A presidential debate at Dartmouth just days before last week's Democratic primary would have been icing on the cake. It's a shame that the College was unable to put together anything more spectacular than a Lifetime Television forum on women's issues with Dennis Kucinich, Joe Lieberman and Howard Dean, while the University of New Hampshire and St. Anselm's College both secured big-time televised debates. But to place blame solely on the Rockefeller Center and then accuse the College of sabotaging a student-organized debate -- as Kabir Sehgal '05 and his Buzzflood cohorts did (The Dartmouth, Feb. 5) -- is reckless, irresponsible and wrong.
The demise of Sehgal's "Healing America" event has more to do with the manner in which it was put together than any sort of malevolent College interference. Can one seriously see the administration secretly plotting to bar the College from hosting what could have been one of the most important political debates of the year?
The fact is, it was Buzzflood's insistence on secrecy and control, its inability to work with administrators and a bizarre misconception that any of the candidates would appear onstage with Lyndon LaRouche that left us high and dry.
The number of inconsistencies in Sehgal's story makes it difficult for us to believe any of his allegations; it makes complete sense that the College would be hesitant to host a debate about which they knew nothing. Furthermore, it is clear that Buzzflood was interested not in promoting Dartmouth, but rather in promoting Buzzflood.
How ironic that an organization meant to "celebrate Dartmouth" is now doing its best to tear the College down.
***
If you've spent any time in the last couple of weeks out on the town, you may have noticed that seemingly every other Greek house on campus has undergone or is awaiting a disciplinary hearing. Why is this? At least part of the reason is the Administration's desire to enforce the most mundane of rules -- having unregistered kegs or not returning registered ones on time. But another common cause for the rash of disciplinary problems is underage students getting picked up by Safety & Security and then giving the officers or their dean the name of the fraternity in which they were drinking.
Let's be honest here: If an underage student wants to get a beer at a frat, they can probably find some way to their hands on one. And when a student is stopped while stumbling back to the Choates, it's pretty easy to just name the first Greek letters that enter one's head when asked who supplied the alcohol. But it's not necessary, and it only serves to get others in trouble and further constrict the already limited social scene.'07s, it is your right to stay silent when S&S asks you where you were drinking. Consider yourself lucky that you got a beer in the first place, and don't ruin the fun for everybody else. Oh yeah, and drink responsibly.
