In Ivory Coast, after a failure to win re-election, Gbagbo refused to step down, drawing economic and diplomatic sanctions from the United Nations Security Council. Gbago then began a campaign of organized violence in response to pressures to step down, killing whomever he considers a political threat. He took the violence one step further on Mar. 3rd as his army fired into a crowd of women peacefully protesting, killing seven. With the death toll reaching over 400 at last count, the need for an international response has never been greater. The people of Ivory Coast have clearly decided they needed a change after years of Gbagbo being in power. Without an organized international intervention, Ivory Coast could potentially fall back into civil war. Economic and diplomatic sanctions must be strictly adhered to, and more pressure must be applied to former president Gbagbo to step down.

In Libya, the situation seems to be just as, if not more, chaotic. Gaddafi has unleashed his own army upon the rebel forces occupying most of the eastern coastline. After protesters toppled regimes in Egypt and Tunisia, it would be a crippling blow to the wave of democracy in the Middle East if Gaddafi were able to hold onto his power through the murder of his own people. The international community must continue to do all in its power to prevent the killing of Libyan citizens and the re-establishment of Gaddifi’s power. NATO forces must continue to operate the no-fly zone over Libyan air space in order to prevent Gaddafi from using his warplanes on his own people.

As much as President Barack Obama would prefer to stay relatively uninvolved in the situations in Ivory Coast and Libya, the necessity for countries like the United States to be at the forefront of promoting democracy abroad has never been more important. Without support, Libya and Ivory Coast could be faced with the bleak reality of prolonged civil wars and stalemates or harsh re-establishments of the old order. Neither is a result that the international community can afford.

Social conservatives who voted for this measure, however, blatantly ignored the facts concerning federal funding given to Planned Parenthood. First, for every dollar spent on family planning, four dollars are saved, which actually promotes fiscal responsibility. Second, no money that is given to Planned Parenthood from the federal government can be used for abortions.

Thus, instead of preventing abortions or saving actual money by cutting funds, the right has shown that it is more interested in promoting its agenda than actually solving the problems at hand.

While Congress should be concerned with actually cutting the deficit by reducing defense spending, most of which goes toward two unpopular wars, it unfairly takes necessary services away from women who are in desperate need of them.

Over 90 percent of Planned Parenthood’s operations go for breast and cervical examinations, health screenings, contraceptives and STI testing for those who are either uninsured or unable to afford these health services. Yet, conservatives cling steadfastly to the hate-filled and uninformed propaganda of the pro-life movement in an attempt to persuade Americans to follow their lead.

Rather than looking into corporations that ship thousands of American jobs overseas or provide terrible working conditions for their employees just to save money, Congress has chosen to attack the health of Americans.

In addition, protesters for the pro-life argument take every opportunity to display their ignorance. At the Planned Parenthood rally in the Boston Common, pro-life protesters screamed insults at the speakers and held signs discussing abortion, which was never addressed by any of the speakers at the rally.

Blind to the actual concerns of hard-working, middle-class American people, the elitist Conservative-led House promotes its own selfish, religious agenda at the expense of the health and safety of Americans.

We must educate ourselves on the real issues at hand. Rather than simply believing every word that Sarah Palin says, we must look into the issues ourselves.

Instead of yelling insults at Planned Parenthood speakers and Democratic congressmen, pro-life protesters should put themselves in the shoes of women who are unable to afford breast or cervical examinations. If they wish to protest abortion, that is their right. But no American should ever fight against services that save the lives of women without harming anyone.

Planned Parenthood has saved countless lives of women with the early detection of cancer due to screenings. By providing contraceptives, Planned Parenthood further reduces the prevalence of abortion by decreasing unwanted pregnancies.

As Americans and as a voting public, we must be informed about the real issues, not just those that are advertised by wealthy elites with an agenda.
The pro-life movement negates the very wording of its own name by this resistance to Planned Parenthood’s health services. The age-old saying “put your money where your mouth is” literally applies.

It’s time to see this attack for what it really is—the promotion of an agenda that can be described as nothing other than an attack on the health of Americans.

At face value, the claim might seem a bit overreaching. But the importance of what the Egyptian people achieved lies not in what happened, but in how it happened.

The removal of a man who used corruption and lies to stay in power for 30 years is undoubtedly a triumph in itself.

