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.

Students often gather outside a roped off free speech area near the SAC to confront

Speech that silences

The SAC at U of L is no stranger to religious extremists, such as the one pictured fuming above from last year.

By Rae Hodge–

FACT: If I catch you on my campus using a roped-off “Free Speech Zone” to yell pro-slavery and anti-gay sentiments to a group of black students within earshot of the Office for LGBT Services, I will – repeat WILL – publicly humiliate you in front of your intended audience by demolishing your arguments until you are speechless, befuddled and blushing deeply. My rhetoric will be swift, uncompromising and executed with extreme prejudice.

And, yes, that’s exactly what happened Tuesday when Drake Shelton, the white supremacist would-be leader of the as yet unformed Protestant Christian Church of Louisville, jumped on his racist soapbox at U of L to beat his separatist drum to the tune of Leviticus 25:44, with a sign propped at his feet reading: “This colony never kidnapped slaves from Africa.”

While I would love to detail how this interaction unfolded, what’s more important here is recognizing how this incident reflects two major problems with the debate regarding hate speech on public college campuses. The first problem is that debate has so far been framed as one where First Amendment rights are at odds with eliminating racism. The second is that the proponents for the protection of hate speech rarely, if ever, think to build an argument that can withstand the christening edge of my bloody axe. U of L’s patron is Minerva, goddess of both logic and war; bigots should therefore be prepared for both from this campus.

Charles R. Lawrence III, a remarkable author and law professor at Georgetown, published an article back in 1990 in the Duke Law Journal called “On Racist Speech.” In it, he forms a profound  interpretation of Brown v. Board as a free speech case when he argues that segregation’s inherit problems include the message of inferiority to black students. The case’s success, then, is in part its elimination of that system of messages in schools.

Students often gather outside a roped off free speech area near the SAC to confront.

Lawrence makes a crucial distinction in the essay: that hate speech in public is not regulated because it is assumed that the listener can escape without being stripped of rights; a black student on a campus is an unwilling listener who cannot escape hate speech without de facto segregation. Safe passage in common areas, then, is part of a university’s obligation to provide equal educational opportunities.

Lawrence also speaks to the silencing nature of hate speech, which is counter to the aims of free speech and seeks to exclude and minimize the voices of its victims. He posits that “If the purpose of the First Amendment is to foster the greatest amount of speech, racial insults disserve that purpose.”

In a climate of racial harassment, the speech and political participation of students within a racial minority becomes subdued. If a university is asking black students to bear the burden of insult in the name of free speech and for the greater good, then those students must be fairly represented in the university’s deliberations on the matter.

I encourage you here, reader, to examine the racial composition of the decision-making body responsible for allowing groups like the KKK – which was allowed to gather on campus in 2004 – and individuals like Drake Shelton access to this campus’ unwilling listeners. Decide for yourself if those students who bore the burden were fairly represented.

For those who claim to be free speech purists, I would refer you to the “fighting words” exception in First Amendment protections, as well as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Whenever you knock a bigot’s teeth down his throat for hurling personally abusive epithets at you or file suit because your boss harassed you at work by making sexual comments, you’re citing a precedent that compromises a person’s right to absolute freedom of speech. Side note: welcome to intersectionality, white feminists.

It is an undeniable exercise of privilege on the part of this author to take a publicly uncompromising stance against the rights of racists on campus. I do not share the same risks as students of color who voice the same arguments, and I am far more likely to have my voice represented in this matter. For this, and for my proclivity toward performing variations of White Knight Syndrome on the behalf of marginalized peers, I have to beg pardon. I’m seeking not to supersede the voices of those most affected by these racists, but to speak in harmonious alliance with that choir when forces seek to silence them.

