The three of us are all down to take a couple of days off before school starts. We’ll be back on Tuesday for the first day of school with lots of exciting news.
[Sorry to do this right as the Willis-Starbucks thing is heating up, but you can use this as a thread to discuss the news articles coming out about the various court appearances.]
See you all next Tuesday!
Continue the conversation on your blog: Trackback URI
RSS feed for comments on this post. 
Comments are moderated for content and spam purposes. If comment does not go through, it may have been held for apporval or deleted outright.
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
CalStuff is officially dead.
Comment by Matt — January 11, 2006 @ 10:02 pm
God is officially dead.
Comment by nietzsche — January 12, 2006 @ 5:16 am
you guys suck and are in shitty frats
Comment by dov — January 12, 2006 @ 8:11 am
Taking a few days off? You guys hadn’t been posting anyway. Putting up this post only exacerbates the shittyness to which this site has fallen.
Sometimes. You just have to shoot the lame horse.
The three of us? Who the hell was the third?
Comment by Anonymous — January 12, 2006 @ 10:09 am
Um, Ben… Granted, his vacation might be slightly less mini.
As far as the complaints go, what’s great about a blog, is that all of you are welcome to stop reading at any time, and no one would give a crap. I’m confident that our ASUC election coverage (and much more) will continue to be awesome, but if you want to get your news from other sources, go right ahead.
Comment by Andy R. — January 12, 2006 @ 12:57 pm
somebody do something entertaining for us.
Comment by Louise — January 12, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
Just got this in the email…
Dear Student Leaders and all students in our campus community:
I invite you to attend open student meetings with the candidates who are being considered for the position of Dean of Students. Candidates will present on the following dates in these locations:
Tuesday, January 17 - Tilden Room, MLK Jr. Student Union
Friday, January 20 - Tan Oak Room, MLK Jr. Student Union
Monday, January 23 - Tilden Room, MLK Jr. Student Union
Tuesday, January 24 - West Madrone Room, MLK Jr. Student Union
Friday, January 27 - Tilden Room, MLK Jr. Student Union
All presentations will take place from 3:30-4:30pm.
Each candidate will present on a topic and then respond to questions suggested by students last year. You will have the opportunity to ask follow-up questions and give written feedback. To retain as much confidentiality for the candidates as possible, candidate names will not be circulated outside of the meetings.
Your feedback is critical to the decision making process, and I hope you will be able to attend these meetings. Please help us get the word out to students regarding the candidate presentations by both forwarding and posting this e-mail.
Sincerely,
Genaro M. Padilla
Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs
Comment by Not so entertaining... — January 12, 2006 @ 5:08 pm
Hey, this is a random thought, but could you guys post some dirt about Tom Campbell? This SOB is hated by faculty, staff, and students alike, and we all know that he’s a politician, NOT an administrator and thus has no business as dean of Haas School of Business.
In light of all this press about overpaid campus administrators, I thought I would throw out this little tidbit. Do you know that in his contract with the university he has them paying for him to LIVE in the Durant Hotel??? He stays there at least 5 nights a week because his commute is too far from Sacramento, and the students are picking up the tab. Somebody please feel free to check my facts and dig up any dirt you can. Maybe we can get the Chronicle to print an article…
Comment by J — January 13, 2006 @ 2:19 pm
the durant hotel is an overpriced piece of crap. why the hell didnt he ask them for a room in the claremont?
Comment by Anonymous — January 13, 2006 @ 10:39 pm
uh… I actually like Tom Campbell.
Comment by Robert — January 14, 2006 @ 6:46 am
So, you know that Paul Gray, the Executive Vice Chancellor, is returning to teaching at the end of the summer. Rumor has it that George Breslauer, the Executive Dean of L&S, is going to get the job.
Comment by How about some gossip — January 14, 2006 @ 9:47 am
this is interesting. I got a car stolen on Fulton street by someone with one of the shaved keys. They typically are crashed in Oakland.
The Berkeley police finally put up their spatial crime data - and look at the rate of cars stolen in the area just SE of People’s park. Density per acre is sort of weird, but 1/3 car per acre is actually fairly high. I think houses here tend to be on 1/6 or 1/8 acre, and apartments on 1/3 acre. It’s not very high comparatively in the Oakland border area or west side. Note that this isn’t a per capita rate, but rate per space, so the students in the dorm aren’t biasing it up or down.
Their drug crime, and prostitution map looks totally different, but residential burglary also matches this map strongly.