But the fact that this revolution was intrinsically Egyptian is its defining characteristic. In the words of a chant that reverberated through Tahrir Square, “the people,” not American armed forces or Western diplomats, “made the regime step down.”

And while many criticized President Barack Obama for not endorsing the millions of Egyptians protesting for a better, purer form of democracy, he did something that Operation Iraqi Freedom could never do. By not forcing the issue, he allowed for a democracy to grow authentically and naturally. And for that, the President’s handling of the situation should be applauded.

However, the era where the United States says one thing and does another needs to end. No longer should we call ourselves a beacon of democracy if our foreign policy in the Middle East mirrors that of the realpolitik practiced over the past 30 years.

But the magnitude of the revolution does not simply lie in the lack of American intervention. It lies in the sense of self-determination and authenticity that seemed to be lacking at the inception of the Iraqi democracy. In Egypt, there were no American soldiers toppling a statue of the deposed dictator. There were Egyptian citizens toppling the government of that deposed dictator. The idea that the Egyptian people did it themselves is so very vital because it finally gives the people a stake in a government created to represent them. And for their courageous stand for democracy, the people of Egypt should be commended.

However, the impact of what occurred over the past few weeks extends far beyond Tahrir Square. It serves to put the numerous other Middle Eastern autocrats on the watch. Another chant that was very popular after Mubarak’s resignation was:

“We’re not leaving Tahrir until Qaddafi leaves office.” And while the Egyptian people will not be running through the streets of Tripoli anytime soon, the chant should not fall on deaf ears. The frustration that overflowed throughout the country is not limited to the borders of Egypt, but is rather emblematic of the rising political tension through the area. And if a nation can do it alone — with a little bit of help from social networking technologies, then so can the number of other countries subject to the malicious whims of power-starved totalitarians.

By taking steps to ensure that they are making the decisions in their country, the Egyptian people have every right to be applauded. But the very citizens who worked so hard to create this opportunity have an even longer road ahead of them as they attempt to form a lasting, effective democracy for years to come. And so we congratulate the Egyptian people on their historic achievement while wishing them the best luck for the work that lies ahead.

This exchange of ideas and the refining of one’s arguments for one’s beliefs happen through dialogue. But students have to wonder if there is sufficient dialogue between the administration and the faculty as a whole, which would only help to make Boston College a better university.

Yes, there are committees with elected faculty that deal with specific issues, and departments have power to make a lot of important decisions within their area. But is it not concerning that there has not been a body formed for professors to understand the issues at BC holistically? And the Provost Advisory Committee is also not enough if all the power they have is to “advise” – this word implies a lack of tangible influence.

To the students, professors are BC. And it is because of this that faculty need to have the opportunity to understand the school as a whole and to know how decisions are being made and who is making them.

This is why we fully support the BC chapter of the American Association of University Professors (BCAAUP) because they are helping to do what BC should have been doing all along: collecting information about faculty concerns and fostering a community among faculty across all schools and across the tenure/non-tenure line.

This group of professors is courageous in their fight for what they believe will improve the University. Against many roadblocks, they continue to have unrivaled passion for BC, and we commend them for the work they have done. They know their students best and fight for our best interest as well.

Simply put, faculty concerns are students’ concerns, and our concerns are theirs.

We urge all members of the administration to have meaningful dialogue with the BCAAUP. And we urge students to find out more about this issue and the BCAAUP through talking to your professors and going to bcaaup.org.

Many universities, including Jesuit ones, have faculty senates that have a lot of influence over all that goes on at those schools. So it is surprising as to why BC does not have one.

The administration also should not dismiss the idea for a faculty senate on the basis of lack of faculty support. It is clear from the 100-plus professors who attend the BCAAUP meetings that there is overwhelming interest, especially considering the BCAAUP is still a new organization.

Without a doubt, great administrators have played a part in making BC what it is today, along with great professors. But when faculty do not have a voice equal to that of the administration, students have to question whether or not the University actually operates by the ideals it claims to teach.

Unfortunately, although the dining halls are providing these bins for dividing recyclables and compost from trash, the reality is that many students are dumping their waste into any receptacle without paying much attention.

Although exiting the dining hall quickly may be a priority, it does not take very long to separate food waste from plastic. Brown to-go containers, napkins and food waste can all be composted together, which makes sorting even easier.

