Best Animated Film

“Coraline”
“Fantastic Mr. Fox”
“The Princess and the Frog”
“The Secret of Kells”
“Up”

Who will win: “Up”

This pick is obvious, but we thought it shouldn’t go ignored. While “Up” is nominated for Best Picture, an absolute achievement in its own right, it doesn’t have a chance of taking that title. Instead, the Academy will award it with this one, which is not a shocker–whenever there is a Pixar film in the category, it wins.

Best Supporting Actress

Penelope Cruz, “Nine”
Vera Farmiga, “Up in the Air”
Maggie Gyllenhaal, “Crazy Heart”
Anna Kendrick, “Up in the Air”
Mo’Nique, “Precious: based on the novel “Push” by Sapphire”

Who will win: Mo’Nique, “Precious: based on the novel “Push” by Sapphire”

Cleaning up so far at awards shows for the past few months, Mo’Nique has come a long way from hosting “Charm School” on VH1 and doing straight-to-DVD films. Her turn as the abusive, disturbed, hateful mother of the title character is the standout role in this critically acclaimed film. Audiences there to see Mariah Carey and to support Oprah were shocked by Mo’Nique’s performance, which was one of the most convincing and moving roles in recent memory. While most of the other nominees deserve their place on this list (does Penelope Cruz get nominated just for existing now?), none hold a candle to Mo’Nique this year.

Best Supporting Actor

Matt Damon, “Invictus”
Woody Harrelson, “The Messenger”
Christopher Plummer, “The Last Station”
Stanley Tucci, “The Lovely Bones”
Christoph Waltz, “Inglourious Basterds”

Who will win: Christoph Waltz, “Inglourious Basterds”
This award further proves that those nominated for supporting roles were really the standouts on the silver screen this year. Christoph Waltz shone as Colonel Hans Landa, the Nazi military man that was woven throughout the multiple storylines of this Tarantino fairytale. He was all at once creepy, funny, endearing, but mostly horrifying–captured within the first 10 minutes of the film. His acting was powerful in multiple languages, something the American cinema very rarely sees. Hailing from Vienna, Waltz has starred almost exclusively in European films, but with his breakout role in “Basterds,” he is already lined up for the much-anticipated “Green Hornet.”

Best Actress

Sandra Bullock, “The Blind Side”
Helen Mirren, “The Last Station”
Carey Mulligan, “An Education”
Gabourey Sidibe, “Precious”
Meryl Streep, “Julie & Julia”

Who will win: Sandra Bullock, “The Blind Side”

As much as we absolutely hate to admit it, Sandra Bullock (forever Ms. Congeniality to us) will take home the Oscar on Sunday night. Absolutely hating “The Blind Side,” this prediction is tough to make, as we feel that every other nominee deserves the award over Bullock’s bad wig, Palin-esque humor and painfully predictable performance. But for some reason, audiences and critics loved her. For those of you who have yet to see “An Education,” you will be captivated and will truly identify with Carey Mulligan, playing a fresh-faced, clever high school student who derails her Oxford dreams to live an exciting, cosmopolitan lifestyle. Gabourey Sidibe, another newcomer, breaks hearts as the ubiquitous Precious, a girl who has faced what seems to be every single adversity one could think up. Meryl Streep is brilliant in everything that she does, of course, and her turn as Julia Child is no exception. Sadly, Bullock will probably prevail, and most people (but not Intermission!) will be happy about it.

Best Actor

Jeff Bridges, “Crazy Heart”
George Clooney, “Up in the Air”
Colin Firth, “A Single Man”
Morgan Freeman, “Invictus”
Jeremy Renner, “The Hurt Locker”

Who will win: Jeff Bridges, “Crazy Heart”

The nominees for Best Actor this year represent a wide range of characters–a bomb expert in Iraq, a gay professor in the 1960’s, a businessman that fires people for a living, an aging country star and Nelson Mandela. While all are relevant and have the potential to take home the award, Jeff Bridges gives a career-defining performance as Bad Blake, the fading musician who’s impossible romance with a young woman forces him to reassess his life. This year is a tough race for these five men, as they all (with the exception of maybe Morgan Freeman) pour their heart and souls into what many consider to be their best work yet. The unknown Renner’s explosion onto the scene in “The Hurt Locker” gave viewers a realistic and compelling portrayal of a soldier, while George Clooney masterfully mixed his signature charm and wit with a vulnerability and sadness we had yet to see from him. But even after a tough race, the Dude still abides.

Best Director

Kathryn Bigelow, “The Hurt Locker”
James Cameron, “Avatar”
Lee Daniels, “Precious: based on the novel “Push” by Sapphire”
Jason Reitman, “Up in the Air”
Quentin Tarantino, “Inglourious Basterds”

Who will win: Kathryn Bigelow, “The Hurt Locker”

In what Intermission expects to be the most poignant award of the night, Kathryn Bigelow will further shatter the glass ceiling for women by becoming the first female to ever win the Oscar for Best Director. However, gender aside, whoever directed the masterpiece that is “The Hurt Locker,” deserves to win the award. The direction of this movie is so deliberate and nuanced that it creates a film that many would argue is near perfect. The close runner-up for this category is obviously James Cameron (who is incidentally Bigelow’s ex-husband), but most believe that the Academy will make this David and Goliath story true to form, and award the low-budget, under-hyped choice over the massive blockbuster (which is also brilliant in its own right). Unlike the last time Cameron was nominated, we believe that this Sunday, Bigelow will be “queen of the world!”

Best Picture

“Avatar”
“The Blind Side”
“District 9″
“An Education”
“The Hurt Locker”
“Inglourious Basterds”
“Precious: based on the novel “Push” by Sapphire”
“A Serious Man”
“Up”
“Up in the Air”

Who will win: “The Hurt Locker”

In an effort to encourage wider audiences and a deeper connection from the average moviegoer with the Oscars, the Academy doubled the nominee pool for this award, making the competition the fiercest that it has ever been. With the exception of “The Blind Side,” every one of these films is a masterpiece. Science fiction burst onto the scene with “District 9″ and “Avatar,” while more traditional character pieces like “A Serious Man” and “An Education” are represented. However, the race between “Avatar” and “The Hurt Locker” will be decided once and for all. While “Avatar” has changed the future of cinema and definitely won the box office wars (the highest grossing film of all time!), this award goes to “The Hurt Locker” for being a timely, beautiful, realistic, spellbinding and exhilarting film that not only expertly portrays the war in Iraq, but also is a shining example of what a film should look like.

BEST
Jennifer Garner, 2004 Valentino
In 2004, Jennifer Garner turned heads when she sauntered down the red carpet in this vintage goddess gown. It took 15 yards of taffeta, countless more yards of chiffon and over 300 hours of work from four couturiers to produce this exquisite, fiery orange creation from Valentino. The work certainly paid off. While vintage, the one-shouldered Valentino fit Garner like a glove. The “Electra” actress kept the rest of her appearance uncomplicated with a simple banged up-do and natural, peach-hued makeup that complemented her entire look.

Reese Witherspoon, 2007 Nina Ricci
In 2007, Reese Witherspoon was still coping with the dissolution of her seven-year marriage to Ryan Phillipe. What better way to make your ex eat his heart out than with this stunning, beautifully tinted Nina Ricci gown? The perfect fit, graduated deep amethyst and gentle waves were the perfect combination of subtle elegance. Witherspoon topped off the look with soft, natural make up and let down her blonde locks to contrast with the darker tone of her dress. Her chic, relaxed-glamour look was a far cry from the vintage Southern belle Dior gown she wore the previous year, when she won Best Lead Actress for “Walk the Line.” For Witherspoon, this Nina Ricci design was the ideal capper of a flawless red carpet season.

Michelle Williams, 2006 Vera Wang
Mustard yellow is not an easy color to pull off. Of all the pretty, sweeping romantic gowns of 2006, Michelle Williams one-upped them all with the bold hue of her sophisticated Vera Wang. She was a splash of color among the sea of the more neutral, muted shades of her peers. Confidently strutting the red carpet with then-paramour Heath Ledger, Williams left no doubt in anyone’s minds that her “Dawson’s Creek” days were far in the past. The “Brokeback Mountain” actress was here to stay.

RUNNER UP
Anne Hathaway, 2009 Armani Priveskirt
Although still a relative newcomer to the red carpet, Anne Hathaway is quickly sealing her status as a fashion icon with gorgeous turns like this sterling number she wore to last year’s Oscars, where she received her first nomination for Best Lead Actress in “Rachel Getting Married.” The dazzling sparkle and fit of her dress, as well as her classy chignon, make us excited for what Hathaway pulls next.

WORST
Gwyneth Paltrow, 1999 Ralph Lauren
The dress is not necessarily ugly. However, the Oscars are all about the glitz and glamour. People tune in to ogle extravagant dresses they can only dream of, not to see a cheap Pepto-Bismol confection they could easily see on a rack at Macy’s or at any generic high school prom in the country. On top of that, Paltrow could have at least gotten a prom dress that wasn’t so ill fitting. With all the extra saggy space in the bosom, Paltrow could have stuffed it with the Oscar she won that night for Best Lead Actress in “Shakespeare in Love.”

Tilda Swinton, 2008 Lanvin
Sure Tilda Swinton’s black Lanvin contraption was supposed to be an avant-garde, fashion-forward choice. Maybe it was too fashion-forward for the masses, but really now, did she just stop by a dumpster on her way to the Oscars to pick up this shapeless, garbage bag? Neither her black attire nor blistering red hair was particularly flattering with her pale complexion. She looked like the alien cousin of Oscar the Grouch. The only thing more painful than this look was her tribute later that night to George Clooney’s nipples during her acceptance speech for Best Supporting Actress in “Michael Clayton.”

ON THE FENCE
Bjork, 2001 Marjan Pejoski
You know this dress. The infamous swan dress Bjork wore to the 2001 Oscars. It’s impossible to forget, and therein lays its brilliance. The Marjan Pejoski creation has become a fixture in the pop culture consciousness after being spoofed in countless comedy sketches and Halloween costumes. Is it a clever subversion of Oscar’s tradition of lavish glamour or simply the most horrid feathered monstrosity to ever waddle down the Kodak Theater’s hallowed red carpet? You decide.

A slew of Senate candidates’ petitions were validated by the Elections Commission on Saturday and Sunday, bringing the field to 35 for 15 seats in the undergraduate legislative body.

Six class president slates — four for the Class of 2013 and one each for the Classes of 2012 and 2011 — were also approved by the commission on Sunday.

Newly official Senate candidates are sophomores Ben Jensen and Michael Cruz, an incumbent, and freshmen Showly Wang, George Tsiveriotis, Will Seaton, Tianay Pulphus, Pukar Hamal, Percia Safar, Noemi Walzebuck, Karissa Paddie, Carolyn Simmons, Arielle Humphries, Daniel Thompson, Daniel Khalessi, Deepa Kannappan, Pay Bruny, Kamil Saeid, Jason Lupatkin, Milton Achelpohl, Anush Ammar, Rahul Sastry, Madeline Hawes and Katie Cromack.

All valid petitions will be announced Tuesday at 4 p.m. Campaigning is set to begin the first week of spring quarter.

Disclosure: Crichton served as The Daily’s columns editor until Wednesday, when he resigned and declared his Senate bid. Two weeks ago, Crichton was exploring a run for ASSU executive, with current Undergraduate Senator Shelley Gao ‘11 as his running mate. The pair began petitioning for a spot on the ballot, but later abandoned their plans to run.

Also, we overlooked the Stanford Chaparral in our initial report; the publication had 95 online signatures at closing and was seeking signatures from 15 percent of, or 1,088 total, undergraduates. The Chaparral appeared on today’s Senate Appropriations Committee agenda, apparently to discuss a dispute over the committee’s approval of the group’s application.

7:47 p.m. | For hopeful ASSU candidates and special fees groups, today’s 4 p.m. petition deadline is separating those who will move on to the April 8 ballot — but not before two weeks of campaigning next quarter — and those whose plans, for lack of enough valid student signatures, end here.

Quinn Slack ‘11, the ASSU elections commissioner, has the preliminary closing numbers; his team will spend the weekend verifying signatures and announce the final list of successful candidates Tuesday at 4 p.m.

Slack pointed out that his numbers only represent signatures gathered electronically; some candidates and groups have collected more signatures on paper, which the commission will also verify.

Executive | Two ASSU executive slates have already been validated by the commission: graduate students Ryan Peacock and Jonathan Bakke, who had 224 signatures at closing; and juniors Thom Scher and Stephanie Werner, 208.