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/police/crimestats/Maps/Motor%20Vehicle%20Theft%2005.pdf
Comment by cp — January 16, 2006 @ 4:47 pm
Jesus, guys. Igor resigns and you have nothing to say about it. This seems like a bit more than a mini-vacation….
Comment by Josh — January 19, 2006 @ 9:08 am
are you going to be covering this interesting and important development?
http://www.uclaprofs.com/
Comment by chet — January 19, 2006 @ 10:38 am
haha, sounds like a feeding tube malfunction.
Comment by feeding tube malfunction — January 19, 2006 @ 5:01 pm
mano:
have you ever slept with shannel ?
Comment by chet — January 19, 2006 @ 5:34 pm
haha. feeding tube says what?
PS: no, i don’t even know her. look forward to hearing about your other ideas for _C_A_L_ stuff stories.
Comment by mano — January 19, 2006 @ 5:52 pm
Mano, why would you defend Shannell if you don’t know her? Most of us who dislike Shannell is because we know who she is, we’ve worked with her on RA staff for years and we know her true intentions.
Comment by Anonymous — January 19, 2006 @ 6:01 pm
My second idea is for calstuff to do an investigative report on the Wichita massacre. You didn’t hear about that one on CNN, now did you?
Comment by chet — January 19, 2006 @ 6:11 pm
I do believe that Nancy Grace and Rita Cosby got that one though.
Look - Christopher Hitchens was a visiting scholar at Berkeley for two years, ending about a year ago, and he is now listed as a plaintiff for this spying case, where the FBI was using NSA tools to monitor PETA, Greenpeace, and Catholic worker among others (inexplicably - why is Peta such a priority?). So that’s interesting - were they recording his calls? He became gung ho re: the war on terror in 2001. People here were saying they smelled alcohol on his breath. http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1688842,00.html
Comment by . — January 19, 2006 @ 7:15 pm
What does alcohol on his breath have anything to do with anything?
Comment by Donald — January 19, 2006 @ 8:00 pm
I guess it relates to the paradox that he kept sharply criticizing people opposed to the government militarism and intervention in Iraq, plus the Patriot Act, yet now he is suddenly leading the fight against excesses of government power. It’s like, did he reverse his position, or did he fail to understand what the people he’s been fighting were saying two years ago?
Comment by . — January 19, 2006 @ 8:10 pm
I don’t think that addresses the question regarding alcohol on his breath. I don’t recall Hitchens defending the Patriot Act (but I don’t read him particularly regularly, so maybe he did), and the Patriot Act has little to do with this. Further, his opponents usually bitched about “we shouldn’t have gone in there because it was wrong, Iraq wasn’t a threat, etc.” which is also pretty unrelated. I don’t think he ever argued in favor of stronger governmental power in general (again, maybe he did).
PETA is a priority because they are sympathetic to criminals. Same with Greenpeace.
Comment by Beetle — January 19, 2006 @ 8:21 pm
riiiiiighht. because confronting militant islamic fanatics and opposing wiretapping without court oversight are so mutually exclusive. the only explanation is that he must have been drunk. only in the f#cked up world of the yapping middle managers.
oh wait. i’m getting a brainwave. maybe we should read more than the first two paragraphs of the story. maybe he actually addresses your ‘paradox’.
“People will say it’s wartime and we have a deadly enemy, and I agree with that. I was in favour of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan very strongly, but it is even more important in such a time that we don’t give away power to the unaccountable agencies that helped get us into this in the first place. It is extremely important we know what the rules are and there has to be a line drawn. You mustn’t turn emergency or panic measures into custom or practice.”
hmmmm. imagine that.
Comment by captain anonymous — January 19, 2006 @ 9:16 pm
Mano, back again with the feeding tube joke… you cream your jeans every time you have a chance to bring it up, dont you?
As I said before, it wasn’t funny (or clever) the first 57 times.
Comment by Tom — January 19, 2006 @ 10:17 pm
“I guess it relates to the paradox that he kept sharply criticizing people opposed to the government militarism and intervention in Iraq, plus the Patriot Act, yet now he is suddenly leading the fight against excesses of government power. It’s like, did he reverse his position, or did he fail to understand what the people he’s been fighting were saying two years ago?”