FACT: As a writer and editor of an independent publication, few causes are dearer to me than the maintenance of this nation’s free press and speech. There is no end to my arguments in defense of our citizens’ exercise of those rights. This article is part of that defense. If your words, flowing from the fountain of purpose to injure, find purchase in the voices and rights of my peers, you will – repeat WILL – find me waiting behind those peers, my red pen raised in solidarity.
File photos

Students crossing in front of The Ville Grill are particularly careless in the intersections.

Walking the line: Pedestrians on U of L’s campus take risks on the roads

Students crossing in front of The Ville Grill are particularly careless in the intersections.

By Noah Allison–

A certain something changes in an individual when they move away to college.  They attain a new found sense of accomplishment, a real can-do attitude and an arrogance that puts their life in danger and holds up traffic.

I don’t know how many times I’ve seen it in the first month or so of this semester: hordes of students walking in front of green lights and a line of impatient cars that would be more than glad to teach them a lesson, if it weren’t for the legal repercussions of jail time that would follow. People from the ages of 18 to 23 suddenly forget or purposefully disregard all the skills of being a pedestrian that they’ve acquired throughout their lives. Whereas at one time in their lives they would simply wait for that convenient walk signal to let them know the coast is clear, they now feel the need to tell the car they are crossing the street whether its appropriate or not.

The impatience of many students just doesn’t make sense.  There are too many individuals who walk out in the street, pace unchanging, head phones in, too cool to care about anything else, all because they have the right of way. The car or cars are going to stop for them because of the simple fact that they have to.

The stupidity of the arrogance is what offends me the most; it is as if as soon as an individual finds a way to pay for their college tuition, they are suddenly invincible. They assume that the car will always see them and that they will always stop, and if they don’t then it’s the driver that’s screwed.  The , yeah; last time I checked it’s the person getting hit by the car that get’s screwed over in the end. Because being here on a college campus we know that nobody who is driving could have their attention taken away by other things like, oh say, texting, eating, smoking (not just cigarettes), cranking loud music, conversing with friends in the car, or simply just being way too freaking drunk to drive a car. But don’t worry, even though its dark out and they have all that going on they will still find time to go from 35 mph to stopping suddenly just for you to get across the street.

Cars are dangerous and they are always out to get you, and I see too many people taking unnecessary risks with their life all just because they are impatient. Human stupidity is ultimately one of the largest causes of death in this world, and I don’t want to see anybody ruin or lose their life because they were stupid enough to think traffic is always going to stop for them.
Photo: Val Servino/The Louisville Cardinal

Eating at the fast food establishments in the SAC can break the bank. Make food at home to save money

Making it work: Five ways to get through a difficult semester

Eating at the fast food establishments in the SAC can break the bank. Make food at home to save money

By Anna Meany–

1. Stay in touch with family

I used to think that going home was a wasted weekend – like I couldn’t make it through the semester without attending the infamous toga party. But after two years of going to school away from home, I realized going home is just as important as making time for friends.   Take time to visit your parents, grandparents, sister or brother and even old friends. The ultimate stress reliever can be talking to people about something other than class.

 2. Put school first

Really. And even though this is something your mom already bugs you about, making time to finish homework and study can lead to a better social life  – you can go out without worrying that you still have that huge test to stress over. Don’t let boys keep you from studying! And most importantly, you won’t worry about losing your scholarship.

 3. Talk to your neighbor

So to avoid sounding like Mr. Rogers, I’ll rephrase. Getting to know your classmates is one of the most obvious ways to succeed. And those ten minutes before class starts could be used socializing instead of dreading the next hour of your life. Maybe I’m more outgoing than others, but reaching out and forming study groups can make tests less daunting.

4. Get out of your dorm room

This includes apartment, house or parents’ home; even going out by yourself should be a priority. A change of scenery (and maybe a cup of hot chocolate) can do wonders for cabin fever that hits when the weather gets cooler. And Louisville is such a great city! Utilize the GPS on your phone and go exploring.

