Suite selection process spurns seniors

Mandell Family Hall has four-person suites.

Sunday morning, 11:30 a.m.: figures straggle into the common room one by one. “What a night, huh?” “Trim in a bit?” “I’ll give you my One Card if you get me a coffee from Dunks.”—all common phrases heard throughout a Babson suite on a Sunday morning after a long night spent studying. All participating in a scene that is as traditional as Woody at Dunks, Midnight Breakfast, or stooping.

Having the opportunity to live in a suite at Babson is a privilege. However, that privilege is currently being taken away from those who have earned it the most: seniors. After this year’s suite selection process was completed, it was clear something was awry. Instantly, large numbers of seniors took to social media to display their dismay at how quickly the suites ran out. Numbers that were previously considered locks for a suite did not even come close. One common theme was prevalent: there are currently a large number of senior students without suites.

Numbers have been thrown out, such as 65% of suites being composed of juniors. Furthermore, examples of suites being occupied by a majority of juniors are being cited left and right. Over 85 seniors without suites are currently a part of a Facebook group message. Amongst all this speculation, one thing remains clear: something went wrong.

The housing system is supposed to be designed to ensure fairness. However, there are rising juniors with better housing numbers than rising seniors. As the current housing code is written, rising juniors with enough credits to be considered rising seniors are entered into the same lottery as all rising seniors. This provision was designed considering that these rising juniors would be graduating early with rising seniors. However, there is no stipulation that these rising juniors must declare their intention to actually graduate early. This leaves a large number of rising juniors with the same opportunity to live in a suite as a rising senior.

The grievance is not with juniors living in suites. The grievance lies in the fact that certain juniors were given the same opportunity to live in a suite as seniors. It is understood that it is common practice for seniors to pull in one or two juniors to complete their suite, but the fact that there are suites composed mainly of juniors is simply not right.

Seniority is a term that has never been more applicable. Seniors who have contributed to the Babson community for three years are now being hung out to dry by the very community they helped to build. No senior wants to spend their final year living in a single in Putney while the suites are occupied by a large percentage of juniors.

Senior year is supposed to be a year spent making memories and cultivating relationships that have been formed over the first three years of college. The current housing system seriously compromises that opportunity, and something must be done.

Four- and six-person housing must be redrawn. Juniors should not be placed in the same pool as seniors unless they declare their intent to graduate early. Occupancy of suites should also be reconsidered. Suites should be forced to be occupied by a majority of seniors. Therefore, two juniors could live in a Mcullough or Pietz suite, or one junior could live in Map Hill.

As a rising senior, I want to look back on my Babson experience positively. I want a fair opportunity to have that Sunday morning in a suite comprised of my closest friends. I want the same opportunity for rising juniors when they become rising seniors. I want a housing system that rewards seniority instead of deeming it insignificant.

I am not alone in these sentiments, and we urge Babson to hear our concerns. As future graduates going out into the real world, we will certainly be asked about our college experience. Will we say that we had an amazing four years fostered by a supportive administration, or will we say #ThisIsNotOurBabson?

Life and social media, discordant

Morgan Roth questions why she posted an Instagram photo in the midst of a family crisis. Photo courtesy of Morgan Roth.

Saturday morning, I posted a Instagram picture from the Mandarin Oriental in Miami. By then the tears had stopped, and I had begun mentally preparing for the journey ahead. My 14-year-old brother commented, curiously inquiring why I was in Miami. My heart hurt as I thought of how much he didn’t know. On Saturday afternoon, I hugged a cop whose partner had just committed suicide as I stood across from my dad’s hospital bed.

48 hours earlier: “Who am I speaking to?” An unfamiliar female voice answered the phone. I hesitated for a moment; it was far from the “Hello sunshine!” my father’s warm voice usually greets me with when I call. Regardless, I smiled, then responded that I was his daughter. The women, who turned out to be a nurse, nonchalantly answered, “We found your father unresponsive in his home this morning. Nurses tried to wake him up, but they couldn’t, so he’s on his way to the hospital. It’s not looking good. I have his phone, though I didn’t know who to call.” My mind went blank. It felt like a year passed before I finally thanked her. As if she had just realized the gravity of what she had told this man’s daughter, she added a shaky apology and hung up.

I wasn’t completely unprepared for a phone call like this, because my father’s health had been deteriorating for almost a year. But at this moment I was in the most helpless position. I put down the phone and stared blankly out of the 24th floor of my apartment in Shanghai. Days before all this happened, my Instagram featured a picture in Shanghai with the caption “I think I’ll stay here.” How ironic, because after that I was on the next flight out to Miami.

It is so easy to paint a pretty picture of a perfect life online—the hard part is getting through real times.