There’s no paradox. Say what you will about Hitchens, he has always been consistent on civil liberties. He has NEVER supported the Patriot Act and while he has expressed disdain toward a broad swath of liberals (some deserving and some not so), he has also NEVER advocated a government crackdown on their activities. You could argue that he hasn’t devoted enough ink to civil liberties (if for nothing else to counterbalance the praise of elements of Bush’s foreign policy), but that’s not to say that he’s been silent on the issue. And alcohol has absolutely nothing to do with either scenario; mentioning it is just a cheap smear.
Comment by Donald — January 20, 2006 @ 8:04 am
Tom: sorry, but i got tired of your mom.
Anon #18: Would be a good point, if I were defending her. But I’m not. I’m attacking you all for being insufferable wieners. When it gets to the point where you are railing about the even-handed application of something so pathetic as a residential housing code, its sad.
If some in loco parentis is being overbearing to this wiener Jorge, there are much better ways than whining on blogs or to higher level administrator wieners. Whining here about your super personal shit is basically an admission that you cant handle your own life. If we’re doomed to this tripe, next thing you know, well be hearing about all these wieners’ other problems, like their parents hassling them, or how they cant get laid or their lactose intolerance or the grocery clerk that was mean to them or the problems they have wiping their own asses.
Hitchens: the demoncrats are pushing the spying probe thing. Hitchens fits right in on that.
Comment by mano — January 20, 2006 @ 9:07 am
yeah, and if shannel is spewing racist filth against african-americans, would you still be calling us “insufferable wieners”? of course not, you would be in the streets leading the revolutions. but as long as shannel thomas is disparaging asians it’s all cool with you.
cream away, mano.
Comment by chet — January 20, 2006 @ 9:50 am
Mano, my mom is dead. and the grocery clerk was mean to me last week.
Comment by Tom — January 20, 2006 @ 10:11 am
I think mano thinks it’s ok for Shannell to attack us Asiand because he’s following along with Shannell’s belief that there are “too many” of us on campus and there shouldn’t be as many “yellow people” and the “yellow hoardes are taking over.” Stop the “yellow peril”. Racist garbage. If we teach Shannell a lesson maybe the actions will turen the tide against anti-Asian sentiment.
How come Cal spoke out against that black rapper who made fun of Asians on the radio but won’t speak out against their own racist faculty members?
Comment by Anonymous — January 20, 2006 @ 10:19 am
dumbass, the story thus far is:
shannell was mean to jorge, because jorge is an
obnoxious drunk and she hates him. lets get back
at her because she is railroading him etc etc. and then
suddenly its: oh yeah, btw, theres was this time, did
you know that shannell said something “mean” about asians?
so puhlease. the asian comment is an afterthought to the insufferable whining of wieners, an attempt to make this story more relevant or important than it is.
the fact is, of course the stupid res hall rules arent going to be enforced fairly. noone at that level even gives two shits about being “fair” or “equal”. youre nice to the people you like, you arent getting paid to be a supreme fucking court justice. and frosh: if you sign yourselves up to live like small children at a boarding school and then you complain that it isnt fair, sorry that im not feeling sorry for you. you “are adults”. make the most of it or move the fuck out (or dont move in).
PS: also, living situations such as dorms can and should be fun, and are for most people, especially when you arent a stupid insufferable wiener spending your time doing crazee fun shit instead of fighting meaningless battles against an “authority” that is so minor that you can simply ignore or avoid it.
Comment by mano — January 20, 2006 @ 10:30 am
Actually if you want to knwo the truth mano, there were complaints for years now about Shannell. The anti-Asian comment cdame in the fall of 2004. RFL suppressed it because they’re so tolerant and open-minded. The fact that it’s just now surfacing shows that perhaps there’s a chance for justice in the end. So my question to you mano, id would you have reacted the same way if Shannell made a similar comment about Palestianians, Arabs, blacks or Hispanics? What would your response be?
Comment by Anonymity — January 20, 2006 @ 11:59 am
“the fact is, of course the stupid TSA rules aren’t going to be enforced fairly. noone at that level even gives two shites about being “fair” and “equal”. youre nice to white people and strip search arabs, you aren’t getting paid to be a supreme f#cking court justice.”
feel the same way about that mano? or is it okay for shannel thomas to be racist, if she’s attacking some asians????
Comment by chet — January 20, 2006 @ 12:37 pm
PS the funniest part of mano’s post is when he talks about “fighting meaningless battles against an authority that is so minor that you can simply ignore or avoid it”. hello, projection anyone? does this mean the communist revolution has been cancelled?
cream away.
Comment by chet — January 20, 2006 @ 12:41 pm