5. Manage your money

I used to avoid looking at my bank account because I knew it would read a thousand purchases from McDonald’s (but can you blame me? It was one block from my dorm room.) But I should have been eating the food I had! So much money is wasted eating out and it could be spent on things that won’t make you feel horrible afterwards – like going to Huber’s with friends or seeing a movie.
Photo by Val Servino / The Louisville Cardinal

Soliciters on campus are often pushy and should be restricted to certain areas on campus.

Hey, annoying solicitors: I am not a commodity

By Simon Isham–

I find it more than a little demeaning to have interactions with people who don’t give a damn about establishing a relationship with me personally, but have a vested interest in parting me from my hard-earned cash, valuable time and legally binding signature. And yet this problem is rampant on U of L’s campus, festering every step of the way between Porter College of Education and Speed School.

“Do you care about the environment?”

“Would it be okay if I shared a brief message of peace with you?”

“Does it bother you that thousands of animals are suffering in captivity right now?”

With questions phrased like these, do solicitors honestly expect anyone to be so callous as to not indulge them? Of course, this is exactly what they want; they know that open -minded, and perhaps slightly naïve, college students are easily swayed by this kind of ensnaring language. It is this kind of language which makes me retch at its thinly veiled shallowness.

Solicitors like those representing the military are never pushy and are confined to the lawn by the SAC. The same can’t be said for Green Peace.

Those students who truly care about the issues that these campus-haunting beseechers flaunt are so beyond the basics that they are entirely unaffected by the neophytic, pre-manufactured spiels and slogans that are currently being spewed most intensively in the Ekstrom quadrangle. Those elevator pitches are instead designed to appeal to the masses: by giving that five bucks to Greenpeace, you’re supposed to feel the same authentication you’d feel if you’d quit school to save the Arctic.

Unlike those infernal ASPCA commercials, where Sarah McLaughlin pets a domestic animal and sings about being held by celestial beings, you can’t just press a button to make the pathos-driven marketing cease. But U of L can take action to curb the diffusion of solicitation on campus.

As it is a public university, it cannot restrict solicitors from the premises entirely, for to do so would be a violation of their First Amendment rights. It can, however, require that non-student solicitors preregister with the university for a time and location that has been approved for their use. This prevents the problem of oversaturation, as well as making procedures just a little bit more difficult for potential solicitors to navigate. Unfortunately, such a plan is not currently in the works.

In the mean time, though, you too can help to quell the groupthink. The next time someone comes up to you with a flyer, asking “May I speak to you about universal healthcare?” don’t speak to him. Don’t give him money. Don’t sign his paperwork—it will only spawn more of them. In fact, don’t even hesitate to tell him he can take his cause and shove it.
Photo: Val Serdino/The Louisville Cardinal

panel C

Editorial: Open forums should include students

In an organization like a university, wherein several disparate departments are vying for funds and have differing interests and concerns, communication is key.  That’s why the open forum for faculty and staff held on Sept. 20 was so important.

Universities are increasingly becoming more and more like a business.  The product they’re selling is a degree and the value it holds in society.  The students, as customers, are in the peculiar position of paying the university for a degree that can’t be bought with money alone.  We also have to work for it.  In addition to all of that, there are many professors and students who disagree about the purpose of a university altogether and feel that a university should be a place where value is earned and education should be sought after for its own sake and not bought and sold like a commodity.

Both of these lines of thinking coexist at U of L and in many ways are necessary for a successful campus community.  Without the business side, we would not be able to pay top professors and bring desired amenities to campus. Without the academic side, however, the campus wouldn’t be fostering a learning environment and releasing capable, intelligent graduates into society.  The open forum was an attempt to bridge the gap between business and academia at U of L, focusing on the ways in which these two areas intersect.

Many of the issues discussed had to do with the budget and making sure money was appropriated responsibly.  The smoking ban was also discussed, as well as a perceived disconnect between faculty and staff.  All of these issues are important and there must be a running dialogue like this, to insure that all sectors of the campus community are communicating and working together.