Three more slates each had  the requisite 200 signatures at closing, but await verification: Angelina Cardona ‘11 and Kelsei Wharton ‘12, who had 339 signatures at closing; Austin Guzman ‘11 and Patrick Mahoney ‘11, 219; and Billy Kemper ‘11 and Josh Meisel ‘12, 207.

A sixth slate, Katherine Heflin ‘11 and Daniel Leifer ‘10, had 187 electronic signatures at closing, but Slack said they had signatures on paper “that should put them all over the required amount, assuming there are no issues.”

Special fees | Two student groups that petitioned to get a spot on the special fees ballot had been validated by Friday evening: SPOON, with 1,270 e-signatures, and the Society for International Affairs at Stanford, 687. SIAS also turned in a paper petition.

All groups’ petitions, which include budget and account statements, are still up at the Elections Commission Web site.

Slack said Friday evening that three groups had turned in paper petitions that should, along with electronic signatures, put them over the edge: the Stanford Band, with 1,135 e-signatures; Volunteers in Latin America, 784; and the Stanford African Students Association, 581.

Other special fees groups who appear to have successful petitioned include the following, who each sought signatures from 15 percent of, or 1,088 total, undergraduates (a figure determined by the size of the group’s request): the Sexual Health Peer Resource Center, with 1,155 signatures at closing; Stanford Mock Trial, 1,181; the Bridge Peer Counseling Center, 1,372; Green Living Council, 1,113; and The Stanford Daily, 1,213.

Basmati Raas had collected 515 e-signatures at closing, but paper signatures could still get the group onto the ballot.

Among groups seeking signatures from 10 percent of, or 725 total, undergraduate signatures, two appeared to reach that threshold Friday: Stanford Symphony Orchestra, with 778 e-signatures, and Students for a Sustainable Stanford, 794. Stanford Solar Car had 615 names online, but could get onto the ballot with enough additional paper signatures.

Sunday FLiCKS, seeking special fees from both undergraduates and graduates, needs 2,298 signatures, or 15 percent of the joint population, to get onto the ballot. Online, the group had collected 1,744 on Friday.

Two groups’ petitions were halted earlier in the petition process: Sigma Nu, a fraternity whose request for fees for Sunsplash, Moonsplash and a charity concert was ruled ineligible by the ASSU Constitutional Council; and the Student Services Division, which failed last week to get two-thirds approval by the Undergraduate Senate to seek special fees.

Undergraduate Senate | Nine candidates are, with Elections Commission approval in hand at closing time, headed to the April ballot: Juany Torres ‘13, Khaled Alshawi ‘13, Stewart Macgregor-Dennis ‘13, Nikola Milanovic ‘11 (also a Daily columnist), Ed Négiar ‘13, Robin Perani ‘13, Bennett Siegel ‘13, Miles Unterreiner ‘12 and Andrew Jang ‘12.

Forty-one candidates’ petitions have yet to be validated, including the three incumbents who have thrown their hats in the ring: Dean Young ‘11, Anton Zietsman ‘12 and Michael Cruz ‘12. Young had collected 55 online signatures by Friday; Zietsman, 66; and Cruz, 118. One hundred signatures are required.

Class presidents | It appears the Class of 2013 will vote among four slates for sophomore class presidents, each of which had collected more than the requisite 100 signatures by Friday. All slates remain to be validated.

This year’s Class of 2012 presidents return as the only slate for junior class presidents, with 181 signatures; Marie Caligiuri-de Jesus, Adrian Castillo, Taylor Goodspeed and Isabelle Wijangco picked up a fifth member for next year, Cody Sam.

The Class of 2011 also posted one slate for class presidents. With 122 signatures, current presidents Pamon Forouhar, Dante DiCicco and Mona Hadidi are joined by Molly Spaeth.

Graduate Student Council | Twelve graduate students have declared candidacy for the council; they do not have to petition and have until March 18 to join the race.

David Gobaud | The current ASSU president, a coterminal student in computer science who has said he does not know when he plans to graduate, posted a number of mock petitions while testing the election Web site, including one for himself for Undergraduate Senate and two for class president, which were titled “Bring It On!!!” and “Four More Years!!!!” Signatures for the latter two were in the single digits on Friday.

The most egregious misfortune of the film is its storyline, which is utterly flat and predictable. It is almost as though Burton was so focused on the imagery and graphics (which aren’t even that great) that he forgot to read the books–big mistake. If you are 10 years old, than this film is probably incredibly entertaining; but for anyone older, it completely misses the mark. Carroll’s books were written for children, but also appeal to adults because they explore very interesting and complicated concepts. The books deal with themes of making the impossible possible and enjoying the freedom and imagination of youth, both ideas of which are dealt with in the film in a ridiculously shallow manner, if at all.

I realize that the creators were not trying to mimic the plot of the books; however, the essence of the stories was completely lost in order to dramatize and commercialize. Consequently, the story morphs into a laughable, epic tale dealing with a group of eccentrics looking for a hero to save them from the villain–complete with a fight scene, a bizarre romance and a dance sequence (yes, that says dance sequence). We’ve seen this plot a hundred times before, just this time it includes a girl named Alice, a Mad Hatter and a Red Queen.

I don’t know if it was just my pervading disappointment, but the attempted humor completely missed its mark. Maybe I didn’t get it, but if that’s the case, no one else in the theater did either–there was very little laughing. They were scenes that were written to be clever, but were simply poorly written. The jokes just didn’t translate. All of the characters, even the Mad Hatter (who for some unknown reason had a Scottish accent intermittently, traded off with a lisp), were not absurd enough. It is actually very unfortunate because this is Wonderland–a loony place where you can get away with being foolish and silly. It was oddly restrained. It’s Tim Burton for god sakes! Give me some crazy! While Carroll’s books are very zany and illogical, the movie is almost too methodical and makes too much sense. I didn’t feel like I escaped to Wonderland, I felt like I was dragged through BoringVille.

I could talk about the terrible screenplay for hours, but another problem with the movie is Alice. It could be the actress (a fresh-faced Mia Wasikowska) or it could be the way the character is written (I’d bet on that one), but either way she is far too passive and unremarkable. Alice is supposed to be a very curious, inquisitive and intrepid girl, but in the movie, she is blase and mellow. Throughout the film, Alice just goes with flow, barely showing any emotion, reaction, or concern. Strangely, she seems apathetic, almost like she was given a tranquilizer for the first half of the film. I wanted her to have just a little more vigor.

In this giant mess of terrible writing, ordinary characters and halfhearted enthusiasm, Helena Bonham Carter shines. I’ll admit, beyond this movie I am definitely a fan of hers, but as the Red Queen, she is a standout. She performs with just the right amount of dark humor and annoying tone, with a pinch of vulnerability, to pull off not only the best character, but also the best element the entire film has to offer. She knows how to do the crazy I wanted in the rest of the film.

When it comes to this last Burton children’s story remake, don’t believe the hype. The downfall of “Alice” is clearly bad writing, which even the visuals don’t make up for. Although I want to be entertained and engaged with effects and visuals, I also want to my movies to have substance. Unlike with recent openers such as “Dear John” or “Valentine’s Day,” I was hoping this movie could take Carroll’s works and create an incredibly original and intriguing piece. Instead, it took a classic and stomped on it, and then adding insult to injury with a miserable closing credits song performed by Avril Lavigne. This Hollywood, commercialized, Hot Topic-sponsored mess has absolutely nothing on the 1951 animated classic.

Professors William Perry and David Kennedy made a case for the return of the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) to campus yesterday in front of the Faculty Senate, which passed a motion to investigate potential relations with the program.

The ROTC program, which during the Second World War involved roughly half of undergraduate males, left campus in 1973. According to Kennedy ‘63, the 1969 Faculty Senate terminated the program because of academic concerns over the faculty status of military instructors and units given to students, and punitive clauses in student contracts for those who left the program.

The punitive clauses – students who left the program were automatically conscripted – are now gone, and academic concerns were negotiable then and should be negotiable now, Kennedy said.

But both Kennedy and Perry ‘49 M.S. ‘50, the former U.S. Secretary of Defense,  said that the elimination of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is a prerequisite for the return of ROTC to campus.

When Perry was discussing the issue with President Hennessy last decade, the controversial policy came up as a roadblock.

“We both decided that with ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ it was inappropriate to re-raise the question,” Perry said.

But yesterday, Kennedy and Perry expressed confidence in President Obama’s ability to end the policy.

Stephen Krasner, an international relations professor, cautioned the faculty that political uncertainties surrounding “don’t ask, don’t tell” should not dictate the University’s reconsideration of ROTC.

“I would urge the committee to not make it hostage to what happens to ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’” Krasner said.

The elimination of ROTC from campus has negatively affected both students and the military, Kennedy and Perry said.

“I do think that we are in danger of seriously compromising a 200-year-old tradition of the citizen soldier,” Kennedy said, noting that the armed forces are now very small and efficient, and don’t involve much of the civilian public.

Kennedy spoke about the emergence of a “military caste,” which both he and Perry noted as a troubling phenomenon.

In 2008, Kennedy said, of 307 top-level general officers, 180 had children in the service. By comparison, in a civilian body of similar stature, the U.S. Congress, just 10 of 535 members had children in the service.

This divergence of civilian and military life has serious implications for political accountability of the armed forces, Kennedy said.

Both Kennedy and Perry emphasized that the University, which aims to train the leaders of the future, must embrace ROTC if it is going to play a role in training future military leaders.

“The main reason I joined ROTC [just after World War II,] was that in the event that our country faced another crisis, I wanted the opportunity to be in a leadership role,” Perry said. “Had Stanford not had ROTC, I would not have come to Stanford.”

Perry supported all of Kennedy’s assertions, and added several anecdotes that illustrated his support for bringing the program back to campus.

He told the story of twin sisters participating in Air Force ROTC that were in a class he taught at Stanford, and the extent to which the time spent meeting their commitments off campus caused them to miss opportunities.

“In my view, these sisters were some of the best Stanford students I have met,” he said. “I just felt that the loss to them, and the loss to other Stanford students, in not being able to participate in campus activities, was really a shame.”

Perry also spoke about the experience of his grandson, a Marine, sitting in one of his lecture classes while in uniform.

Though his grandson expressed some apprehension about roaming campus in uniform – he had heard Stanford students were anti-military – he received an instant standing ovation from the 100 students in attendance, Perry said.

Other Business

Professor Arthur Bienenstock gave a presentation on the Government-Research University Partnership, highlighting the Obama administration’s effort to increase the efficiency of research.

Bienenstock said that nationwide, there are currently $2.4 to $4 billion in non-reimbursed indirect research costs on government-funded projects stemming from administrative burdens. This amounts to about $1,000 per student at Research I and Research II universities.

Professor Philippe Buc, chair of the Committee on Undergraduate Standards and Policies, detailed several items from his committee’s work on electronic devices in the classroom, grade inflation and GERs.

The committee is poised to recommend a ban on electronic devices during exams, but likely will leave policy on devices in the classroom up to individual professors because compelling arguments for and against a ban exist.

Grade distribution has come under scrutiny this year as well. Buc reported that his committee has been in dialogue with Princeton University, which has successfully brought down the percentage of A’s given to students in recent years.

Tightening the definition of GERs and the GER designation process is also on the agenda.

“If we have GERs, faculty and students should take them seriously,” Buc said.

In his report to the Senate, Provost John Etchemendy commented on several issues that have been sparked interest on campus.

Etchemendy said that Vaden Director Ira Friedman and Vice Provost for Student Affairs Greg Boardman are coming up with an exceptions policy for the controversial new requirement that all international students purchase Cardinal Care, the University-provided health insurance plan.

He also complimented the overseas studies program staff in Santiago, Chile, where 21 Stanford students are studying, for their work after last week’s magnitude 8.8 earthquake, and said that a decision on the status of the program next quarter will be announced within several days.

“My worst day in the public sector — and I’ve had some really bad days — was better than my best day in the private sector,” she said.

Jarrett is one of the president’s longest-serving advisors, having known Obama since 1991, when she hired Michelle Obama — then Barack’s fiancée — to work in Chicago Mayor Richard Daley’s office. In addition to her role as an advisor, Jarrett has two other titles — Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Relations and Public Liaison, and Chairperson of the White House Commission on Women and Girls.

While some were expecting a policy talk, Jarrett instead delivered a highly personal account of her own life.

Jarrett began by describing her childhood and the path that led her to Stanford. She was born in Iran and moved to Chicago at age 5. She told the audience the story of her father, who was the first black resident in a Chicago hospital and who moved to Iran to practice medicine rather than accepting pay significantly lower than that of his white peers.

“I wanted to see how that experience [of being born in Iran] fit into what she’s done,” said Anna Schickele ’13. “It was interesting to hear her life story.”