Why in the world did I Instagram while my dad’s life was in crisis? Was I being selfish, vain, ignorant or insensitive? As I think back and wonder why I did, I look at all the filtered moments of my life and realize I did it because it’s nice to see something that looks so pretty and perfect when you are living through what feels like the worst moments of your life.

It is rare to see a grown man in uniform crying in public. He stood silently weeping in the corner for this fallen friend. He recounted to me how it was completely unexpected, because his partner “was the happiest guy”; he had wife and a kid who he loved with all his heart. He told me that he just couldn’t wrap his mind around how this could happen. I thought silently to myself how it is always the ones who we least expect it to be. The ones who are in the most pain are usually the ones who are able to hide it the best.

Instagram and Snapchat make it so easy to make it look like life is perfect. There are filters, edits and timed views to give people a window into your life. You get to choose exactly what people see and you hold the power to control people’s perception of your life.

Every day, social media is flooded with endless images of the seemingly perfect lives of celebrities, models, socialites, and our own friends. They draw a range of emotions from those who view the images, from happiness, inspiration, and awe, to anger, jealously and sadness.

Whether it is freshman year of college and everyone looks like they’re having the time of their lives, or junior year and everyone is posting glamorous pictures from study abroad, it makes me wonder: is everyone’s life perfect? Of course not, but people aren’t going to post the moments of their lives where they are stressed out or in pain; they’re going to post the happiest, most exciting times.

I think I know what my friends are going through because I commented on their last Facebook post or liked their last Instagram picture. But it is not until I finally see them that I understand the whole story. It’s so easy to assume that you’re the only one going through a hard time and no one would understand if you told them. But chances are, no one knows you’re actually going through anything. Some problems are definitely bigger than others, but it doesn’t mean we are helpless. It is so easy to paint a pretty picture of a perfect life online—the hard part is getting through real times. So lean on your friends when you need to, because the real ones are always going to be there for you.

Letter to the Editor: On the diversity petition Op/Ed


Dear Babson Free Press Editor,

I applaud your effort in taking the initiative to research and put forth factual data so that we as students are more informed about the various clubs and resources we have on campus. An article such as yours will receive backlash due to its sensitive subject matter however, it does what all great journalism pieces do: It forces people to have a difficult conversation from different points of view.

I cannot validate nor invalidate any individual’s experience at this school as every person’s experience is different. I can however, share my experience in the hopes that people realize that Babson is diverse in many aspects. I am not one to actively seek diverse courses or subjects but as my experience will convey, diversity permeates all throughout the college.

My second semester during my first year here I was required to take Rhetoric II in which an openly gay, white male professor taught us about the experiences of black lesbian females and the intersectional oppression they face from not one, but three groups. The professor was neither black nor female yet was still able to teach us and open our minds to the idea of oppression as “the sum of all parts” and apply those critical ideas to various topics including our own lives. The professor excelled at two things: exposing us to a group whose oppression often goes unnoticed and helping us realize that this oppression can be universally applied to every form of oppression. Once again, I did not know the topic of the class before I took it nor did I actively seek out this subject matter however I was exposed to it, and thereby allowed to make my own critical analysis.

This semester I took a course called South Asian History. Many people would expect a person from South Asia to teach this course. However, the person who taught me about the region where I am from was from Maine. Yes, a white man from Maine who has a PhD in History taught me about the South Asian region. He was able to deliver the material in a clear unbiased manner that taught us to think critically about the problems that plague the area. His race, ethnicity, socioeconomic background, gender or sexual orientation simply did not allow him to have any advantages or disadvantages when it came to the delivery of the subject matter.

Professors at this school are hired because they are learned academics who have devoted years of their lives studying the subjects that they teach. Discrediting them because of their race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or perspectives is shamefully wrong. Professors who qualify for an open position based on merit should not be forgone in favor of professors who have a diverse social backgrounds. If hiring new faculty and staff to ‘be more diverse’ is the goal, what happens to the current faculty?

Furthermore, I would like to remind the first year students who are so vehemently in favor of this petition to realize that they have only experienced one semester at this college. There is simply not enough data for them to make conclusions about the entire institution without having experienced it fully. Their opinions are valued and offer a perspective into their experiences but it must be realized that most of them have only experienced 4 or 5 courses.

Lastly, I welcome informed discussion, debate and conversation about this topic but I will not stand for attacks on my own or other people’s character, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, or socioeconomic background because they should not discredit my own opinions that I have expressed above. I further acknowledge that my experience may not be the same as other’s experiences but I am open to hearing about these. I would like to remind all students that diversity encompasses the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or other ideologies.

