working students who will one day, hopefully, contribute to the betterment of society.

The police could spend their time handing out citations to us, or they could spend it trying to get actual criminals off of Louisville streets. If the local police were more willing to accept these facts instead of using these parties as a way to hand out more citations, I think that we as young adults would be able to view them in a brighter light than in the current situation.
Cartoon illustration by Michael Layman/The Louisville Cardinal

Seniors Mario Benvides and Will Stien celebrating the U of L football Sugar Bowl win.

Louisville takes a step up in the hierarchy of sports

Seniors Mario Benvides and Will Stien celebrating the U of L football Sugar Bowl win.

By Randy Whetstone Jr.–

I­n terms of national prominence, Louisville athletics have been fighting with a monkey on their back for quite some time.  The program has faced much adversity when performing on the big stage.  National critics have often questioned Louisville’s ability to rank in the prestigious sector of college sports.  I would adhere to say, actions speak louder than words.  Louisville Athletics defeated the odds in such a practical way, it would go without question that 2012 was the year to finally put Louisville over the hump.  The program’s performance in various sports credits Louisville to be a part of the debate related to “power houses” in college sports.

Surpassing the limitations of many college analysts around the country, Louisville men’s basketball won the Big East Championship and kept the momentum rolling into a trip to the Final Four in New Orleans last season.  In addition, they began this season ranked No. 2 in the nation, playing with confidence and high expectations on their way to closing out 2012 by defeating in-state arch rival Kentucky.  So the discussion of becoming national champion is quite favorable and appealing for this team.

The quarter part of 2012 deserved notable recognition for a year that would be unforgettable in Cardinal History.  Women’s swimming and diving alongside men’s tennis partnered together earning an exclusive ticket on the Big East Championship.  Both teams coast their way to victory overcoming high waves throughout the journey.

In 2012, the month of May subjoined the Cardinals’ athletic dominance.  The women’s outdoor track and field team was crowned Big East Champion.  Shortly after, the softball team became regular season and Big East Champions as well.  The baseball team closed out a hard fought season by being honored co-regular season champion. This trend of success should not be taken lightly as the teams surely look to produce similar results in the future.

Louisville athletics didn’t fall with the leaves in the latter part of the year.  Men’s soccer ended the year as divisional regular season champion.  Volleyball was worthy of regular season champion and Big East Conference champion.  This was a perfect set up for the achievement merited by the football team.  Not only did this army defeat Rutgers for Big East crown, it earned the Cardinals their biggest BCS Bowl Game in school history.

In the Sugar Bowl, odds were against Louisville as they faced SEC powerhouse Florida.  Once again, the critics’ mouths were duck taped by the convincing performance displayed by the team.  Their heart, dedication, commitment, and courage resulted to title of Sugar Bowl Champion.  There was no other option acceptable for bringing in 2013 for Louisville Athletics.  The program also added a cherry on top of their sweet success by signing and sealing a contractual agreement with the Atlantic Coast Conference, known as the ACC.

While the naysayers are put on mute for the moment, Louisville has earned the right to be in discussion with other profound universities in the nation.  They began and ended 2012 with purpose.  The program as a whole envisioned a goal, and each area of sport played its part for this program to have an awesome year.  It was a year to remember for Cardinal Nation.

caption:Seniors Mario Benvides and WIll Stein celebrating the U of L football Sugar Bowl win.
Photo: Austin Lassell/The Louisville Cardinal