After graduating from Stanford in 1978 with a degree in psychology, Jarrett attended law school at the University of Michigan and then was hired by a private law firm in Chicago.

“I took the path of least resistance,” she said. “I’m not proud of it, but that’s what I did.”

Dissatisfied and “miserable” at her law firm, Jarrett chose to enter public service, working in the Chicago mayor’s office until 2005 and then serving as CEO of the Habitat Company before joining Barack Obama’s administration in 2008. She described some of the lessons she learned working under Daley.

“Find the place where people appreciate your choices, your gratification beyond your job,” she said. “If you don’t, you’ll be miserable.”

Jarrett ended her talk describing her experience working in Barack Obama’s administration.

“It’s been an extraordinary last 14 months,” she said. “We’ve made an enormous difference in one year and we still have an enormous, long journey to go.”

In many ways, Jarrett’s speech served to encourage Stanford students to get involved with public service. She spoke at length about engaging with the local community and with the government at the local, state and federal level, and discussed her own experience tutoring autistic students during her time at Stanford.

“Ordinary people can do extraordinary things,” she said. “You are extraordinary people, so just imagine what you can do, and go out there and do it.”

Jarrett answered more specific questions about policy and governing in a session with Profs. Harry and Michele Elam after her speech. Michele serves as the director of African and African American Studies, the department that hosted the event.

“The appropriate role of government is to do what the private sector cannot do…it must provide the safety net necessary for the private sector to thrive,” Jarrett said.

After the presentation, students had positive reactions to Jarrett’s message.

“The fact that she took the time out of her schedule to come here and talk to us was great,” said Kelsei Wharton ’12. “It certainly met my expectations…she talked about leadership and her experiences, instead of delivering a policy paper.”

“I didn’t really have any expectations,” added Taryn Sanks ’13. “I liked that it was personal.”

Though Jarrett’s talk was generally seen as quite strong, some students felt there were a few missing elements.

“One question I would have liked to ask her was what she would have done differently,” said Camira Powell ’13. “I wanted to know how what she learned here has affected the rest of her life.”

“Maybe she could have given a shout-out to whatever dorm she lived in,” Schickele added.

Police received reports during this period of bike thefts near the Landau Economics building, Y2E2, the Gates Computer Science building, Taube Family Tennis Stadium, Roble Gymnasium, Schwab Residential Center, Stern Hall, Wilbur Hall and the Law School.

Thursday, Feb. 25

At 9:30 a.m., an injury, bike-vs.-fixed-object collision occurred at Arguello Way and Crothers Way.

At 12:40 p.m., in the Center for Integrated Systems, there was an accidental chemical release inside the building. The building and surrounding areas were evacuated. Palo Alto Fire Department confirmed the building as safe.

At 3:19 p.m., a non-injury, bike-vs.-bike collision occurred at Panama Mall and Duena Street.

Between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. at the Gilbert Biological Sciences building, an unknown suspect stole the victim’s wallet from her unattended purse, which was located in an unlocked laboratory office. This report was brought to you by the prefix “un.”

Friday, Feb. 26

Between Feb. 25 and Feb. 26 at the Student Services building at 563 Salvatierra Walk, an unknown suspect tipped over a golf cart, causing the battery of the vehicle to leak fluids. Stanford Facilities was notified of the damage.

An unknown suspect was reported to have spray-painted graffiti on the front wall of Memorial Church. The writing was illegible.

Between 8 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. at Olmstead Road and Oberlin Street, a tree fell on a vehicle, causing minor damage. No injuries occurred.

Between 10:15 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. at Galvez Field, a vehicle was damaged when debris fell from trees, causing moderate damage to the vehicle’s rear window. There were no injuries, except for the tree, which lost a few limbs.

Between 1:40 p.m. and 2:30 p.m., a student took another student’s unlocked bike from outside Arroyo. The first student returned the bike about 50 minutes later, claiming he thought it was his own.

At 7 p.m., at Campus Drive East and Bowdoin Street, an injury, bike-vs.-vehicle collision occurred.

Saturday, Feb. 27

Between 8 p.m. on Feb. 26 and 11:30 a.m. on Feb. 27, an unknown suspect smashed the front passenger window of a vehicle parked at Narnia, and stole an iPod and charger from between the front seats.

Between 3:00 p.m. and 3:10 p.m. at Tresidder Memorial Union, the reporting party had a verbal dispute with another person.

Sunday, Feb. 28

At 12:15 a.m. at 680 Lomita Drive, a student was cited and released for being a minor in possession of alcohol.

12:40 a.m. at Lane W and Lomita Drive, a student was cited and released for creating a public nuisance by urinating in public.

Monday, March 1

A victim reported that she believes another student had sex with her at Kappa Sigma while she was too intoxicated to give her consent.

Tuesday, March 2

Between 6:30 p.m. on March 1 and 9 a.m. on March 3, at Ayshire Farm Lane and Running Farm Lane, an unknown suspect smashed the window on a victim’s vehicle and stole loose change.

Between Feb. 28 and March 2, an unknown suspect used a victim’s Wells Fargo credit card information to make unauthorized transactions.

At 1:35 p.m., a stolen vehicle was recovered at Parking Structure 5 at 360 Oak Road.

At 3:20 p.m., a stolen golf cart was recovered at Manzanita Dining Commons.

In Oakland, a group of protestors blocked Interstate 880 just before 5 p.m. The protest occurred just after a peaceful rally at Oakland City Hall, according to the L.A. Times. Police arrested an undisclosed number of people before reopening lanes at 5:30 p.m.

According to The Daily Californian, approximately 25 schools were represented in the riots, aimed at conveying the negative reactions of students and faculty toward state education budget cuts.

University of California (UC) President Mark G. Yudof released a statement regarding Thursday’s events.

“My heart and my support are with everybody and anybody who wants to stand up for public education,” Yudof said. “I salute those who are making themselves heard today in a peaceful manner on behalf of a great cause.”

While the demonstrations in most venues were in fact peaceful, many protestors at UC-Santa Cruz reacted with more hostility. A driver reported having his car window smashed by either a rock or a hammer, an expected occurrence after UC-Santa Cruz Provost David Kliger alerted students and employees of reports of protestors armed with clubs, knives and pipes.

Outcry began in late September 2009 after it was announced that UC and CSU schools would raise tuition 32 percent.

-Zach Zimmerman

Among executive slates, three pairs had reached the requisite 200 online student signatures by 10 p.m. on Thursday, but those signatures had not yet been verified by the Elections Commission. Kelsei Wharton ‘12 and Angelina Cardona ‘11 had 264 signatures; graduate students Ryan Peacock and Jonathan Bakke, 216; and Billy Kemper ‘11 and Josh Meisel ‘12, 201.

The petition of juniors Thom Scher and Stephanie Werner was verified on Wednesday.

Katherine Heflin ‘11 and Daniel Leifer ‘10 had 180 online signatures on Thursday night; Austin Guzman ‘11 and Patrick Mahoney ‘11, 164.

Elections Commissioner Quinn Slack ‘11 said some slates had also been collecting signatures on paper, which would be verified after today’s deadline.

Forty-five prospective Undergraduate Senate candidates were still petitioning Thursday night for a chance to compete for 15 seats. Two more candidates, Juany Torres and Robin Perani ‘13, had their petitions validated.

Ten candidates are attempting to throw their names in the ring for Graduate Student Council; none of their petitions have been validated yet.

Freshmen may have their pick of up to four class president slates for next year — all still petitioning Thursday — while one slate each is petitioning for the classes of 2011 and 2012.

-Elizabeth Titus

Eating disorders are not just a woman thing.

“We see more and more men every year,” said Dr. Naomi Brown, a psychologist with Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS). “For men, it is often about the need to buff up, steroid abuse, over-exercising and weight lifting. We also see anorexia and bulimia in males.”

For John, a Stanford student whose name has been changed to protect his identity, his fight with body image and eating disorders included both anorexia and over-exercising. When he looked in the mirror, he saw cheeks, and contemplated ways of how to get rid of them.

By the 11th grade, he was eating less and less with one goal in mind: weight loss. He drastically changed his diet, eating only certain protein and salad.

John, who was on the tennis team at the time, said that his coach and his mother both noticed and tried to force him to eat.

“I exercised more than I ate in high school,” he said. “Freshman year of college, I had one meal a day and it was basically chicken or salad.”

By the end of his freshman year at Stanford, he had dropped from 165 to 128 pounds.

“My mother was seriously worried,” John said. “I used to wear baggy clothes freshman year, so the kids in the dorm didn’t notice me lose the weight. I had stopped going to the gym.”

His mother consulted a nutritionist, but he refused to listen. Yet it wasn’t until John realized how weak he was while weight lifting that he began to change his outlook.

“I got more into looking buff,” he said. “But when I went to the gym, I figured out I couldn’t do anything.”

In a dramatic turn of events, John returned to more normal eating habits and now looks physically healthy. But he still pays much attention to his diet and exercise.

“I still try to avoid eating sugar or carbs if I am not working out that day,” he said. “This month, I have just been going to the gym once or twice, so I have had no reason to eat. In general, I eat a lot and I go to the gym a lot.”

John still hasn’t talked to a professional about his eating disorder, explaining that he’s never felt the need to.

“I only eat as much as I need to,” he said. “I don’t want to eat more because I don’t have any reason to eat more. I don’t like food.”

”Jenny”

For another Stanford student, anorexia began as just a game with a friend.

“My friend and I thought it would be cool to lose a few pounds,” said Jenny, a Stanford student whose name has been changed to protect her identity. “And then I stopped eating. It happened really quickly. Before I even knew it, I had a full-blown eating disorder.”

Jenny talked to someone professionally about her issues for a few weeks, but cut off counseling when she thought it wasn’t working for her.

She went from 115 to 90 pounds in a period of six months.

“I was struggling to have energy to do work,” she said. “My body couldn’t take it anymore. Eating 800, 600, 400 calories is hard. Then I hit that breaking point where my life was pretty miserable.”

“I didn’t need the psychological shackles that come with having an eating disorder, and I started eating more,” she added.

With support from her friends, she began to eat more, eventually returning to her original figure. This again made her struggle with her body image.

“I had support from a really great boyfriend,” she said. “And my close friends helped me feel good about myself. They made me realize that being worried about five or 10 pounds didn’t matter.”

Taking Action

“It is never a good time to approach someone with a raging eating disorder,” Brown said. “But it is always a good thing to ask a friend how they are doing. The safest thing to do is to talk about behaviors, including their appearance.”

Denial is one of the greatest barriers to getting someone help or to getting an accurate tally on eating disorder statistics at Stanford.

“There are bulimia clubs at Stanford, there are anorexia clubs at Stanford,” Brown said. “But we do not have any statistics on these issues because the first stage of an eating disorder is denial.”

If you know someone who is potentially suffering from an eating disorder, doctors at Vaden recommend that you let that person know that they have your support. You can then ask if they are willing to go in to Vaden.

“We want to put out the message that seeking help is proactive,” Brown added. “Everyone needs help from time to time because we’re human and life is challenging.”

For Janelle Leatherwood ‘10, who spent years struggling with an eating disorder, the challenge of overcoming body issues isn’t a simple fix. It’s a daily trial.

“There is no going back,” Leatherwood said. “It defines a huge part of my life. It changes how I think about things. I can have a bad day just because I feel fat, but I have to keep operating in the world. I have to deal.”

What some seniors would give to rewind.

For Nho and other Stanford seniors, the final year on the Farm is one defined by reflection on the past, an intensified effort to live in the present and a projection toward the future.

No two of Stanford’s seniors experience their final year in the same way. Some seniors eagerly anticipate graduation, bolstered by the comfort of having secured a future job. A few haven’t made any firm post-graduation plans. A handful are absolutely terrified. Others are just enjoying the ride.

“They’re a different breed in that they’re planning for June and beyond,” explained Felicity Meu, assistant director of student and young alumni development at the Office of Development, of the current seniors. “They’re thinking about life beyond the bubble.”

Nho, an economics major planning on working at a San Francisco consulting firm after graduation, said that the most unsettling part of leaving Stanford is precisely that— Stanford.

“I’m completely afraid of graduation because no matter how cool of a job you have, it’s not going to be school,” he said. “This is pretty much the best life I could ask for.”

For Elizabeth Bagot, the specter of life beyond Stanford is taking its toll on her.

“Instead of looking forward to the future, I’m terrified,” Bagot admitted. “I’m not yet at the point where I’m excited to graduate.”

“Right now I’m thinking, ‘Why am I not doing engineering?’” she added.

Christie Cho, a history major, noted that although one usually gains confidence over the course of their college career, Stanford seniors have their own set of insecurities.