Thank You,
Vikrant Ghate

Decompressing (for free) on Babson’s beautiful trails

Photo courtesy of Andrew Plifka

As any Babson student knows, multitasking and being extremely efficient are necessities for survival. Drowning in work, excessive stress, and the feeling of being completely inadequate compared to one’s peers are not uncommon occurrences on this campus. And, While not the best culinary experience any of us has ever had, Trim’s infamous “all you care to eat” style can really start to become “all you care to gain” on our waistlines. However, when a student looks to have a relaxing experience or peel themselves away from their overflowing email inbox, they should not simply look for the typical activities and happenings on campus. They should do something that offers a multitude of benefits for just one investment of time.

With limited financial resources, many students can seem trapped here at Babson, which is simply an unpleasant way to feel about one’s college. However, many students do not know is that they are actually within a safe walking distance to walking and running trails and multiple grocery stores. Over the past few weeks, I explored ways to get off campus for a grand total of nothing.

Right here on campus, we have a running and walking trail that offers students an innovative and healthy way to check out some of New England’s iconic foliage and fall weather in the next few weeks. Past Coleman Hall, one can find the Sudbury Path. The Town of Wellesley has actually created an expansive network of safe and easily accessible trails. I was able to start near Coleman Hall, travel through parts of Olin College, and continue into the forest near the Wellesley Recycling center. The path was well marked, clean, and close to help. It offers students an opportunity to get exercise, fresh air, and decompress after a long day here at Babson. In addition to the Sudbury Path, I have also discovered a safe route, complete with sidewalks, to Whole Food Market in Wellesley. A twenty- to thirty-minute walk each way offers exercise, an opportunity to explore the community surrounding Babson, and the chance to grab a variety of food and necessities.

So go run, walk, or take a leisurely stroll in nature; it’s actually a very feasible option. We have great resources that are not well marked or talked about. Take advantage of the benefits that these free trails and routes have to offer so you don’t find yourself as stressed out, bloated from Trim Food, or bored in the future.

Map courtesy of the Town of Wellesley

A Binary Choice


When Americans cast their vote for president on November 8th, they will be deciding between two and only two candidates, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  While many voters, particularly millennials, are justifiably angry and frustrated with a political system that divides Americans in a way not seen since the Civil War, there is no room for a protest vote or for staying home — not this time.

If you are not convinced that a protest vote can have severe unintended consequences, we need look no further than 2000 when Al Gore lost Florida by 537 votes, throwing the election to George W. Bush, who started the Iraq War under false pretenses, ballooned the deficit, and drove our economy over a cliff.  The protest candidate that year was Ralph Nader, whose 97,488 Florida votes were directly responsible for the Bush victory.

We face a choice between two candidates with very different visions for America.  Trump proposes mass deportation, building a wall to stop Mexican “rapists,” and banning Muslims from entering our country.  He believes that climate change is a Chinese hoax and that massive tax cuts for the rich will somehow trickle down to the middle class without ballooning our deficit.  He admires Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin and encourages Russia to conduct Internet espionage on Trump’s political opponents.  

Trump’s birther movement has falsely challenged the legitimacy of our first black president.  He promotes violence at his rallies to the point of encouraging “Second Amendment people” to take matters into their own hands should he lose the election.  He would pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and start a war with Iran when they make “gestures” at our sailors.  He would walk away from the Paris climate agreement signed by over 100 countries and appoint conservative Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe vs. Wade while limiting a woman’s health care options.  

Alternatively, Hillary Clinton would carry forward the President Obama agenda that has focused on addressing climate change, expanded healthcare coverage, largely ended two wars, cut our deficit in half, and produced a record 78 consecutive months of job growth.  Clinton would also push forward an agenda of debt-free tuition for students whose families make under $125,000/year, a $15/hour minimum wage, gun safety initiatives, and increased taxes on the wealthy to pay for a needed infrastructure jobs program.  She has more experience than any previous presidential candidate having served as first lady of Arkansas, first lady of the United States, U.S. senator from New York, and secretary of state.

When we go to the polls on November 8th, we should heed the advice of Senator Bernie Sanders, whose extraordinary campaign brought millions of millennials into the election process.  

“I’m the longest-serving independent in the history of the United States Congress. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature. When we’re talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not time for a protest vote. This is time to elect Hillary Clinton.”

Sen. Sanders has it right.

Why the Donald Trump represents the modern day republican party


The Republican Party today seems astonished by the fact that Donald J. Trump is their party’s nominee in this election. The Republican establishment acts as if Trump is an unfair hand they have been dealt with, without any of their own actions contributing to his success.

There is a general outrage that the party has chosen an individual who is expressing hateful and vile judgements about various groups of potential voters.  However, there should be no surprise that Republican voters applaud Trump’s ideas such as the “Great, Great Wall” and “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” when the party has spent years telling immigrants they are not welcome here through “self-deportation”, the anti-Dream act, and anti-refugee rhetoric. The Republican Party has relied on fear mongering as a tactic for years by establishing suspicion of Latinos and Muslims long before Trump.