Another forum will be held on Oct. 12 and hopefully many more will be held throughout the year.  It might also be beneficial to have a similar forum, involving President Ramsey and a similar panel of administrators and students.  Students that have pertinent concerns should have their voices heard.  The student, after all, should be the central figure in a university environment, more so than faculty or staff.  We are the ones receiving an education and paying salaries, for the most part, and our perspective should be represented.
Photo courtesy UofL Today


The Baconator: A symbol of fast food oppression at U of L

The “Baconator” is emblematic of a larger problem at U of L: lack of healthy food sources on campus.

It’s 6 p.m. on a Tuesday.  Campus is practically deserted but you’ve been in the upper reaches of the library writing a paper since you got out of class, and you have several hours of work ahead.  The gurgling of Einstein autumn roast coffee comingled with what’s left of the pumpkin bagel you had for lunch is becoming more frequent, a reminder that some form of sustenance is going to become necessary very soon.

We’ve all been here before. You’ve used up most of your meal points on McAllister’s (What’s that? You want a small sandwich and a tablespoon of macaroni and cheese? Ten magic meal point dollars, please.) and walking back to your apartment or dorm isn’t an option.  That’s when you begin to consider the fast food restaurants in the SAC.

First, there is Wendy’s, probably the cheapest option on campus.  Despite all of my firm resolutions to get a salad or something I won’t feel awful about eating, I always find myself blurting out “Baconator” on the rare occasion that I go to Wendy’s.  The inner monologue goes something like, “You’ve been studying all day, working hard; why don’t you reward yourself with bacon!”  But this is never a good decision.

It’s hard to articulate the sense of profound shame and disgust one feels when eating a Baconator.  It’s basically this sloppy calamity of greyish meat and probably microwaved bacon between two buns, slathered with mayonnaise and ketchup.  And let’s not forget the natural cut fries!  What exactly is a natural cut fry, you say?  I can only assume that Wendy’s workers are setting out the little fry cartons under trees in an enchanted forest overnight and that by morning, they are full of fries, cut and salted by Mother Nature herself.

Back to the Baconator.  I can’t stress enough what a dastardly invention the sandwich is.  It’s not often that a food item can ruin your day.  With each bite, dripping with mayo and bacon grease, you begin to question your self worth.  It can inspire feelings of existential angst.  Questions like “What am I doing with my life?” and “Why am I here?” begin to crop up.  I feel like I should have to make a confession after eating one: “Bless me father for I have sinned.  I’ve – oh God, I can’t even say it – I’ve eaten…a Baconator.”

They say that smoking a cigarette takes five minutes from your life expectancy.  I feel like there must be an analogous figure for the baconator.  But yet I see dozens of poor souls ordering them all the time.  They study the menu for a moment, as if they were considering the healthier options, and then inevitably, with a sigh of resignation, murmur “baconator” under their breath, accepting the five minute dock.  I imagine all of these people on their death beds one day, their lips parting to say in a raspy voice to their gathered loved ones “I’ve always meant to tell you…” and then dying abruptly because of one Baconator too many.

All of this is to say that there aren’t many healthy meal options on campus.  I could mention the mystery meats and horrible service at Subway or greasy Papa John’s pizza, but it seems like the baconator is the most relevant symbol for U of L’s abysmal food choices.  So for the sake of future generations, I’m begging U of L administrators: give us something besides the baconator.
Photo courtesy

NASA has taken major budget cuts in the last few years.

Pennies for NASA: Small change to help bolster our underfunded space program

NASA has taken major budget cuts in the last few years.

By Aaron Williams–

On Aug. 6, 2012, the robotic rover Curiosity landed on the dusty surface of the red planet known as Mars. It was a historic moment for the American people and for the country that can proudly boast having put the first man on the moon. NASA’s propensity for innovation and ability to make dreams a reality has inspired scientifically minded Americans for over half a century now.