“There are moments when you see this brilliant freshman,” Cho said, “and you think, ‘They have it way more figured out than I do.’”

But other seniors are ready to move on to the next phase of their life.

“I kind of feel a need to breathe,” said Joy Henry, a science, technology and society major. “A lot of Stanford students have basically been going non-stop since they were 16, so it will be nice to just be a normal human being. As weird as it is, real life will probably be a lot less stressful than Stanford.”

As a way of seeking closure, many seniors have attempted to retrace their time on the Farm and get back in touch with the eclectic communities that have shaped their identities.

“Senior year has been different in terms of reconnecting with the school,” said Walter Foxworth, a mechanical engineering major and a senior class president.

The combination of the intensity of the undergraduate experience, the incredible friends and the attachment one develops for life at Stanford make senior year bittersweet. When seniors point to the single aspect of the Stanford experience that they will miss most, it is almost unanimous: the people.

“You really begin to appreciate the friends you have made and really cherish it,” said Amir Ravandoust, a management science and engineering major.

For Ben Phillips, a big difference in the future will be the lack of everyday conversation among friends.

“I’ll definitely miss the camaraderie,” Phillips said. “I feel like there are a bunch of really great people here. You can just have the most excellent conversations, even about the most trivial stuff. I mean we’re so nerdy—I love it.”

For Ravandoust, senior year revolved around four main tasks: fulfilling GER requirements, writing a thesis, Pub Night and recruitment.

Cho said that her senior year has revolved around writing her senior thesis.

“This quarter I’m taking one class,” Cho said. “I’m also writing an honors thesis. It takes up 99 percent of my time.”

However, when seniors aren’t madly writing a thesis or prepping for job interviews, they are conscientiously trying to make the most of their remaining time.

Sonia Mendoza, a human biology major, decided to focus on her social life this year more than she has at any other time during her Stanford career.

“Senior year comes really fast,” Mendoza explained. “You just want to put the brakes on.”

Sam Julian, who intends to teach English abroad, is trying to use his senior year to complete some unfinished business.

“My band wants to get together and get all of its songs recorded before we graduate and break up,” he said. “Everything is coming to an end.”

Senior year also makes students reflect upon how much they have changed during their time at Stanford.

“You grow so much from when you’re a freshman to when you’re a senior,” Mendoza said. “You have no idea how much your life is going to change by the time you graduate.”

For Ravandoust, this growth meant learning that it was okay if the Stanford experience didn’t unfold in exactly the way he had planned.

“When I first came, I was in high school mode,” Ravandoust said. “My tolerance for things not going as I wanted was very low. Then over time, you explore and you see that things not going how you want them to won’t kill you.”

JR Heard, a computer science major living in Columbae, recognized that he had changed from the person he was as a freshman when he opted to live in a co-op.

“If I came here as a freshman, I wouldn’t have been interested in living in Columbae,” he said. “I mean co-ops are pretty weird. They tend to have pretty weird people.”

“And really, if anyone got into Stanford,” he added, “they’re already pretty weird.”

Finally, with more than three years of experience under their belt, seniors are some of the best sources of advice for life on the Farm. They’ve got a few tips for undergrads.

Ronnie Tisdale, a Resident Assistant (RA) in Murray, recommended that students remember to breathe while attempting to navigate their four years at Stanford.

“Calm down and take your time,” Tisdale said. “There’s no need to rush academically.”

To Foxworth, perseverance is critical to a successful Stanford run.

“It’s going to take you in and spit you out,” he said. “But you have to trust that you are going to come out as a very strong individual.”

Garner Kropp, a Daily photographer, offered his own advice on how to get the most out of the Stanford experienced, expertly distilled:

“Go abroad, go to football games and go to office hours. That pretty much sums it up.”

Sophomore forward Jeremy Green, above, must have a strong performance in order for Stanford to beat Cal tomorrow night. Senior forward Landry Fields, the Cardinal's second standout, is a Pac-10 Player of the Year candidate. (MASARU OKA/Staff Photographer)

Saturday marks Senior Day for the five seniors on Stanford’s basketball roster, but senior standout Landry Fields insists, “I’m just looking at it as another game.”

Fields may be playing it cool, but the weekend match-up with cross-Bay rival—and the Pac-10’s top team—California is more significant than he lets on.

First and foremost, as the final game of conference play for both teams, it will heavily influence the postseason for the whole conference. The Bears (20-9, 12-5 Pac-10) probably need a win to secure the conference title outright (assuming Arizona State can handle UCLA). And Stanford (13-16, 7-10 Pac-10) needs a win to avoid the play-in game for the Pac-10 Tournament.

As a veteran of tournament play and the player averaging the most minutes in the conference (36.10 a game), Fields hopes the already-shallow Cardinal roster can avoid any extra play.

“Given our personnel and the minutes guys are giving, it would be beneficial for us to play [fewer] games,” Fields said. “It would be big for us to have to win three games to win it all instead of four.”

But to win <I>any<P> games in the conference tourney in L.A., the team, which has often struggled on the road, needs all the momentum it can muster coming out of Saturday.

Senior guard Drew Shiller knows it.

“We know that going into the Pac-10 Tournament, any team could get hot,” Shiller said, “and that team could be us. But, building that momentum definitely starts Saturday.”

Head coach Johnny Dawkins, though, notes that regardless of the postseason implications, the game holds other significance.

“We absolutely realize the importance of this game,” Dawkins said. “One, we’re playing rivals, so it’s always an important game, and the guys are going to compete at a high level. Two, we still want to get as many wins as possible. So, I think it takes on a huge meaning for us, and it has a huge meaning for them.”

On a more personal level, there are a few individuals for whom the game could also have huge meaning. The first is Fields. He ranks in the conference’s top 10 in seven statistical categories, including scoring (first with 22.1 points per game), rebounding (second with 8.6 per game), steals (fourth with 1.66 per game) and blocked shots (10th with .79 per game). If he sounds like a conference Player of the Year candidate, you’re right—with the one blemish on his resume being the team’s overall standings.

A win on Saturday still makes him an iffy candidate; a loss makes him a no-go.

“I think you can make an argument for Landry [as Player of the Year] because there’s so much parity in our conference,” Dawkins said. “Typically, I’m an advocate of ‘to the victor go the spoils.’ Teams that do the best, their players should be honored…but whenever [there is] this much parity, where no one’s really run away with the conference championship, then you have to really look at players from every team and make a determination of who’s the best player. For us, he’s been a do-everything guy…he’s carried a heavy load.”

Contrastingly, for anyone who wants to honor a player from strictly the conference’s best team, Cal’s senior guard Jerome Randle (18.9 ppg, 4.52 assists per game) might be your guy if the Bears stomp on Stanford, like they did back in January.

Randle went 8-11 to notch 24 of the painful points that led to Stanford’s crushing 92-66 defeat.

But there were four Bears in double digits that day—Randle and forwards Theo Robertson, Max Zhang and Omondi Amoke—compared to two Cardinal players in Fields and sophomore Jeremy Green, who combined for 43 points.

Given that two months and the entirety of Pac-10 play have since passed, Dawkins is optimistic that history won’t repeat itself.

“We played them the very first game of the Pac-10 season,” Dawkins said. “Since then, they’ve evolved, and we have too, so I don’t think we can do the same things we did in that game. And I don’t think they will either.”

What the Cardinal can expect, though, is the same breadth of scoring and a daunting challenge on both ends of the floor.

“They’re very efficient offensively,” Dawkins noted. “You’re digging a hole if you’re not keeping pace through the looks that you’re getting. They have four guys all capable of scoring in the 20s…They’re capable, and they’re so explosive offensively, it just takes a run or two for them, and they could knock you out.”

But, Shiller says Stanford is “much more confident” than it was during its first Cal encounter, and thinks a victory is within reach.

“I think we’re a more together team,” Shiller said. “We’ve kind of figured out our identity and what we need to do to win, so hopefully, we can execute that on Saturday.”

Fields agrees, noting that much of Saturday’s result will depend on the parts of the game that Stanford can control.

“They’re a strong group, and it’s going to be hard,” Fields said. “We need to minimize our mistakes, because playing a team like Cal, they’ll capitalize on them.”

Fields and Shiller will take to the floor at Maples for the last time to prove just how much they’ve learned on the Farm. Tip-off is at 3 p.m.

Despite the threat of bad weather, Stanford remains scheduled to play three games at home against UC-Santa Barbara this weekend. Stanford's offense has been an unexpected strength this season; it racked up 10 runs against UC-Davis last night. (WYATT ROY/The Stanford Daily)

After a strong showing yesterday at UC-Davis, Stanford’s baseball team will return to the Farm today to open a three-game series against UC-Santa Barbara. Hanging over the series is the possibility of rain throughout the weekend. The weather has already impacted the Cardinal this week—the game against the Aggies was originally scheduled for Wednesday, and was moved to yesterday due to rainy conditions.

No. 24 Stanford (5-3) started off its week on Tuesday with an exhibition game against Rikkyo University of Tokyo, Japan. Though the Card played many of its younger, less experienced players, it still came away with a 4-2 win. Sophomore Elliott Byers was the winning pitcher for Stanford, while Kenya Okabe took the loss for Rikkyo. The Japanese team is in the middle of a tour of California, where it will play a number of other schools.

Yesterday, the Cardinal got a day of good weather and traveled to UC-Davis for a single game against the Aggies (4-5). Despite falling behind early in the game, Stanford rallied to pull out the win, 10-6.

For the first five innings of the game, the Cardinal’s offense was anemic, scoring only two runs off Davis starter Matthew Lewis.

Meanwhile, freshman Garrett Hughes, the starting pitcher for the Card, was taken out of the game after giving up four earned runs in just 2.1 innings of work. After he was relieved in the third inning by sophomore Brian Busick, the Cardinal pitching staff locked down the Aggie offense, surrendering only two more runs in the eighth inning. Stanford used a total of seven pitchers.

Entering the sixth inning, Davis held a slim 4-2 lead over the Card. In the first at-bat of the inning, freshman center fielder Jake Stewart hit a triple to deep center, followed by a walk and a single by junior second baseman Colin Walsh and freshman left fielder Stephen Piscotty, respectively.

After loading the bases, a walk to junior shortstop Jake Schlander forced in a run. Following an out by junior pinch hitter Dave Giuliani, freshman third baseman Kenny Diekroeger launched a grand slam over the wall, giving Stanford four more runs and putting the Card ahead for good.

The Cardinal’s next challenge will be at home against UC-Santa Barbara (3-2). The series marks the first time the two schools have played each other since 1997.

The Gauchos will certainly pose a lesser challenge to Stanford than its first two weekend series. The Card opened its season two weeks ago with a three-game sweep of preseason-No. 6 Rice, before being swept in its next weekend series at No. 5 Texas.

“We didn’t play very well down in Texas,” said Stanford head coach Mark Marquess. “We didn’t hit and we didn’t pitch very well.”

The Cardinal should have plenty of opportunities to rebound strongly against UCSB. Its toughest opponent of the year has been San Jose State, and it lost its series against the Spartans 2-1.

However, Marquess is not taking the Gauchos lightly.

“It’s very difficult to sweep anybody,” he said. “You don’t want to lose any games, and I’ll be disappointed if we lose any games, but we can. If we don’t play well, we’ll get beat—it’s a matter of how we play as compared to our opponents. No one’s going to be that easy to win a game against.”

On the offensive side, Stanford will look to Walsh to provide firepower at the heart of its lineup. Walsh leads the team in several statistical categories, including batting average, hits and runs batted in. Junior catcher Zach Jones will also be an integral part of the Cardinal’s lineup—he currently leads the team in home runs.

Defense is certainly an area where Stanford needs to improve. The Cardinal’s starting infield—comprised of Walsh, Diekroeger, Schlander and junior first baseman Jonathan Kaskow—has collectively committed eight errors this season, including three by Schlander. The left side of the infield has been especially poor, with an average fielding percentage of .933. As a team, the Card has committed 13 errors, compared to just five by its opponents.

Stanford’s starting trio of sophomore pitchers, Scott Snodgress, Jordan Pries and Brett Mooneyham, has also struggled, especially against Texas. All three currently have ERAs at or above 4.50, but those numbers should improve after facing a weaker UCSB lineup this weekend.

“I don’t think we really have any strengths right now,” Marquess said. “There are phases of our game where we’re very average or below average. Our defense, which we thought was our strength, hasn’t played very well. We’ve walked too many people and struck out too much. Really, I think we’re very fortunate to be 4-3.”

Barring weather delays, Stanford will begin its series against UC-Santa Barbara today at Sunken Diamond. First pitch will be at 5:30 p.m. Neither team has announced a starting pitcher.