Republican lawmakers express shock when Republican voters cheer at Trump’s inappropriate derision and actions, even as they themselves deny our president common courtesy, for instance, by not standing during a state of the union address or by not giving a fair hearing to a supreme court nominee.

Republicans have no justification for their surprise at the rise of Trump considering that they have been laying the foundation over the last seven years for such an authoritarian and egotistical candidate. It all began when Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader, said in an interview to the National Journal, “It is our top political priority over the next two years to deny President Obama a second term”. The Republican Party at that point decided to block all legislation and policy on all issues regardless of urgency or merit, with examples including: Veterans Affairs Funding Bill, Infrastructure Bill, Equal Pay for Women Bill, Student Loan Forgiveness, Bring Jobs Home Act etc… The greatest absurdity, however, is the fact that Republicans claim to back policies that support the former bills and acts, but since, it was President Obama who supported those policies, the Republican establishment couldn’t respect it.

In the seven years that President Obama has been in office, he has been filibustered over 500 times. For some context, Lyndon B. Johnson had two filibusters during the same time period. President Obama has also had 79 nominee blocks during his administration, versus 68 total for all of the other presidents combined.

That same disrespectful, uncompromising and dictatorial nature is exemplified in Donald Trump’s oratory, with examples such as, “Because you’ll be in jail” as he threatened his opponent with jail time or “You have to take out their families” referring to how to deal with terrorism through war crimes; clearly showing no respect for the judicial process.

The party is now reaping what they have sown. The Republican establishment prioritized the happiness of its right wing voter base rather than approaching the issues that mattered to the majority of Americans.

The Republican Party has not moved from that model. Even after condemning Trump’s policies, most Republican lawmakers have endorsed Donald Trump due to fear of their political futures. Until earlier this month, respected Republicans such as Paul Ryan and John McCain had backed Trump, even after Trump refused to denounce an endorsement from the leader of the Ku Klux Klan.

Republican leaders supported Donald Trump through comments that denigrate Latinos, Blacks, Muslims, disabled, and now women. Even now, the Republicans who are now abandoning Trump are doing so because his comments about sexual abuse affect their predominantly white right-wing voter base.

The Washington Post sums up the situation: “Trump is the GOP’s Frankenstein monster”. Conservative leaders through their words and actions demonstrated that government, politics, and political parties were institutions that did not deserve respect, and now it is their own nominee who is taking advantage of those perceptions.

Conservatives leaders have incited nothing but fear, hate, distrust, and resentment in their most avid supporters; therefore, it should be no surprise that they have nominated Donald Trump, a product of their own actions.

Links used for Evidence:






Babson student life: Ranked #1 in bureaucracy


The Babson website proudly compares starting a club at Babson to “starting a new venture,”- even alluding to the notion that participating in student life functions as entrepreneurial practice. However, every club’s events must be approved by SGA, every piece of marketing material must include an SGA logo, and every dollar raised during these events must be returned to SGA. In reality, students who start and run clubs look less like entrepreneurs and more like bureaucrats. It is quite ironic that a school ranked #1 in entrepreneurship forces students to create the collegiate equivalent of government agencies in order to have a registered organization on campus.

While the structure of the system might be slightly ironic, the plethora of issues that stem from it are no laughing matter. The current incentive structure creates an environment where club leaders can ask for a large amount of money as many times as they can. Since the money they are spending is not “their” money, there is no organic incentive against requesting funding for pizza for every meeting, even if such spending is relatively frivolous.

Since the government decides which events can go through, and at times choose to not fund or partially fund events, club leaders are incentivized to submit as many budgets as possible, in the hope that some get approved. This system leads to an enormous amount of proposals and creates an environment that wastes the time of both club leaders and SGA members. On top of that, the need to request funding for each event creates a massive amount of uncertainty regarding whether the event will be able to be financed per the specifications of the club.

A good example of the issues with the current system can be found with the experience of the Babson Political Association. Caleb Wursten, founder of the BPA, expressed to me how difficult it is to plan events with such “immense levels of uncertainty.” He says that club leaders are essentially forced to “shotgun budgets and hope some get approved.” As someone incredibly passionate about politics who founded the very first political association on campus, Wursten (‘19) is exactly the type of student that the system should encourage. Instead, he finds himself in an environment that constantly inhibits his club’s flexibility and holds his passion bureaucratically hostage to the extent that running the club at times creates more stress than enjoyment. It comes as no surprise then that the government weights put on the back of organization leaders lead to high club turnover and lack of club longevity.