One such group is an organization known as Penny4NASA. According to Penny4NASA’s website, their goal is to convince the Obama administration and the U.S. Congress to increase NASA’s current federal funding of 0.48 percent to a whole annual one percent of the U.S. annual budget. According to their data, 2012 is second lowest year of NASA funding by percentage of the U.S. annual budget since NASA’s founding in the years of 1958 and 1959.

Should NASA’s budget be increased to one percent of the U.S. annual budget? I would argue that it must. President Obama and the Democrats spent all of last week stressing how they will strengthen and stimulate the U.S. economy by improving our infrastructure, funding innovation and increasing funding in education in critical areas such as science and math, where the U.S. has fallen so far on the world stage.

A budget that is worthy of the work that NASA does is a necessity for our society. It shows where America places its values. The funding of NASA can have a direct economic and technological impact in the U.S. With more jobs for engineers, physicists, and mathematicians, we can become a leader in innovation and technological advancement once again.

In a CIO article entitled, “It Came From Outer Space: NASA Innovations in Our Lives” Meredith Levinson discusses several new technologies that the public now enjoys that were originally developed by NASA. These include nutritional supplements, aerogel insulation, memory foam pillows, high-tech swimsuits designed for Speedo by NASA, lithium batteries for hybrid and electric cars and infrared thermometers. These are just a few of the technological advancements that American society has benefited from thanks to NASA.

Even if you cannot concede that increasing NASA’s budget would encourage growth in math and science sectors of the American education system, you must accept that planet Earth will not be around forever. Whether due to asteroid impact, irreparable climate change or nuclear war, our planet can quickly become inhospitable to life.

If the human race is going to ascend past planet Earth and take our exploratory spirit with us across the galaxy, it begins with our own solar system. Lunar colonization and eventually martian colonization are vital steps to ensuring the human race can outlast the Earth. It is a long road but we must start to pave the way today if we ever intend on seeing one of our boldest dreams come to fruition. It starts today, with NASA and with the funding of organizations like Penny4NASA. If you have the means, you can donate directly to Penny4NASA on their website. If you do not, call your representatives. Tell them that you believe NASA’s funding should be increased, to the benefit of us all.
Photo courtesy of


Sticks and Stones: Why words are just words and Muslims don’t have the right to not be offended

Protesters around the world have protested the film “The Innocent Muslims” by burning US flags and effigies of President Obama, raiding our embassies and killing four of our citizens in Libya.

By Lee Cole–

Do we have the right not to be offended?  In today’s world of hyper-political correctness and nearly instantaneous communication, it’s hard to miss an offensive statement made publicly.  This is evidenced by the fact the film responsible for all the violence and turmoil now erupting in predominantly Islamic countries around the world is crude, insignificant and virtually unknown to the American public.  Those protesting at our embassies apparently think that we were showing up in droves at our local movie theaters on Sept. 11 to mock the prophet and that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the Coptic Egyptian who distributed and produced the film, is tantamount to Christopher Nolan.

The horrible irony of the whole situation, that would almost be funny if it weren’t for the outrageous bloodshed, is that the film criticizes Islam for its extremist elements and propensity for engendering violence, and as if to prove the film’s point, thousands of Muslims took to the streets in violent protests.  You could almost hear the collective thud of moderate Muslims’ hands smacking their foreheads and cringing the world over.

What’s more troubling is that many Muslims apparently think the appropriate response for a cartoon or an offensive film regarding their religion is murder.  We saw it a few years ago with the Danish cartoon and before that with Rushdie’s “The Satanic Verses.”  Attacks on those who criticize Islam are not restricted to a single country or ethnic group; rather, it seems as though there are extremist Muslims practically anywhere in the world willing to kill or harm those who have committed the horrible crime of speaking words or creating images that are critical of Islam.  Those who claim that tribalism, economics or politics are responsible for terroristic violence will have to reconsider after the massive global response to the film.  What else, besides religion, could be the culprit?  Why else would non-Middle Eastern countries take offense on behalf of Palestine and burn Israeli flags, when their cultures are a world apart?