Tomorrow, the No. 2 Stanford women’s basketball team (27-1, 17-0 Pac-10) will end its regular season on the road against California. The highly anticipated “Battle of the Bay II” will tip off at 12:30 p.m.

Though the Cardinal has already claimed the regular season Pac-10 title (for the 10th consecutive year), it will still look to end its season with an 18-0 conference record.

The first “Battle of the Bay” took place in January. The Cardinal overwhelmed the Bears, winning by a final score of 79-58. In a weekly interview posted on GoStanford.com, Stanford head coach Tara VanDerveer made it clear that the team will not take the competition this weekend lightly.

Forwards Kayla Pedersen (14) and Nnemkadi Ogwumike (30) have been offensive leaders for the Cardinal all season. They will look to take Stanford to a perfect 18-0 in conference play. (SCOTT STUK/The State Press)

“We played Cal in the first Pac-10 game this year,” she said. “I knew that when we played them again, their freshmen would not be freshmen anymore—that they would improve a lot, and they have. They’ve had a great season with such young players.”

Cal (17-11, 11-6) saw its five-game winning streak snapped when it lost to Arizona State 57-50 last Saturday. The Bears have had some recent momentum, however, going 11-3 in their last 14 games. Senior guard Alexis Gray-Lawson and freshman DeNesha Stallworth will likely lead their team in scoring and rebounding.

After this weekend, the Cardinal will look forward to the Pac-10 Tournament. Because of its regular season record, Stanford has locked up the tournament’s top seed.

“People are getting excited about the tournament; they’re feeling a sense of urgency,” VanDerveer said. “Each game, whether it’s playing Cal or playing the Pac-10 Tournament—[has a] tournament atmosphere. Once you hit the NCAA or even the Pac-10, if you have a bad game, you are out.”

Unfortunately, the Cardinal has not been immune to injuries this season. With the brunt of the injuries falling on Stanford’s guards—junior Jeanette Pohlen, junior J.J. Hones, senior Rosalyn Gold-Onwude and junior Melanie Murphy have all been injured—a lot of responsibility has fallen onto the Cardinal post players to maintain team consistency.

“Our ‘big three’—[senior] Jayne [Appel], [junior] Kayla [Pedersen] and [sophomore] Nneka [Ogwumike] have really shouldered the scoring load and defensive load…our big three have been really steady,” VanDerveer said.

Last week, Appel was recognized as the Pac-10’s all-time leading rebounder after beating out Lisa Leslie’s original record of 1,214 boards. Appel has scored over 2,000 points in her career and has won two Pac-10 Player of the Week awards this season. Thanks to the dependable offensive efforts of Ogwumike and Pedersen, the Cardinal expects to have a strong end to the regular season this weekend.

“[Cal has] a very athletic team, a very motivated team—it’s one of the best teams in the Pac-10,” VanDerveer said.

But the Cardinal is anxious to show its own improvements as well.

“We’re excited…our team likes playing at Haas [Pavilion at Cal]. It’s great preparation for the NCAA Tournament and that type of atmosphere,” VanDerveer said.

Stanford will tip off against Cal on Saturday at 12:30 p.m.

Stanford will face significantly tougher competition this weekend at the DeMarini Invitaitonal in Fullerton. The Cardinal has gone 8-1 in its past 9 games, but it will play three very strong teams in Florida, Northwestern and North Carolina. Stanford lost to the Wildcats last weekend in Cathedral City. (Stanford Daily File Photo)

The No. 10 Stanford softball team (12-2) travels to Fullerton, Calif. this weekend to take part in the DeMarini Invitational.

The Cardinal will play five games during the three-day tournament, including a rematch with Northwestern—which beat the Cardinal last weekend—and a showdown with third-ranked Florida.

Stanford is coming off of a 4-1 showing at the Cathedral City Classic last weekend, with its only loss coming at the hands of the Wildcats.

The Cardinal relies on a powerful offense, led by a pair of All-Americans, senior left fielder Alissa Haber and sophomore second baseman Ashley Hansen.

Haber enters the weekend hitting a team-leading .489 batting average, three home runs and 16 runs batted in. Hansen, who played shortstop a year ago but moved to the right side of the diamond this year, is doing her part, hitting .409 out of the second spot in the lineup.

Also enjoying a strong early season for Stanford is senior catcher Rosey Neill. Neill is second on the team with a .429 batting average, while also managing an inexperienced pitching staff.

Leading that staff has been freshman Teagan Gerhart. Gerhart, whose twin sister Kelsey is also a freshman on the team, is 7-1 with a 2.21 earned run average. Junior Ashley Chinn has been Stanford’s other go-to pitcher this year—she is 5-1 with a 2.33 ERA.

Stanford opens its weekend in Fullerton today with its toughest test, perennial power Florida (12-1).

The Gators and the Cardinal last met two years ago at this same tournament, with Florida leaving with a 4-3 victory on Mary Ratliff’s walk-off three-run home run in the bottom of the seventh.

This season the Gators are as good as ever, and they come in hot, having won 11 consecutive games. Leading the way for them is junior pitcher Stephanie Brombacher. Brombacher is 10-1 with a 1.79 ERA on the year.

Much like the Cardinal, the Gators are led offensively by a senior left fielder. For Florida, that player is Francesca Enea. She is hitting .417 with six home runs and 20 RBIs on the season.

After its matchup with the Gators, Stanford will play a second game today, this one against host Cal State Fullerton (3-10). The Titans, who went 1-4 at the Cathedral City Classic last weekend, have struggled to find pitching this year. Their team ERA, amassed by four pitchers, is an astronomical 7.41.

On Saturday, Stanford will take on North Carolina in the morning before its rematch with Northwestern.

The Tar Heels (10-3) come in riding a nine-game win streak. Senior pitcher Danielle Spaulding has been a catalyst for North Carolina both offensively and in the circle, posting a 5-1 record and a 0.93 ERA, while also leading the team with three home runs and 11 RBIs.

Northwestern (6-8) has struggled this season, but managed to shut out the Cardinal last weekend, 4-0. Stanford couldn’t figure out senior pitcher Lauren Delaney, who threw a complete game one-hitter, striking out seven Cardinal batters. The lone Stanford hit came off of the bat of sophomore centerfielder Sarah Hassman.

Delaney will likely start again tomorrow as the Wildcats will try pull off another upset. For the year, she is 3-4 with a 2.30 ERA.

Stanford closes out its weekend Sunday with a single game against Indiana (5-6). Much like the Titans, the Hoosiers have struggled to find a consistent pitcher this year—they have used four that have combined for a 4.49 ERA.

After this trip to Fullerton, the Cardinal has 12 days off for exams before returning to the field March 19 for the Stanford Louisville Slugger Classic at Smith Family Stadium.

Seniors Kawika Shoji (12) and Garrett Werner (14) will look to keep Stanford in the thick of the MPSF title race. While Stanford is currently ranked No. 2 in the nation, No. 1 Pepperdine is also in the conference and leads the MPSF. (AURELIA HEITZ/The Stanford Daily)

Stanford (10-4, 8-4 MPSF) is coming off a successful week of conference play, with a three-game sweep of UC-Santa Cruz and a 3-1 victory over Pacific. Because the Card is only a half-match behind the Mountain Pacific Sports Federation (MPSF) leader, Pepperdine, this weekend’s matches are crucial for the team’s momentum going forward.

The Cardinal offense has proven unstoppable in the team’s current hot streak, leading the nation with a .353 overall hitting percentage. Against Pacific, sophomore outside hitter Brad Lawson led the team with an impressive .561 hitting percentage and 27 kills. Senior opposite Evan Romero and junior outside hitter Spencer McLachlin each contributed 14 kills. Senior setter Kawika Shoji tallied 61 assists in the victory.

In preparation for this weekend’s matches, the team has been focusing on its defensive play.

“Every day, we work to perform our best consistently over time,” Shoji said. “We need to continue to improve in all aspects of the game, but have focused on blocking and defense recently.”

Although ranked lower than Stanford, both UCSD and Long Beach are formidable opponents for the Card.

While UCSD (5-12, 2-10) has only two conference victories, both came on the road against solid squads: No. 5 UCLA and No. 1 Pepperdine. Senior opposite Frank Fritsch leads the Tritons in kills—averaging 3.57 kills per set—while the team is hitting .291 overall. Senior Jason Spangler and junior Joel Davidson, both outside hitters, also add to the offense with 3.25 kills per set and 3.19 kills per set, respectively.

“UCSD has some great wins this year,” Shoji said. “We know how dangerous they are, and we are a mature team that respects our opponents.”

Long Beach State (8-6, 6-4) is also riding a three-game winning streak as it heads north to face the Card. The team is led by senior outside hitter Tommy Pestolesi, who was voted AVCA National Player of the Week and MPSF Player of the Week for his .488 hitting percentage against UC-Irvine and 15 kills against UCLA. Aside from current leader Pepperdine, Long Beach was the only team to receive a first place vote in the AVCA Coaches Poll.

“We want to win both matches,” Shoji added. “We have a great opportunity to win both and continue to move to the top of the MPSF standings.”

Following Saturday’s match, Stanford will have a two-week break from matches to rest and prepare for the last stretch of conference play.

The Cardinal will take on UC-San Diego tonight at 7 p.m. and Long Beach State at 7:30 tomorrow. Both matches will take place at Maples Pavilion.

After a few ups and downs, the Stanford women’s golf team finished in eighth place at the Bruin-Wave Invitational on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday with an 885 (21-over-par) after playing 54 holes. The well-organized tournament was hosted by UCLA and Pepperdine, and was held at Robinson Ranch Golf Club in Santa Clarita, Calif.

The tournament boasted a deep field that posed a significant challenge to the No. 14 Cardinal. Five of the nation’s top 10 teams competed—No. 2 UCLA, No. 7 Pepperdine, No. 9 USC and No. 10 Arizona.

In the first round, Stanford shot a 292 (four-over) to tie Washington for fifth place. It sat 10 strokes behind Arizona, which led with a 282. UCLA (286) and USC (286) were tied for second, with Pepperdine (288) close behind in fourth.

Junior co-captain Rebecca Durham led the Cardinal on the first day. She holed out from the fairway for an eagle, and had three chip-ins for birdies to shoot 70 (two-under) for the round.

Sophomore Sydney Burlison competed as an individual, and also scored three birdies in the first round, but fell to 73 (one-over) after hitting a few bogeys and a double bogey. Senior Angela King and freshmen Sally Watson also tied Burlison’s score of 73, putting them in 19th place.

Stanford finished in sixth after the second round with a 295 (587 total). UCLA was in first place by 11 strokes, and was at even par with a total of 576.

Durham once again had a good round on day two, shooting a one-under-par with a few birdies. However, she struggled on her last three holes. Watson also had a fair round, and was at five-under-par at one point.

In the last round on Wednesday, Stanford had its weakest results, posting a 298. The team finished the 54-hole tournament in eighth place with a score of 885, which is 21 above par. USC won the event with an 866, 19 strokes ahead of Stanford.

Individually, Durham slipped to 13th place after shooting a 77 on the third round. She ended up 10 strokes behind Daniella Kang of Pepperdine, who finished with an eight-under 208 to win the tournament.

Freshmen Watson and Kristina Wong finished the tournament tied for 18th with a four-over 220. King finished 29th, Burlison finished 57th and sophomore Lila Barton finished 89th.

“We were disappointed with our finish,” Durham said. “That being said, we did a lot of good things. This is the first tournament where we’ve had a lot of birdies and the potential of going really low. We were in contention with the top teams in the country, and we now know that if we play to our potential, we can win. We’re a young team and have to take this tournament as a learning experience. Next time, we’ll finish strong.”

The Cardinal women will be back in full swing March 26-28 at the Besty Rawls Longhorn Invitational in Austin, Texas.

“It was definitely a good feeling to win the match after the heartbreakers against Cal and USC and a positive step forward,” said freshman Sam Ecker.

Stanford’s singles players won four matches, all by significant margins. Junior Alex Clayton defeated Jason Smits 6-0, 6-4; junior Greg Hirshman defeated Alex Golding 6-2, 6-3; senior Richard Wire defeated Timmy Allin 6-4, 6-0; and freshman Denis Lin defeated Dmytro Mamedov, 6-1, 6-0.

“We felt fortunate to be able to finish the match,” Ecker said. “We knew heading into the match that there was a relatively good chance that it was going to be cancelled due to inclement weather, so it felt good to get a win despite finishing only 4 of the 7 matches.”

Stanford’s top singles player, sophomore Bradley Klahn, was up by a set before his match was suspended due to rain. Freshman Matt Kandath’s match, which had started, was also suspended. No doubles matches were started.