Clubs on campus should operate to fulfill the needs of their members and students who are interested in that particular club. The college should finance those organizations, not because every little function they perform benefits the whole campus, but because they provide value to the students who are interested in that activity.

Isaiah M. Williams, Co-President of Babson TV, explained to me how his club has had “a very difficult time pitching a budget” because SGA doesn’t exactly see the projects and events of Babson TV translating well to “the greater student body.” So much for the “diversity” of clubs that Babson advertises on their clubs page. Williams (’19) goes on to explain how in his presentation to SGA, many members seemed disinterested, on their phones, and generally seemed to lack care about a subject that he and the many members of his club are passionate about. His description of the immense difficulty in navigating the SGA “red tape” contrasts almost comically with Babson’s claim on their club page that “Red tape is kept to a minimum.” People who love media and film should be the ones deciding what projects can be completed, but in the centralized economy that is Babson student life, the government is the one who decides whether a a club’s function adds value, and they do that by questioning whether it adds value to the whole community. In the real world, instead of attempting to add a little value to the entire population, companies fill specific niches and add a lot of value to specific segments of the population. If we start emulating real world venture creation, maybe our student life can finally live up to our #1 entrepreneurship ranking.

Aside from the minutiae and specifics of the funding process, the entire mindset behind student life is misguided. Marketing materials must have an SGA logo because the events are funded by SGA. Any money raised with the assistance of SGA funds must be returned immediately to SGA. The message is clear: it is SGA’s money and they are graciously giving it to you. If the SGA is truly a government for the people, then it is not their money at all. They should merely perform the job of fairly allocating it among the various student groups (and get paid the same $1000 they already get paid). As students and sources of tuition money, we, the broader student population of Babson, should have access to funds given for the purposes of student life without the restrictions (such as having an SGA logo on all flyers) levied on us by what is essentially a financial middleman.  

I propose that Babson migrate to a different system of financing student life in order to make it more vibrant and efficient. Rather than having organizations apply for funding for every little thing they do, they should instead apply for funding for every semester. They would submit a general outline of why they need the amount they are asking for and then SGA will allocate money to be spent by that organization for the semester. How large the funding an organization can receive should be based on past performance (how long they’ve been active, how much value they added last year, etc). Tying funds to past performance would also help reduce club turnover because clubs would be incentivized to be active and add value every year. A faculty advisor for each organization would have to approve each time funds are disbursed by a club in order to regulate spending.

Any perceived mismanagement of funds can be dealt with by the SGA in the form of asset freezes, lack of future funding, etc. This system would create an incentive structure that promotes conservation of funds because any dollar spent by an org would mean they couldn’t spend that dollar on an event later in the semester. Williams (’19) and Wursten (’19) both expressed extreme enthusiasm for the idea as they claimed it would allow their respective clubs to be more efficient and add more value to the student body by removing many of the incredibly restrictive regulations placed upon them by the SGA. This idea isn’t new either; many colleges use a similar system to fund their student life.

At Columbia University clubs put in funding requests to their student government at the end of the academic year and then receive a lump sum for the next year. When club leaders come back to campus in the fall they already know their resources for the year and can plan their club accordingly. Adopting a system like Columbia’s or some version of the one I proposed would make both clubs and the government more efficient.

The Babson website on their clubs page proclaims, “as in any entrepreneurial venture, at Babson anything is possible.” Well at the moment that should be modified to say that at Babson when the government supports your idea, anything is possible.

Letter to the Editor: On Paris and Beirut


I’m deeply troubled by the carnage this past weekend in both Paris and Beirut. This sadness comes from a number of places—I have friends, both from Lebanon and from France, and I feel the intense sadness they feel for their own people. I am also troubled because this is another tragic moment where fanaticism and hateful, exclusionary ideology has manifested itself as a violent outbreak, leaving the global community crippled and asking, yet again, “Why?”

Aside from my grief, I feel something else; I feel confused. I am confused as to why a global outpour of sympathy has been directed almost exclusively towards France, leaving Lebanon, for the most part, in the dark. This is not to say I think there should be no sympathy shown for France—on the contrary, I wonder why people do not see the bombing and loss of innocent life in Lebanon, by the same group of fanatics, as troubling as the French incident. Monuments were lit up with France’s colors of red, white and blue, as well as people’s Facebook profile pictures, and I was sitting there wondering, what about the rest of the victims? Aren’t their lives equally precious and important? I did not see this sort of solidarity for the victims of the Lebanese bombings, or the Yemeni civilians crippled by airstrikes, or the Jordanian fighter pilot, and all the other journalists and aid workers who were brutally murdered at the hands of ISIS. These are just a few examples that hit close to home.