The Onion published a satirical cartoon and accompanying article immediately after the protests began depicting the Buddha, Yahweh, Jesus Christ and Ganesh taking part in a thoroughly depraved sex act with the headline “No one murdered because of this image.”  While the intent was humor, the message is important.  When our ambassadors die as a result of a movie no one’s seen or ten people die in Afghanistan because an idiot named Terry Jones burned a Quran, it’s time to step back from the situation and reassess.

Religion is often insulated from criticism in our society, because we believe that it is sacred.  Those who criticize Islam are accused of Islamophobia, a curious new term that is usually associated with or considered tantamount to racism.  We forget, however, that a religion is a belief system and thus a choice.  Unlike race or ethnicity, we can choose what religion we are a part of.  We can choose, as adults, to either assert its principles or denounce them.  Yet, leaders of Muslim countries around the world have the gall to demand that we criminalize the publication of materials that might be offensive to Islam, as though it should be considered hate speech – a totally absurd notion.  We can openly criticize someone’s views on politics or science, but when it comes to their beliefs about iron age superstition, middle eastern real estate and the commands of an imaginary, bearded sky god, we must abstain from criticism because it might hurt someone’s feelings.  Religion is perhaps the most deserving of criticism, because of its bold, unsupported claims.  Neuroscientist and writer Sam Harris put it well in an article for The Huffington Post when he wrote: “There is an uncanny irony here that many have noticed. The position of the Muslim community in the face of all provocations seems to be: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn’t, we will kill you. Of course, the truth is often more nuanced, but this is about as nuanced as it ever gets: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn’t, we peaceful Muslims cannot be held responsible for what our less peaceful brothers and sisters do. When they burn your embassies or kidnap and slaughter your journalists, know that we will hold you primarily responsible and will spend the bulk of our energies criticizing you for ‘racism’ and ‘Islamophobia.’”  This sums up the current situation aptly. There has to be room for secular criticism of religion in a free society, without those secularists being lumped in with genuine xenophobes and racists like Terry Jones.

In the United States we have freedom of speech, for the most part, meaning that we can express ourselves as we please, like the satirists over at The Onion.  We understand, because most of us are no longer living in a medieval mindset, that words are merely words and pictures merely pictures.  They don’t have some magic quality; Muhammad is dead and so are Jesus and the Buddha.  They can’t see the pictures we make anymore or read what we say about them and even if they could, why would they care?  If these men were truly great spiritual leaders, do we really think they would be petty enough to care about an idiotic cartoon or an offensive movie?

What would really offend them, I would imagine, is murder, for any reason.  I’m offended by fundamentalists in my own country when they burn Qurans and behave like imbeciles.  I’m offended when my country goes to war for oil and other foreign interests and disguises its intentions by calling it a war on terror.  But I’m beyond offended when our embassies are attacked and our citizens murdered because Muslims think they have the right to not be offended.  When American citizens are killed, our sovereignty is violated and our country injured in a manner that could never be accomplished by mere words.

As literal sticks and stones were being hurled at tanks and riot police around the world Friday, I was reminded of the old saying for which this article is named and which I learned to appreciate sometime around the second grade: Words can never hurt me, or at least they shouldn’t be able to.  But when speaking, writing or printing an image is enough to guarantee violent rebuke, freedom of speech is truly in danger.
Photo courtesy of

Gangnam style: South Korean singer Psy brings his stellar dance moves to the United States

Gingnam style was an overnight internet sensation, getting radio play in the US and the turning South Korean singer Psy into a star.

“Hey, sexy lady. Op-op-op-oppan Gangnam style.” With over 160 million views on Youtube, there’s absolutely no denying that “Gangnam style” by South Korean singer Psy has become an international sensation.