This weekend, Stanford heads to the Pacific Coast Doubles tournament in La Jolla, Calif. The Card currently has the best doubles team in the country in Klahn and fellow sophomore Ryan Thacher. While the tournament is an open competition, the field will be comprised primarily of college teams. The Card’s most prominent opponents will be from schools like USC, UCLA, California and Pepperdine.

After the tournament, Stanford will take a break for finals, then head off on a road trip to the Midwest to face Illinois and Michigan on March 23 and 25, respectively.

Winning streaks in sports are really hard to start, and even harder to continue.

The Stanford men’s swimming and diving team is going for 29 straight Pac-10 swimming titles this weekend. It’s a pretty incredible streak, one that has spanned decades of athletes, Olympians and teams. Head coach Skip Kenney has been through every single one. It is a streak that has defined Stanford men’s swimming since the 1980s.

These streaks are hard on the current athletes, though. No athlete wants to be on the team that loses the streak. Inside every current athlete is a little bit of the former athletes who paved the way and allowed the current group to have a chance to extend the streak. No athlete wants to be associated with the end of dominance. Truth be told, every swimmer in that pool this weekend wearing a Stanford cap wants to come home with No. 29.

When I was in high school, we had not lost to our rival in football in 14 years. In fact, our rival was built after my high school, so it had never beaten us in football, ever. We had shirts with the word “Never” on them as a tribute to the fact that we had never lost to them. But nothing lasts forever.

I was on the team that lost to our rivals for the first time. They were ecstatic to break the losing streak, even going so far as to rush our home field when the clock hit zeroes. The players felt ashamed, embarrassed and disappointed to be forever remembered as the team that lost, the team that ended “never.” The team that lost the streak that so many teams before us had built up and maintained.

But we got over it. And it really wasn’t the end of the world. The streak was great, but it was bound to end at some point. The players and coaches accepted this faster than we all would have thought because we understood how accomplished we were in the previous 14 years. We came back the next week to focus on winning the next game. We ended up winning the San Diego city championship that year. Some of us had forgotten about the broken streak by that point.

Arkansas track and field won 12 straight NCAA indoor track and field championships from 1984-1995. Connecticut women’s basketball won 70 games in a row a few years ago. UCLA basketball won 14 Pac-10 titles in a row, back when John Wooden was the coach. They also won 88 straight games from 1971-1974, including four NCAA Tournament titles. Besides being amazing, successful and record-breaking streaks, these all have something in common—all of them eventually came to an end.

It’s really hard in sports to keep up winning streaks, especially when the athletes are getting bigger, faster and stronger; and especially when every team and player starts gunning for you.

A team cannot keep up perfection forever because at some point, the magic of the streak just doesn’t continue. Something will happen. Or maybe it will just face a better team and will be outperformed on that day. Championship winning streaks are even harder, as a team has to peak at the same time of the year, every year, continually fielding teams that are better than everyone else’s best.

Some teams would drop everything to win one title. Winning 28, like the Cardinal has done, is beyond impressive. It is a record that probably will never be touched again. But unfortunately, one day it will end.

Stanford has done well enough the past 28 years to claim the Pac-10 title every year. They have fended off highly ranked teams and fast swimmers to come out on top. They have even won when they weren’t heavily favored. This year is no different, as the team is the underdog to No. 1 Arizona and will be up against a tough Cal squad, as well. Whichever team wins the Pac-10 this weekend will deserve it because it had the fastest swimmers and depth across multiple events. For 28 years, Stanford has had the best combination of those factors. However, year 29 is a new year. Stanford has the talent to win No. 29. Other teams have the talent to take back the podium spot where Stanford has stood the past 28 years. You can be sure nothing would be sweeter to other schools than to take the title away from the Cardinal.

Do I want the men’s swim team to win this weekend? Of course. Do I think the streak is great? Absolutely. Do the swimmers want to win this weekend and make it 29? Is that even a question? But if they do not come out on top, and they break their streak, it’s going to be OKAY. I would tell the athletes not to dwell on it, no matter how disappointed they were. Be more disappointed about individual performances and the current team’s performance than the larger streak. Don’t compare yourself to the Stanford teams and athletes of the past—the last 28 years mean nothing, and it is this year that matters.

The streak hasn’t continued because the Card has been swimming for the teams and athletes in the past. All 28 teams have swum for themselves, in the present, trying to touch that wall before the person in the lane next to them did. That is what made this streak, and that is what will keep it going. If it continues for 10 more years, then that is great, and just further etches this team’s legacy in stone. If it doesn’t, then it is not the end of the world. Stanford swimming and these athletes will live on far beyond this streak.

While the mentality of an athlete is never to think of the end of success, it’s a little hard to think that whatever win streak you are on can continue without end. Misty May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh had an unstoppable 112-match, two-year winning streak going until they lost in 2008. After the game, May-Treanor simply said, “It happens.”

Nothing lasts forever.

The streak for men’s swimming is remarkable and record-defying. I hope it continues this weekend. But if it doesn’t, I will tip my hat and say well done. The next time they swim, they can start a new one.

Danny Belch is going through his extensive hat collection to find the best one to tip. Assist him in his quest for headgear at dbelch1@stanford.edu.

I have had many experiences, some good, some bad, and the pleasure to meet some delightful men who still hold a dear place in my heart. Through the ups and downs, I longed to find the holy grail of “love” with no avail. Like the readers have suggested, perhaps I need to surround myself with better men, men who understand and appreciate me as a person rather than a sexual object. Likewise, perhaps I need to admire men for their humanity and individuality rather than admiring them as imperfectly preserved Greek sculptures. Therefore, as a woman with “many experiences” who has yet to experience love, I applaud those who have found a sense of belonging and wish you the best of luck with the continuous effort in maintaining your happiness.

Consequently, because of my “many experiences,” some readers have also accused me of promoting casual sex, to which I claim “not guilty.” Promoting casual sex is as regressive as promoting abstinence: both create cultures that force people to conform to a standard, whether “sexual liberation” or “sexual deliberation.” What I want to promote is a healthy attitude toward one’s own sexuality. If casual sex makes a person happy, then s/he should not feel judged by society for having casual sex. Likewise, if a person feels that sex should only be shared with someone special, then s/he should not be pressured into doing something s/he does not want to do. I have been focusing specifically on women as victims of sex and stereotypes, but for every woman accused of being a “slut,” there is a man afraid of being called a “virgin.” In both cases society forces someone to conform to a norm rather than celebrate their own sexual identity. Therefore, I ask you, my readers, to uphold your own beliefs and not become or make others victims of “social norms.”

As I plow through my comments, I am also delighted to hear about so many wonderful, ready-to-please (and still available) men on this campus. This makes a girl giddy. However, the cases I have listed in previous articles are, in fact, prevalent in Stanford. Both men and women have been quick in telling me that they/their partners are not like that. In fact, they say, it is my skewed perception of the world that made these things visible to me. While I understand their effort in restoring the name of men made rotten by “a few bad apples,” I insist on my stance on respect and awareness.

The scenarios I have listed in my two previous articles have been committed by lovely Stanford men who may or may not have beautiful girlfriends. And while it is easy to dismiss these scenarios of coercion as something “other” than our own experiences, we have maybe only one degree of separation between “us” and “them.” According to a U.S. Department of Justice report entitled, “Sexual Assault on Campus: What Colleges and Universities Are Doing About It,” statistics have shown that one in four women have experienced rape in their college career. In addition, the report indicates that the majority of rape is committed by people whom the victims know. In fact, “the more intimate the relationship, the more likely it is for a rape to be completed rather than attempted. Half of all student victims do not label the incident ‘rape.’” We read these statistics, and easily remove ourselves from the statistical pool or place ourselves in the non-victim and non-offender category. Therefore, to emphasize the “rarity” instead of (in context) “often” is counterproductive to my objective.

What we have to keep in mind is that people around us, and perhaps we, too, have been or will be “challenged” in the bedroom, and confronted by something that makes us uncomfortable. It could be the situation listed or it could be something more minor or severe. If we recognize the situation, we have a choice in deciding which part of the statistical pool we want to belong to. We can choose to recognize the violation and stand up firmly in defense of our own beliefs and of ourselves. Or we can dismiss it, and be like the female protagonist from “The Blowjob Scenario,” compromising our own morals and self-esteem, scarring our sex-life.  Similarly, if we are the people who are in the position of possible coercion, do we recognize that we are making our partners feel uncomfortable and consequently remove ourselves from the “gray zone,” respecting our partners while protecting our own integrity? Or do we let our primal instinct take over and make regretful judgments that could be life damaging? (TBC)

To inquire about eligible bachelors ready to please, contact yanran@stanford.edu. She is celebrating celibacy as a sex columnist for the sheer irony of it.

Salinger created a character that young people could relate to – Holden’s followers have all, at some point, shared in feelings of isolation. This common experience is not about lacking friends or loved ones in our lives, but about not feeling like we can be fully understood by them, about lacking people who are both sympathetic and speak the same language. The phenomenon may largely be a product of growing older, of coming into ourselves and leaving our old worlds behind in the process. In this sense, feeling alone is sometimes the sign of growth. But we grow further still when our new selves find kindred spirits, the people who understand and challenge us.

Books and movies can play an important role as avenues through which we relate to others, as means of universalizing parts of our lives. We see in a character a little snippet of ourselves, in a story an experience we know. And this relation between ourselves and a fictional world can be tremendously comforting! Characters provide constant companions, ones who never leave us. What is more, they are created by a human being – an actual person who captured our thoughts in a story – and so they give us a sense of interaction with the emotional compatriot who wrote them into existence. If people complained about J.D. Salinger’s hermetic way of life, one reason is that they desired to know him better as a person because he seemed to understand them so well. Fiction creates a window into the mind of its creator, a connection that spans space and time.

Books and movies can achieve remarkable things in our lives. But it is infinitely more exciting when we encounter a person in whom we see ourselves. Nothing can replace real relationships with two-way communication, and we should never forget the value of these relationships. Especially in the week after Parents Weekend, when 3,000 parents descended upon the Farm to enjoy a few days in their child’s world, thoughts of who we are in relation to who we once were and where we came from may be especially on students’ minds. A visit from home can take us back to a world that seems old, to people who don’t understand us as they used to and who are not growing and changing at the same pace. Maintaining connections with parents and old friends is important, but reaching out to new people is also crucial as we get older and understand ourselves in different ways. College is the time to do this, to seek out others who breathe oxygen into our lives. Our friendships should provide structural support, and they can only do this when they are in part based on a genuine human connection.

A very wise friend recently impressed upon me the importance of cultivating these friendships, of seeking out others in whom I see echoes of myself. I can think of little advice that could ring more true! We should all seek out others whom we relate to and invest in these relationships when we find them. Trying to understand ourselves without connecting to others is isolating, and it is an illusion to think such a life will ever completely satisfy. We are social creatures; meaning in life has everything to do with human connection. It seems strange to think this may require a conscious and concerted effort, but it often does. Forging human relationships sometimes begs for proactive behavior – and sustaining them can require deliberate attention. We should devote a little effort to this, especially to inviting new people into our lives; there is little that brings more joy or self-understanding.

Aysha thinks it’s good to be understood! Send her your comments at abagchi@stanford.edu

The following is in response to Michael Lazarus’ March 3 column entitled, “Indian could work if done respectfully.”

In a self-interested quest for fame and fortune, Christopher Columbus, thinking he had arrived in the West Indies, dubbed the inhabitants Indians, at first out of honest ignorance and thereafter out of the arrogant vanity necessary to knowingly misapply a term to a people solely because one considers oneself the reference point of the universe.

In Mr. Lazarus’ misguided article, I hear echoes of someone and a society in search of not fame and fortune, but identity. Unfortunately, I also hear echoes of the ignorance and arrogant vanity of his lost predecessor.

Only the blissful ignorance of a cultural orphan could explain the suggestion that picking one out of the “tons of local tribes in the area” and designing a “culturally and historically correct” mascot benefits that lucky tribe.

Mr. Lazarus suggests that the tribe “perform during halftime shows at football and basketball games, displaying different aspects of its culture and customs.” Do we really want to watch people shopping for dinner or blowing out candles on a birthday cake at halftime? I suppose “Indians” are frozen in time and still fish the Bay in canoes when they get hungry. Even if they did, what crowd wouldn’t get energized by that?

Only the arrogant vanity of a Columbus would consider the exchange of “recognition, money, prominence and respect” for “fir[ing] up the crowd at home games” a good deal for the tribe. After all, who is doling out this recognition, money, prominence and respect? “Fundraisers and charity events?” Why didn’t you say so!