I just wonder, what if my home in Jordan, which is just a borderline away from Lebanon, were to be subjected to such terror? Would the global community stand in solidarity with my people, my family, my friends and my home? Or will it be seen as just another act of violence that can be expected in such a turbulent region?

My thoughts and best wishes go out to anyone who has been affected by this past weekend’s global tragedy; no life is less precious than any other.

“To my fellow first-years…”


Dearest collegiate freshman,

Here you are, the class of 2018. You’ve studied, you’ve crammed, you’ve been the president of school clubs, directors of plays, producers of television shows, and editors-in-chief of newspapers. You’ve done so much already in such a short period of time.

And now, here you are. Standing before me, I see a class filled with potential, a class that exudes charisma and charms that go beyond the classroom. Your passions bleed beyond the small Babson community into the global world. I see you all going places – some will be CEOs of Fortune 500, while others will take their innovative ideas into the nonprofit sector. Of course, there will be a plethora of careers in between, all gearing up to do more.

But before we go off and explore the infinite possibilities that lie ahead, let us take the time to reflect on some of the most important, and oftentimes overlooked, parts of our college experience. First off, high school may have adequately prepared some for the vigor of college academia, but for many of you, this is a new experience. Now, I’m no expert on college, nor do I have any exceptionally amazing credentials. These thoughts are mere suggestions and tips that I’ve picked up during my short time at Babson, and they are subjected to change as I morph into the entrepreneurial leader I wish to become. Here are three things you should keep in mind as your journey at Babson continues.


This marks the beginning of your adult life. You’re free for the first time – free from daily familial obligations, free to be your own person, free to explore your own boundaries and take charge of your own future. Take advantage of that freedom and go explore the unknown. Get out of your comfort zone, and be proactive about your future. Join that club or organization you’ve been interested in, or better yet, join and run for that e-board position. Take the time out of your day to recognize your strengths. Build upon them.


I know this is an abstract concept, but I encourage failure. Our FME professors tell us “failing is growing” and “failure only leads to success in the long run.” But let’s be honest here: from the student perspective, failing sucks. Failing means you did not accomplished what you set out to – or that’s the definition as we know it now.

Let’s re-define failing. Failure is not defeat. Failure is a mere road bump which leads to greater understanding of our strengths and weaknesses and builds stronger leaders. We’ve been trained as a society to think that failure is the ultimate form of defeat, when in actuality, failure may lead to success. The ambitions that we, as a class, have are stronger than the adversities and naysayers that try to hold us back. We are resilient, we are strong, and we are united.


As we grow up and migrate away from the metaphorical “nest,” we often lose sight of the important things in life. We change as individuals, and sometimes, we stray from our core values and beliefs in hopes of discovering something better. I’m not here to tell you not to experiment and not to find yourself. What I will say is the grass is not always greener on the other side. Sometimes you must be adamant with your beliefs and stay true to your values.

College is a time of discovery and rediscovery; it’s a time of innovation. As cliché as it sounds, it truly is the time for you to be selfish and find yourself. Don’t waste this time. Take advantage of all the resources and activities offered, and live these next four years with no regrets. Put yourself out there and stay forever young in your thoughts and unafraid of change—set forth to make a difference, and do it.

We may never get this chance again, so please make the right vote on election day


In one of the most publicized election years in recent memory, it seems everyone has an opinion on the US election. However, the only plausible choice for president has never been more clear. For students reading this article, this is the most important presidential election in our lifetimes, and I–as a middle eastern American and registered Independent–am pleading you, it is vital we do not make a catastrophic error by electing Hillary Clinton, in which the consequences would simply be destructive for generations. In order to protect our constitutional values, basic freedoms, and classical liberal Western ideologies, we must vote Donald Trump.

To many readers, my plea for the presidential candidate may come as a surprise to you. The mainstream media has of course indoctrinated us to believe Donald Trump is “racist”, “sexist”, and “xenophobic” among other names. For a long time, these trigger words utilized by the media worked effectively to influence the opinions of the masses. However, as the electoral process continues to develop, Donald Trump has now taken the lead over Hillary Clinton in many polls in several key states as well as nationally. Regardless, many voters (especially younger ones) are still not sold on Donald Trump. This article will explain while he is simply the only option.

The most common argument against Trump is that he is “racist”, and many point to his comments regarding illegal immigration. Mr. Trump “stereotyped” all Mexicans, calling them “rapists” and “drug dealers”. Truthfully, Donald Trump has said countless times he is in favor of legal immigration from Mexico and has expressed a level of great respect for the millions of Mexican Americans living in the United States:

I happen to have a tremendous feeling for Mexican Americans not only in terms of friendships, but in terms of the tremendous numbers that I employ in the United States and they are amazing people, amazing people. I have many friends, so many friends and so many friends coming to Mexico and in Mexico. I am proud to say how many people I employ.