As intelligent young men and women of a prestigious university, there is no way that Boston College students are unable to identify where their “trash” is supposed to go. Therefore, only pure laziness can account for this lack of recycling and composting.

College campuses are huge sources of trash, a lot of which could be recycled or composted. Small efforts made by individuals to use the proper recycling receptacles around campus can cut down on that waste significantly.

It is no secret that the planet is in need of some serious TLC, and BC provides opportunities for its 9,000 undergraduates and everyone else on campus to do their part. Although there are still more ways that BC could improve their system, much of the job depends on the students and faculty that participate in creating all of the trash.

Unfortunately, if people do not use the recycling and composting system in the dining halls and around campus, eventually dining services will cease to make the effort. When plastics and bottles get thrown into the compost, the entire container of potential compost becomes trash. It is not the responsibility of dining services to sort through the trash and make sure that everything gets properly sorted.

Food makes up about 30 percent of the waste stream, so composting makes significant reductions in the amount of trash that ends up in landfills. Compost does not damage the environment; it makes fertile soil in which to grow new food. Why, then, BC students cannot seem to bring themselves to scrape their plates into the yellow bins is inexplicable when composting is a simple and effective way to contribute.

No one is expecting the student body of a relatively large university to produce no waste. However, when the college offers opportunities to recycle and compost what can be reused and recycled, it then becomes the responsibility of the students to participate in contributing.

BC could improve a few things. Making compost bins available in every dining hall, for instance, instead of only a few, would make it more possible to decrease total food waste. In addition, offering more of the biodegradable food containers instead of the plastic variety would cut down the use of plastic. In general, the more local and organic food choices that dining services could make available would decrease the impact on the environment that imported goods make.

All in all, buck up, BC! It’s time for students to seize their opportunities to do good, and make small efforts towards making the environmental horizon cleaner and brighter.

While John Boehner and the Republicans on the Hill will undoubtedly celebrate their victory, the party should not last too long. After utilizing a political strategy of being the party of “no” for the last two years, the new leadership role for the Republicans will have to be met with a true participation in crafting the reforms that this country needs.

On many pieces of important legislation within the past few years, Republicans blocked passage forward – sometimes with dirty tactics and outright lies. There were some legitimate issues that had to be resolved in the process, but all of those were overshadowed by the specter of death panels espoused by the GOP.

The days of running a continuous opposition campaign along party lines must end. As the party in power, Republicans must now take up the mantle of running this country. They will have to deal with heavy issues such as immigration reform and fossil fuel dependence. They will have to work with President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to get a comprehensive education policy forward to address many of the shortcomings of No Child Left Behind.

Most importantly of all, Republicans will have to provide clear leadership with a distinct message. Bill Clinton and his Democratic Party lost control just two years into his first term as well. But in the first year of new Congress, in 1995, the Republican Party began to collapse.

Newt Gringrich, Speaker of the House at the time, refused to pass a budget without excessive cuts in spending – effectively shutting the government down. The plan backfired as the country turned on the Republican Party because they were looking to Washington for the same quality that people are looking for today – effective, responsible leadership that transcends party lines and focuses on the betterment of this country.

There needs to be clear, thoughtful legislation put forth in the 112th Congress by the GOP that will help to resolve many of the pressing issues of the next few years, including the high rates of unemployment. Yet, they must also make tough decisions – including whether or not to continue tax cuts for some of the wealthiest Americans, adding billions to the deficit.

The Republican Party must realize they have been given an extraordinary opportunity here, especially to change the image that removed their candidates from office in the last elections. Extreme, outdated views that hold America back will not be tolerated.

So with this opportunity, there comes expectations. They were elected because the voters of America want change in Washington. But they are neither looking for simply a change of faces nor totally opposite views. They are tired of the partisan bickering and the influence of special interests.

Republicans must step up and work with Democrats and Independents to make legitimate efforts towards reform to solve the greatest problems that our country faces.

Students from all levels of the Boston College community would
generally affirm this statement, for a variety of reasons. The lines at Conte for tickets; the random checks in the
lines into the House of Blues; and the general disarray of the scene
all contributed to a generally sour perspective of this year’s bash.