Mr. Lazarus claims that “[s]ports have the power to enhance a reputation,” that mascots done right “most importantly, remind the public that the tribe still in fact exists.” I suppose Chief Illiniwek was a great reminder that the Illinois tribe still exists; turns out the Illinois were not a tribe but rather a confederation of tribes, and that it does not exist as such anymore. And it’s great that “the average American” associates Seminoles with Florida, but how do they know they were largely displaced to Oklahoma? Maybe they should re-enact that at halftime.

Conversely, Mr. Lazarus claims that when the Indian mascot went away, it was “as if Native Americans were never a part of the Bay Area’s history.” Why? Because Americans did not have a mascot to remind them, of course, since a lack of media attention and pop culture indifference can erase history.

The real problem here is a lack of identity. There are great things about being Native, but there are tough things, too. At least the Fighting Irish were actually Irish that were fighting to some extent at some point. Do some family history, go visit the land of your ancestors, reconnect with who you are. Usurping the identity of a convenient local tribe temporarily for a halftime show is not the answer. Being Native does not stop when the buzzer sounds for some of us. And Stanford Indians are from India.

-Kimball Bighorse ‘06

Where comedy draws you in, drama encourages the viewer to draw back and appreciate the rawness of the character and the virtuoso performance of the actor. It is my opinion that the device of audience identification fails when applied to a dramatic moment or performance on TV. When an episode is written such that the audience is intended to identify with a character’s struggle or breakdown, inevitably the screen representation will alienate the viewer. Moments of vulnerability are difficult to project oneself onto because the vulnerability and breakdowns are so personal. As a result of our powerful emotional and physical memories from our own breakdowns, we pull ourselves away from the character by nitpicking: when I fight with my mom, it was like this; when my husband left me, I felt like this; when I found out my son had autism, I cried, etc. For the writers of a TV show, then, the task of depicting dramatic disappointments and failures on screen relies on the strength of the writing and the authenticity of the acting. If these are accomplished, the audience reacts not with, “That’s exactly how I feel!” but with, “I believe that that is how she feels, and I sympathize with her.”

This is the failure of NBC’s new family drama, “Parenthood.” I didn’t hate the pilot for sure, but I walked away from it feeling apathetic. I now realize that the multitude of characters–two parents, their four children, each child’s significant other(s) and their children–weighs down the script with excessive breakdowns, epiphanies and fights. I believe that an ensemble show thrives with the development of the worlds of the individual characters (although many critics disagree with this point on “Modern Family” and prefer to see the three units united in an episode).

In “Parenthood,” this development exists briefly and intensely in each character’s breakdown moment–Lauren Graham crying on a date, Peter Krause and his wife crying about their son’s Asperger’s diagnosis, Erika Christensen crying about her daughter’s seeming punishment of her for her law career, and Dax Shepard stressing about his girlfriend’s biological clock and his ex-girlfriend’s surprise. It’s a lot to digest in less than an hour, and it forces you to throw pity at the characters, not get to know them. Ron Howard, the producer of the show and the director of the original 1989 film, describes the central tenet of the show as the idea that, “There’s nothing funnier than watching people go through the pain that you’re feeling.” For me, this is problematic in that the show is funny in the way that Seinfeld is funny when he’s yelling in his characteristic voice and in that Howard is that implying this is a show targeted for the parent demographic. If the show is very subtly trying to wink at its parent audience, I’m lost because, well, I’ve never pumped a child out of my nether region.

As a “child” viewer, I’m also frustrated by the role of the children in the pilot. They are oversimplified to simultaneous problems and prophets: Mae Whitman, who plays Lauren Graham’s daughter, gets arrested for smoking pot, but then tells her mom how to dress for a date. Erika Christensen’s daughter’s only role is to reject her mother, suggesting that this show will be about never understanding the kids and watching the parents cope. Most frustrating, yet promising, is Peter Krause’s character’s son, who is diagnosed with Asperger’s halfway through the episode. The representation of Asperger’s is subtle, and one of my favorite moments in the pilot came from watching him jump into a puddle without rain clothing. Those moments of artistry and ambiance will save the show; however, this boy also awkwardly plays a kind of “Tiny Tim” character in that he unites the whole family and, by virtue of his disorder, argues to the viewers that, “Parenting takes a village.” I think the converse, that parenting is what happens when you’re alone with your kid, not when you’re consulting your brother about how to parent, is the more compelling one.

“Parenthood” may be the life raft its parent network, NBC, has been waiting for, but I hope that the show finds a better format than congregations at the grandparents’ Berkeley hippie mansion to create the family.

The tech rehearsal this past Tuesday covered a full rehearsal for the show in addition to a play on lighting effects. On one side of the studio looking onto the stage sat a number of performers preparing for their group pieces, some preparing their music, others chatting with a fellow performer as they swung their legs on a small ballet barre. Meanwhile, on the other half side of the studio, tall freestanding windows lined both sides of the stage, its dark floor dimly but sufficiently lit.

When the rehearsal began, lights focused on the stage floor, introducing Ali McKeon’s “Bloom,” bringing together her training in classical ballet and an interest in the exploration of lyricism in her contemporary work. The dynamic changes and intricate patterning reflected melodious parts of her classical training, as well as fast and athletically physical movements introduced by acoustic guitar–music with which McKeon hoped people could connect.

In another creative mix, Katherine Hawthorne combined her interests in physics and dance in “Fell.” She drew inspiration from principles of gravity and free fall, as well from her summer research in the Stanford physics department into her piece. “My technical understanding of [free fall] motivated my work, challenging me to remove assumptions that we as dancers hold about verticality and falling,” Hawthorne said. Further, she hopes to “problematize the role of the spectator,” just as modern physics concerns the role of the observer.

Like McKeon and Hawthorne, other choreographers also displayed artistic heft in their innovative pieces and a desire for engaging both the performers and the audience. Temo Peranda fused post-modern choreography with Native American dance traditions and mythology in his “Sacred Smoke.” His sound score included Mariachi harp, played live. Samantha Smith-Eppsteiner explored the art project phenomenon of “Post Secrets,” drawing inspiration from the PostSecret project founded by Frank Warren.

CC Chiu, a freshman at Stanford, said her piece “Push” was inspired by her relationship with her brother, who is a graduating senior. “This piece symbolizes progression and constant movement,” Chiu said, also referring to the representation of how the two siblings work together. Impressively synchronized, Chiu’s fast and playful piece represented a unique dance between brother and sister.

The compiled works comprised a mix of fierce, strong, sometimes rustic, other times melodious, parts in the both music and body movements. Diane Frank, concert director and dance faculty, commented, “The choreography this year is unusually strong, not just in the dancing but in conceptual framework.”

While McKeon predicted a great audience turnout at this weekend’s performances, she also expressed concern that there may not be enough seats for everyone.

“Stanford Dance needs a big enough theater of its own!” McKeon exclaimed. Sitting nearby, Katherine Disenhof ‘12 also agreed, with both commenting on how the athletic departments get far more recognition than dancers.

“I mean, we can also jump as high as basketball players,” Disenhof said jokingly.

Nonetheless, the performance is expected to be strong, captivating and entertaining, trumping any space available for the Stanford dancers.

“This is, by any standard, a concert that pushes the thresholds in highly engaging and theatrical ways,” Frank added.

In the decade that I’ve loved La Bamba, it’s risen in popularity and correspondingly grown less dilapidated. Still, the ambiance is eclectic at best. The bright yellow exterior is festooned with colorful murals and painted cursive letters imploring passers-by to “Experience the La Bamba Difference!” Inside, another mural depicting a peasant-y El Salvadorian street scene shares the stage with a changing cast of truly atrocious art pieces. My personal favorite is a gaudily framed mirror emblazoned with a picture of a waterfall and softly lit from behind. Mariachi music and the cacophonous metallic-sounding theme songs of several pinball machines greet patrons. And while there used to be a few small tables scattered helter-skelter throughout the small space, the city of Mountain View recently declared this setup in violation of fire codes. So now you can only sit along plastic counters that line the taqueria’s periphery, which can make for a communal (and thus awkward) dining experience.

But you go to La Bamba for the food, not the ambiance. And the food is damn good. What La Bamba specifically makes best constitutes a fundamental point of contention in the Danforth family, but several items cannot be missed. In terms of the basics, La Bamba’s blissfully simple grilled chicken is perfectly tender and flavorful. I like to get the grilled chicken tacos, served on freshly made corn tortillas and topped with really good (but spicy!) salsa, chopped onions and cilantro; but my big brother swears by the grilled chicken burrito. La Bamba also makes incredible carnitas, slow-cooked pork whose wonderfully crispy outside gives way to the perfectly seasoned, succulent interior. Again, I like the carnitas in tacos, but it also works great as a burrito filling.

But La Bamba isn’t your typical taqueria. The food is actually El Salvadorian, which means they have certain uncommon regional specialties, the most notable of them being the pupusa. No one I’ve ever talked to frantically about the glory of La Bamba pupusas (and there have been many) understands that I’m not talking about papooses, the Algonquian word for an infant child. So as a primer, a pupusa is a deep-fried, extra thick corn tortilla stuffed with cheese and shredded pork and served on a bed of cabbage and carrot salad. The pupusas at La Bamba are piping hot, delicious and just plain addictive–only don’t think about how it’s all going straight to your hips.

In conclusion, La Bamba is the greatest (definitely the best thing Mountain View has going for it). It’s cheap, uses fresh ingredients and is just so tasty. When I think of happiness, I think of washing down their pupusas with cinnamon-laced horchata. Everyone should go, preferably for every meal–unless you’re on a diet or taking a snooty foreign dignitary on a high-stakes first date.

Coll lectured for an hour Thursday on “the globalization of terror” at Encina Hall, focusing especially on Pakistan’s role in — and perspective on — South Asian security.

The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies presented Coll as the 2010 Payne Distinguished Lecturer. He has spent 20 years as a foreign correspondent, with his first news story on Al-Qaeda in 1993, and served as the managing editor of the Washington Post from 1998 to 2004.

Coll argued that the Pakistani army’s institutional memory of the cost-effectiveness of mujahedeen fighters, dating back to their employment against the Soviets in the late 1980’s, has made them a vital part of Pakistani strategy, not easily removed even under American pressure.

The Pakistani army’s tolerance for militant groups, Coll argued, emerged less out of ideology than out of practicality. For a Pakistani general in the Punjab region, Coll said, “jihad is something you do at the office. It’s not something you bring home.”

This has meant that Pakistan has long tried to maintain an often paradoxical balance between authorizing the actions of militant groups and maintaining the goodwill of its American ally.

“This sense of doing things simultaneously is literally embedded within the system,” Coll said.

Coll admitted that he felt Pakistan, for a long time, had not been wrong in its assessment of the practical benefits of the fighters, nor in its resistance to American pressures to crack down, at least among some parts of the Pakistani army.

Pakistani leaders, especially in the military, also remember the failures of American policy in the late 1980’s following the Soviets’ war in Afghanistan and an ensuing “lost decade.”

“U.S. policy has contributed to the problem U.S. policy is now trying to address,” Coll said.

He added, however, that the acceleration of political events in the region since 2007 had changed the merits of this assessment — and said that, slowly, a shift in Pakistani attitudes was resulting.

“Managed jihad” is also inseparable from Pakistan’s policies toward India, Coll noted. The army in Pakistan picked up the mujahedeen model and applied it to conflict with India in Kashmir in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s.

“And it worked,” he said, “600,000 Indian troops were tied down in Kashmir fighting a force of no more than a few thousand.”

Coll said that, for the United States, the most vital task was “to convince the Pakistanis that it’s in their interest to convert violence to politics.”

Coll also noted the disappointment of an effort in this direction in late 2006 and 2007, when India and Pakistan came close to reaching a framework for normalized relations. The two nations have been in conflict since partition in 1947, and Coll repeatedly emphasized that Pakistan’s concerns toward India drove many of its actions.

That diplomatic effort collapsed after actions by Pervez Musharraf, the former president of Pakistan, precipitated a loss of his control over the country. The process destabilized politics within the country, leading to a democratic rebirth on the one hand, but on the other, complicating the process of foreign relations.

“One thing about Musahrraf was, you had one negotiator,” Coll said.

One story stuck in Coll’s mind as an example of the lost possibilities of that diplomatic effort, which collapsed. In the fall of 2006, a Pakistani businessman heard from his brother in the Pakistani army that negotiations were imminent. The businessman went to the border between India and Pakistan in the Punjab and started leasing transit stations, assuming that he could profit between the growth of trade between the two nations and the new economic opportunities it would offer.

“I think of that brother with the warehouses repeatedly,” Coll said.

“The goal of U.S. policy is to get back to that moment,” he added.

Coll noted that, despite the immense complexities of Pakistan, the capacity for normalized relations with its powerful neighbor remained strong outside the corridors of power.