And the United States first, second and third generation Mexicans are just beyond reproach. Spectacular, spectacular hard-working people. I have such great respect for them and their strong values of family, faith and community.”-Donald Trump on August 31, 2016

Clearly, these are not the words of a man who has deep hatred for the people of Mexico.

In reality, Trump was referring to an influx of crime coming in from illegal immigrants across the southern border. The statistics show Trump is not incorrect. Between 2008 and 2014, 40% of all murder convictions in Florida were criminal aliens. In New York it was 34% and Arizona 17.8%. During those years, criminal aliens accounted for 38% of all murder convictions in the five states of California, Texas, Arizona, Florida and New York, while illegal aliens constitute only 5.6% of the total population in those states. These numbers were compiled by the Government Accountability Office using official Department of Justice data on criminal aliens in the nation’s correctional system. The term “criminal aliens” refers to non-U.S. citizens who have been convicted and incarcerated, and about 90% of criminal aliens happen to be illegal aliens. Furthermore, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety, between 2008 and 2014, 35% of the all murder convictions were illegal aliens.

According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, while illegal immigrants accounted for about just 3.5% of the U.S population, they represented 36.7% of federal sentences in the fiscal year of 2014. Taking a closer look at the numbers, illegal immigrants represented 16.8% of drug trafficking cases, 20.0% of kidnapping/hostage taking, 74.1% of drug possession, 12.3% of money laundering, and 12.0% of murder convictions. What is most frightening, is the fact that the number of illegal immigrants crossing the border is increasing majorly this year, according to data provided by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Donald Trump’s concerns of illegal immigration are seemingly valid, and to argue that being against illegal immigration is equivalent to being racist is pure lunacy. Proving this point, African-American civil rights activist Clarence Henderson, one of the men who helped stage the 1960 sit-in at a North Carolina Woolworth’s lunch counter to protest segregation, endorsed Donald Trump and touched on the meritless accusations of him being a racist, “I come from a time known as Jim Crow — and I know what racism is and isn’t.” Clarence Henderson made a fantastic point that it is Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump who has ties with racism. Hillary Clinton has been open about her relationship with former democratic congressmen and Ku Klux Klan leader/recruiter Robert Byrd, whom she considered a friend and mentor. Donald Trump meanwhile has no affiliation with white supremacy groups, and has said along with his running mate Mike Pence that he disavows and does not want the support of white supremacists.

Clarence Henderson is not the only civil rights activist who is in favor of a Donald Trump presidency. African-American civil rights leader and former mayor of Mississippi Charles Evers has also endorsed Trump and stated he has not “seen any proof of [Trump] being a racist.” Both Henderson and Evers agreed that Trump would be the best president for jobs and the economy in general. Evidentially, those that are wise enough to look past the mainstream media’s attempts of demonizing Donald Trump, realize he is not racist. This can be seen through the fact that Lynne Patton, a female African American executive of the Trump Organization, released a powerful video slamming those who try to align Donald Trump with racism, and revealed the Trump Organization has hired more minority and female workers than any other company she has ever worked at. Patton states, “to equate racism with my boss’s call for a temporary moratorium on a flawed immigration system that radical Islamic terrorists continue to exploit, or the construction of an impassable wall to protect our borders from the influx of illegal drugs, is not only incendiary, it is wholly irresponsible.”

“Sexist” is another term used to attack Trump. However, an article published in the Washington Post on November 25, 2016 reports: “many women who have worked closely with Trump say he was a corporate executive ahead of his time in providing career advancement for women…his companies nurtured and pro­moted women in an otherwise male-dominated industry.” Taking all the aforementioned information into account, the primary cases against Donald Trump have been debunked.

With that being said, the case against Hillary Clinton becomes much more alarming. I already mentioned some of Hillary Clinton’s ties to racism, an area where Hillary Clinton has gotten off the hook is sexism. Firstly, we know Hillary Clinton remained married to Bill Clinton, who committed adultery in the Oval Office, solely for political clout. On top of this, Bill Clinton has a long history of sexual assault. As a matter of fact, Bill Clinton has been accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault by at least 10 women. One victim, Juanita Broaddrick, spoke out: “I was 35 years old when Bill Clinton, Ark. Attorney General raped me and Hillary tried to silence me. I am now 73….it never goes away.” Knowing her husband was doing such horrific acts, and not doing anything about it (or worse, silencing the victims), makes Clinton a clear enabler of sexual harassment and assault.