The Undergraduate Government of Boston College (UGBC) could have done
better. Many attendees of the event complained about the organization
and the strict rules they were subjected to once at the House of
Blues. How much of this was truly in the hands of UGBC may be up for
debate, and some degree of disapproval can be attributed to those who
planned the event.

And yet, that is a small modicum of the blame to go around. Planners
can only anticipate so much, and we have no doubt that those behind
this year’s Homecoming put in a lot of time and effort into providing
a good time for BC students.

Instead, the greatest criticism should be assigned to us – the students.

Many of the problems of this year’s Homecoming arose from the fact
that it had to be relocated to the House of Blues in Boston because of
the noise complaints from last year’s bash. Maybe this can be brushed
away, blaming the uptight Newton and Brighton residents for their
unwillingness to let us have some fun for just one night.

The very vocal complaints (and guerrilla videos that accompanied it)
are signs, however, of more than curmudgeonly neighbors who want a
quiet night in. The general attitude and behavior of BC students not
only in our surrounding communities of Newton and Brighton, but also
in Boston, has garnered a great amount of criticism over the years.
Not only do we have a bad reputation, but also our Ten-Year Master
Plan, which was commenced this year, was delayed because of
neighborhood disapproval many times over.

The argument that college students should be allowed to be college
students can only be stretched so far. The behavior that was exhibited
on Saturday night was unacceptable in many ways. Complain all you
might about the lack of an open bar, but the fact that the House of
Blues felt the need to do pat downs and stalk bathrooms was justified
by the multiple medical transports that had to be done on campus, and
the dangerous amount of nips bottles that were littered throughout the
floor.

This is just one night. It is hard to imagine what some homeowners
have put up with for years that would lead to such hostility towards
the BC community as to stop our expansion. Essentially, these
residents are saying that there is already too much of BC. We
should, through our behavior and our respect for our neighbors,
promote a culture where people not only begrudgingly acknowledge our
expansion, but welcome it as a good thing.

Enjoying the college experience is important. However, the behavior
shown at Homecoming – and, undoubtedly, over many weekends during the
school year – was unacceptable in many ways. BC will probably not be
allowed to return to the House of Blues next year, which is an
unfortunate tarnish on our reputation. However, we can address this by
a greater responsibility to presenting the BC that is great and worthy
of respect.

Two years later, 18 to 29 year olds have the chance to make a similar statement, as many seats in Congress and state governments are up for grabs. And yet, young voters have been conspicuously absent in the primary elections. There have long been problems with getting the youth vote out — resulting in less attention from our nation’s politicians regarding issues we care about the most.

Knowledge of current events and issues does not constitute political activity. It does not bode well for our generation that we consider demonstrations of political ideology to be useless, even, perhaps, too dangerous for our tastes. Extreme, hateful rhetoric and lying for the sake of political gain is never acceptable. But rejecting such tactics is also not an excuse to become complacent in our political lives.

Yes, politics is more polarized now than ever before. The louder, more obnox­ious, and usually more unreasonable a politician is, the more attention he or she gets. So to fully combat how “politics as usual” works, people have to vocalize their discontent, not to shy away from it now and plan only to participate when it gets better — it may not without us demanding it.

Civic duty is much more than our extracurricular activities or hours of service. It is important to enrich our souls, our campus, and the lives of others through our efforts. Indeed, many groups on campus have been successful in implementing change at Boston College, including the great achievement that happened last year when the Asian American Scholarship was finally given a name. The Corazon and Benigno Aquino Scholarship honors two figures who did not sit back and watch their country fall into the hands of people they did not trust or respect — they stood up for their beliefs, and helped bring democracy to the Philippines.

Organizing events and fundraising for service trips are important factors in our lives at BC, but they are no substitute for engaging our elected officials in mean­ingful ways. Most importantly, young people must take their knowledge of issues and events beyond polite, dilettante conversations among peers, and straight to the ballot box.

It is imprudent to suggest that activities on campus can ever replace our civic duty of being active political participants and, most importantly, voters. Whether we like it or not, we all must leave Chestnut Hill at the end of four years and engage in real life. By not using our power now, we are putting our generation at a serious disadvantage.

In November, the way to extend our already admirable efforts on campus is to vote in our local and state elections. Especially in this extreme and divided political environment, our generation can exercise our electoral voice by choosing candi­dates who can restore our confidence in government through effective and entre­preneurial policy-making that will create the society we wish to see.