“Fundamentally, the middle classes in Pakistan and India are way ahead of their governments on the reconciliation issue,” Coll said. “Way ahead.”

Under the revised policy, international students will be obligated to purchase Cardinal Care — the University’s $3,000 annual healthcare package — in 12-month increments. Currently, Stanford’s insurance policy has an “opt out” mechanism that allows students to forego Cardinal Care if they provide proof that they have adequate insurance coverage from another source, such as parents, a spouse or another insurance provider.

Domestic students remain free to choose their own insurance provider.

Currently, seven percent of the undergraduate population, or 488 students, are international. Thirty-two percent of graduate students, 2,734 students in total, are international.

Requiring Cardinal Care solely for international students “is discriminatory because it assumes that domestic students can better evaluate whether their coverage is adequate or not,” said Fabian Sahl, a graduate student in International Policy Studies. Sahl has been at the forefront of the opposition to the mandatory coverage plan, co-authoring a petition that demands that Stanford revoke the proposed plan and keep the existing policy. The petition had more than 500 signatures on Wednesday night.

Ira Friedman, director of Vaden Health Center and a major proponent of the Cardinal Care plan, has seen first-hand what happens when international students fall through the coverage cracks.

“I see these folks drowning in the river,” Friedman said, “and I think, ‘Can’t we put a fence upstream to keep them from falling in?’”

Friedman said the issue of compulsory Cardinal Care for internationals was recommended as far back as 2008 in the Student Mental Health and Well-being Task Force Report. He backs the proposal because he said it provides a safety net that will eliminate medical snafus that have flared up several times a quarter — “problems that occur almost exclusively for international students.”

Friedman said that about 80 percent of international students already buy Cardinal Care, but the 20 percent who have other coverage plans have run into problems ranging from being denied in-patient treatment for mental health conditions to having to relocate to a county hospital when they have a medical emergency.

But for Sahl, Friedman’s well-meant fence curtails his personal choice.

“This is a private institution, and the move is paternalistic,” Sahl said. “We can very well decide for ourselves if our coverage meets the standard that Cardinal Care does.”

Sunil Sandhu, a Ph.D. student in electrical engineering and native of Singapore, rejects the move on principle, calling it “collective punishment rather than corrective action.” He is currently covered under Cardinal Care, but is considering opting out.

“I think everyone should have their own choices, “ Sandhu said, citing his own personal care packages, which he said are tailored to back injuries he sustained in a recent fall. Cardinal Care doesn’t cover Sandhu’s specific physical therapy expenses, and his inability to tailor-make his care package is a problem.

“How much mental coverage do you really need?” Sandhu asked. “Vaden says you need X amount for mental health and X amount for injuries. How can they decide that? It varies from person to person. It makes no sense.”

In mid-February, after the proposed changes were announced, concerned members of the international community wanted answers. Adeline Agut, a graduate student in civil and environmental engineering and member of the French Student Association, along with John Pearson, director of Bechtel International Center, organized meetings with Friedman to discuss steps to get the administration to reconsider the plan.

As an alternative, students asked the University to lay out guidelines for what is considered minimum acceptable coverage and require students who wish to waive Cardinal Care to provide written statements of benefits from their alternate provider.

“From what I’ve heard, Stanford is pretty open to negotiations,” Agut said. “When they say they want the best for us, I believe them. I don’t think they’re evil.”

In meetings with Friedman, students also asked that the University extend the time frame for reviews of the new plan in order to get more student input.

But Sandhu questioned why students — specifically graduates — were blindsided by the policy shift in the first place and left having to scramble for a last-minute response. He blamed a lack of internal communication between the GSC and the Vaden Insurance Advisory Committee (VIAC).

“The GSC just let these guys [the VIAC] go, and there was no coordination,” Sandhi said. “So if, from the start, the VIAC heard that there was this move to get mandatory Cardinal Care for international students, they should have communicated with the GSC and said that this is going to happen. If they had, we wouldn’t have been in this mess.”

Daniel Becker, an electrical engineering Ph.D. student from Germany, is currently on an insurance plan offered by a private German company targeted specifically toward extended stays abroad. Becker’s insurance plan — which costs around $110 per month — provides worldwide coverage, includes dental, vision and prescription drugs, and allows him to freely choose which doctors to visit without the need for a referral, he said. Cardinal Care does not include dental or vision coverage and provides limited out-of-network coverage.

Becker is concerned with the higher premiums he will have to pay under Cardinal Care.

“My biggest concern with mandatory enrollment in Cardinal Care is the loss of coverage compared to my current plan,” Becker said. “Most importantly, Cardinal Care only reimburses 80 percent of the cost incurred at out-of-network providers. Given that serious injuries or illnesses can easily lead to immense health care bills, this puts me at a significant financial risk any time I travel, be it for attending a conference or for visiting my family back home.”

Sahl is currently insured under a German plan that cooperates with the Swiss provider Elvia in the United States. He said that the cost of his insurance policy is roughly $2,000 dollars cheaper a year than Cardinal Care.

Friedman acknowledged that some students, such as Becker and Sahl, are savvy healthcare purchasers and have chosen cost-effective alternatives. For students like those, Friedman is negotiating a “feasible process for exceptions.”

“We’re listening very carefully to student feedback on this,” Friedman said. “The policy is aimed at trying to address a problem that is occurring only exclusively in one quarter of the student population. From a public health viewpoint, we can and should try to address it.”

HARRISON TRUONG/The Stanford Daily

Now, what started out as a one slate race last week has emerged as a free-for-all after several slates tossed in their hats in just a few days’ time.

To keep their executive hopes afloat, each slate now has little more than 24 hours to present 200 student signatures to the Elections Commission.

For the first round of the election process, interested candidates must gather signatures from the students via the ASSU petitions Web site or Elections Commission-approved paper forms. The petition period opened at noon on Feb. 12 and will close at 4 p.m. on Friday.

After petitions are verified, the Elections Commission will on March 9 release the list of candidates eligible to continue on to the April campaign.

As of press time, only one slate — juniors Thom Scher and Stephanie Werner — had passed the 200-signature threshold, according to ASSU Assistant Elections Commissioner for Undergraduate Elections Cotis Mitchell ’12. The Elections Commission validated the Scher-Werner petition Wednesday evening.

Wanted: VP Candidate

While Scher and Werner announced their hopeful candidacy early, Scher’s road to a running mate was, he said, a two-month process.

Scher, who could have graduated early this year, decided to stay another year in order to run for ASSU office. He first began considering a run for executive, and potential running mates, in December.

Initially, Scher discussed a possible run for executive with a pool of ASSU veterans, including former chairs of the Undergraduate Senate Tiq Chapa ’10 and Shelley Gao ’11 and current chair Varun Sivaram ’11. Scher asked Gao to be his potential running mate, saying he “would have probably run with her had she said yes.”

But Gao declined — briefly appearing on a different slate with Danny Crichton ‘11, also The Daily’s former columns editor — and Scher paired up with long-time friend Werner.

At Stanford, Scher and Werner have worked together as executive director and director of development, respectively, of Stanford’s Charity Fashion Show. Their friendship, however, dates back to four years ago, when they met during the Stanford High School Summer College Program.

Both said their slate formed naturally: “We didn’t have to sync our calendars because we are already synced,” Scher said.

Last year, Scher intended to run for Undergraduate Senate with the Students for a Better Stanford coalition, but eventually decided to accept a job with Student Activities and Leadership instead, which he said lent him experience with University administration.

Werner has worked for The Daily and the CoHo.

Will They? Won’t They?

Only close observers of the petitions process were able to catch a glimpse of the short-lived candidacy of Crichton and Gao for the executive jobs. Their petition appeared late last Monday, but was taken down just two days later.

Gao is serving her second term in the Undergraduate Senate, and is also a Daily columnist.

After initially considering a run, Gao said she came to the conclusion that she did not want to commit to an executive post, and will instead pursue other avenues to serve the Stanford community. Late Wednesday, Gao had not opened a petition for a Senate candidacy while Crichton joined the race as a Senate candidate after resigning from The Daily.

The Chappie Returns

Under the slate billed “Two Dope Boys in a Caddylack,” Billy Kemper ’11 and Josh Meisel ’12 joined the executive race early. One in a long line of The Stanford Chaparral-affiliated executive bids, the duo affirmed their determination for the job.

Kemper and Meisel believe they have the skills to direct the ASSU, Kemper boasting his student government experience — he was sophomore class treasurer in high school — and Meisel citing involvement with nearly every campus student group, all of which he signed up for at the activities fair.

The two pledge to stick out their entire term if elected, even through Meisel’s injuries.

Kemper and Meisel had 188 signatures at press time.

Groundbreaking Grads

Last Sunday, ASSU veterans Ryan Peacock and Jonathan Bakke, both doctoral students in chemical engineering, began their petition drive. The pair first met during the recruiting weekend for the chemical engineering graduate program in 2006.

Until Angelina Cardona ’11 and Kelsei Wharton ’12 announced their candidacy Wednesday afternoon, Peacock, a Graduate Student Council (GSC) member, and Bakke, who chairs the Nominations Commission, were the only candidates with major ASSU experience.

Now in his second GSC term, Peacock serves as the group’s financial officer; Bakke served two years on the University’s Committee of Research.

Notably, Peacock and Bakke are the only doctoral students to run for ASSU Executive in the last decade, according to past election records.

Since 1999, only two non-undergraduate students have served as executives: graduate student in genetics John Mills was vice president in 1999, and coterminal student in computer science David Gobaud is the current president.

Undergraduate students historically make up a larger number of the total voters, which may hurt the Peacock-Bakke slate in the general election in April, where slates must win by a majority. Last year, 3,351 undergraduates and 1,783 graduates voted in the election.

Bakke said he hopes that students evaluate the slate on their platform rather than their graduation year. At press time, the two had collected 177 signatures.

“I would hope that everybody can take an unbiased look at the candidates,” Bakke said.

‘Criminalizing Dark Skies’

Also entering the race Sunday, the “No Rain Campaign!” slate of Katherine Heflin ‘11 and Daniel Leifer ‘10 burst onto the scene with a YouTube campaign video. True to their slate name, Heflin and Leifer proposed solutions to what they call one of Stanford’s most pressing issues: precipitation.

But the pair refutes suggestions that their slate is a joke.

“The ASSU race begins to become a lot about broken promises,” Leifer said. “So long as someone is running, why not promise that it’s not going to rain next year?”

Leifer cited experience as serving on the Vaden Advisory Board, among his campus activities.

To fill out their petition form, the slate initially flipped a coin to decide who would be president.

So far in the petitions phase, the two have been victims of technical difficulties. At one point, the slate lost between seven and 80 signatures due to an incorrect petitions Web site URL. The votes were recovered yesterday, and the two have 177 total signatures.

Call to Service

Cardona and Wharton entered the race Wednesday afternoon. Cardona said she decided to run last Friday, while Wharton made his decision late Tuesday.

Cardona, a freshman resident assistant in Trancos, has been involved in campus politics since her freshman year, when she served as Branner dorm president. She worked for the successful executive campaign of Jonny Dorsey ‘09 and Fagan Harris ‘09, going on to serve as their mental health co-chair. She was involved in founding the Wellness Room.

It was Dorsey and Harris who kept calling Cardona as she weighed her decision last week, ultimately convincing her to run.

“They were the ones calling me late Thursday night,” she said. “They were a big push in the right direction, I would say.”

As soon as she decided to run, Cardona immediately knew that Wharton — the current deputy Senate chair, who she knows through Foundation for Education, an afterschool math program — would be an appealing choice for vice president.

Cardona said she liked Wharton’s record as a campus leader.

The two are the only undergraduates candidates with major ASSU experience. Their petition open just seven hours, the two had already gathered 190 signatures on Wednesday night.

Down to the Wire

Austin Guzman ’11 and Patrick Mahoney ‘11, who opened their petition late Wednesday afternoon, have the largest gap to fill by Friday afternoon. Guzman and Mahoney, under the slate name “The Guzman-Mahoney Referendum Demanding Action,” still needed 184 signatures at press time.

In light of the resignation of former ASSU vice president Jay de la Torre ’11 in November, all candidates, save Guzman and Mahoney, said they would be able to serve out their entire term if elected.

Guzman and Mahoney did not return requests for comment on Wednesday.

Thus far, only Kemper and Meisel have committed to using the ASSU public financing plan. Heflin and Leifer said they would spend no money on their campaign, while the other slates have not yet decided.

In total, 4,766 undergraduates, 436 coterms and 256 graduate students have signed petitions for candidates, slates and special fee requests.

Nikhil Joshi contributed to this report.