It does not make much sense to call Hillary Clinton a feminist when she supports and arms Saudi Arabia, as the International Business Times reported. Saudi Arabia is quite possibly the worst country in the world when it comes to civil rights. Women in Saudi Arabia are second class citizens, atheism and homosexuality are punishable by death, and citizens are still beheaded. With the weapons given to them by Hillary Clinton, Saudi Arabia massacres innocent women and children in Yemen, confirmed by the United Nations. Even more appalling, Hillary Clinton has happily accepted tens of millions of dollars from oppressive regimes, according to the Wall Street Journal. This includes Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman, and Morocco (reported by politico). In the United Arab Emirates, laws exist that allow husbands to assault their wives and children. In Qatar, women again have no rights and are second class citizens, atheists and gays are sentenced to death, marital rape is permitted, and having sex out of wedlock is also punishable by death. In Oman, women particularly face discrimination pertaining to domestic issues such as child custody and rape. In Morocco, authorities restricted the rights to peaceful expression, association and assembly through several laws and continue to prosecute print and online media when they criticize the government, and the king. All of this information comes from the Human Rights Watch. For someone to say Hillary Clinton will fight for civil rights, when she supports, arms, and is affiliated with regimes that completely disregard basic human rights, is laughable.

Donald Trump has smartly called out Clinton for supporting these corrupt governments, and ordered she returns the money, which she has not done. A Hillary Clinton presidency would see the further empowerment of these oppressive Islamic countries that strictly enforce violent, outdated scripture in the Quran that states “men are a degree above women” and “If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them.” We simply cannot let this disgusting ideology continue to remain in great power and spread throughout the global world. The ideologies directly threaten our values of basic human rights, the constitution, free market capitalism, civil liberties, political freedom, and democratic representation. There is no free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, or freedom of individual thought in these corrupt countries Hillary Clinton loves to empower. Citizens in these nations have no right to bear arms, and thus are defenseless against the terrorizing authorities. Again, we simply cannot afford to elect a candidate who enables these horrendous ideals.

Hillary Clinton’s disregard for constitutional rights can also be seen in the policy she has imposed on America. Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the patriot act, which completely disregards the fourth amendment, stripping away our protection of unreasonable search and seizure. She proposes an agenda that seemingly diminishes our second amendment right to bear arms which would leave us defenseless against a corrupt government. She supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that allows large corporations to bypass regulations and standards by going overseas, diminishing the environment and costing our country significant jobs while incentivizing the continuation of unethical labor practice overseas, where workers get slaved for insignificant pay.

Hillary Clinton has an infinite list of blunders. She has armed and trained Syrian rebels that have given the weapons to ISIS to use against us, according to Amnesty International. She destroyed Libya by ousting Muammar Gaddafi, whom under him the country was thriving both in terms of the economy (Africa’s richest democracy under his power, per Centre for Research on Globalization) and civil liberties (women had immense rights and privileges), and left the nation completely destabilized. She opted to intervene in Syria, further fueling fire to the radical Islamic terrorism movement. She voted in favor of the Iraq war, which cost our nation over $6 trillion (according to Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University) and led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and led to the foundation of ISIS in the first place. She claimed she had suffered a brain injury so severe she could not answer FBI questions. She directly lied to the American people on what she did and did not send and receive on her private email server. In Benghazi, she personally felt it was not worthwhile to attempt to rescue our ambassador, staff and military personnel due to possible diplomatic complications. The list of inexcusable detriments to our country and to the world goes on and on, and goes to show Hillary Clinton has no business being President of the United States of America.

It goes back to my original point, in order to protect our constitutional values, basic freedoms, and classical liberal Western ideologies, we must vote Donald Trump. I understand Trump is not a perfect candidate. While I agree with the majority of his policies (strengthening the border, increase vetting from Islamic immigrants, upholding the second amendment, cut and simplify taxes, end ties with oppressive regimes, etc.), I understand he can be crude and obnoxious at times. However, there is no such thing as a flawless candidate. As an 11-year-old Trump supporter intelligently said on CNN, “listening to a few bad words coming out of Donald Trump’s mouth is a lot better than people blown up by terrorists, people getting burned alive, people’s heads being chopped off, and people being drowned.” An 11-year-old can understand it, so should you.

Accomplished retired neurosurgeon and politician Ben Carson said it best: “Although Donald Trump, Gary Johnson and Jill Stein have their flaws as well, to argue that they even come close to the level of corruption displayed by someone who lied about sniper fire in Bosnia, lied about a videotape in Benghazi to help secure an election result, lied about what was sent and received on a forbidden private server, attacked women who were taken advantage of by her husband, defended the brutal rapist of a 12-year-old girl and laughed about it, admired and befriended Saul Alinsky, the community organizer who hated America and wanted to change it, used a charitable organization and her political position and power to enrich herself and her family and largely avoids press conferences because she might have to answer questions about all of these things, requires the suspension of rational thought processing.” We may never get this chance again, so please vote Donald Trump on November 8, 2016.