I was in my friend’s car when I first heard this ridiculous song. At that point in time, I didn’t even know that it was a new song. My first thoughts were “this is weird.” Fast-forward a few weeks. My friend pulled up the music video for “Gangnam Style” and told me to watch it. After watching it without blinking once, I thought, “this is really crazy.” Fast-forward another few weeks. I saw the video several times on the big screen at Iron Age, a Korean BBQ restaurant in Rockville, Md. This time, I was thinking, “this is insanely catchy.”

As a former K-pop addict, colorfully dressed Asians dancing odd choreography to strangely addicting beats are not completely foreign to me. When I first watched “Gangnam Style,” I thought it was one of those strange songs that wouldn’t receive too much publicity and was I wrong.

“Gangnam Style” is a combination of silly and borderline weird and that’s what makes it so great. Anyone who has seen the video probably knows what I’m talking about. Random scene locations are featured such as an amusement park, tennis courts and a subway station. Unforgettable people, such as the cute little boy with mad dance skills, the guy in the elevator and of course, Psy. And just look at the signature dance move, “the horse-riding dance.” Who thinks of stuff like that? Then again, Psy did mention on the Ellen DeGeneres Show that his goal was to “dress classy, dance cheesy.” Even people who dislike the song admit that it’s catchy.

I cannot believe how immensely popular this has become, especially in America. I was thoroughly excited and hyped when I first heard “Gangnam Style” on the radio 99.7FM. As a Korean American, I have been exposed to both western and eastern modern and pop cultures. Usually the Eastern hemisphere of the world “borrows” from the Western hemisphere, especially in the music industry. For once, it was refreshing to see that a song from the Eastern part of the world was able to successfully overcome barriers.

There had been other Korean artists who had made their debut in the States including the Wonder Girls, who were the opening act to the Jonas Brothers and BoA, who released an American single “Eat you Up” back in 2008. In general, these debuts were really only known to the already-established American fan base. “Gangnam Style” was never intended to go viral overseas, and yet, it was able to gain popularity and recognition that the other artists sought. When the Wall Street Journal asked Psy if he expected his song to become this popular, he answered, “it never occurred to me that people outside the country would listen to my music. I didn’t even have overseas fans.”

Although “Gangnam Style” is not necessarily quality music, it’s definitely entertaining. And that is exactly its purpose. Nothing more and nothing less. Just fun.

Don’t step on my cardinal bird

By Noah Allison–

The student population at U of L can easily be broken up into two groups; there are the students who are appreciative of all the opportunities the University of Louisville is presenting to them. They respect what the university represents and are proud to say that they are apart of a higher place of learning that prepares its students to not only improve themselves, but to improve the world.

Then, there is the other branch of the student population, those who choose to go against the grain, and by doing so feel the need to disrespect the university that only wishes to better them. They are only passing their time here and being a Cardinal means nothing more to them than if they were a Hoosier, a Panther or God forbid a Wildcat. There is only one way to decipher who is who amongst all these students, and it’s pretty easy: simply notice who walks around the Cardinal Bird and who tromps all over it.

Students here should be proud to be a part of such a school, to give back after all that is contributed to their lives, to support the teams and rep it big. Either get with the program or transfer down the road to Lexington, KY.

“Its about respect, and honoring the commitment that you’ve made to this university,” Unitas Hall President Sam Draut said.

Action must be taken against those who openly disrespect the bird in front of so many impassioned Cardinals. It is up to the Cardinal Strong that make up this student populous to defend the rights of the bird and traditions of the school.

For those who’ve looked down to see the Cardinal beneath your feet, have no fear. Your soul is not yet condemned, but following the correct and righteous path of Card nation is the only way to redeem your crimes against the Cardinal.

For those who refuse to just take the few extra steps required to walk around the bird, know that you are tampering with powers you know nothing about. When other worldly forces start to dampen your life, know that there was an easy way out, that you refused to take.
Photo: Val Servino/The Louisville Cardinal