We’re more than halfway through the fall semester. In five weeks, classes will be over and the hair pulling and nail biting that are associated with finals will ensue. More importantly, students will be frantically trying to rearrange their rosters before the spring semester starts.

Anyone who’s registered for classes via OWLnet knows that creating the right schedule takes longer than ordering a sandwich at the SAC’s ‘On a Roll.’ But lately I’ve found that the scheduling problems are rooted more in the individual departments than in a busy Internet server.

My goal for spring semester was originally to have Fridays off. Three visits and five hours on OWLnet later, I had my roster, and my Fridays off… along with Wednesdays off and only one class Monday, leaving me with five classes in a row on Tuesdays and Thursdays between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.

This hellish routine is not a result of my Friday greediness. As I desperately scrolled through the list of journalism classes, my desire to have Fridays off gave way to my desire to sleep late and take lunch breaks. I began to search for any class that would have me.

However, every class I was interested in was not only scheduled on those two days, but at conflicting times. Turns out Tuesdays and Thursdays from 10:10 to 11:30 a.m. is a popular time for journalism classes. Some classes meet on Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays, but how is anyone supposed to fit that into the typical MWF/TR schedule? I ended up settling for three journalism classes instead of four or five. As a result, I’ll spend my senior year taking classes I should have already taken.

My friends in other majors, particularly education, have had the same problem. For some reason, the further into your education you get, the harder it is create a balanced schedule. This seems backwards. Rosters should be more accommodating as students get deeper into their majors so the workload can be spread out.

Departments need to find a way to vary class times better so students don’t overextend themselves. Hectic schedules won’t help students learn any better or faster. In the meantime, you’ll find me in Annenberg Hall, stuffing my face between classes and praying that at least one of my classes ends early enough to squeeze in a bathroom break.

Late last Thursday morning, Officer Charles Cassidy of the Philadelphia Police Force was pronounced dead at Albert Einstein Medical Center, the second fallen police officer in as many years, and fifth to be shot in the line of duty this year. I won’t pretend that I know “Chuck”, as his family has asked that he be remembered, or that I had ever heard of him before he was senselessly murdered last week attempting to foil an armed robbery. Upon surprising a gunman who was attempting to hold up a donut shop in North Philadelphia, the robber fired one round at close range into Officer Cassidy’s skull, and fled the scene after taking the officer’s service weapon.

Officer Cassidy’s murderer escaped without a cent from the donut shop’s register, and is still at large.

I don’t know Chuck Cassidy. I know this: Chuck Cassidy selflessly gave up his life to protect the citizens of this city. I know this: Chuck Cassidy gave up all of the personal security we take for granted when he donned his police uniform and put himself in the line of fire to try to maintain order in our chaotic city. I know this: Chuck Cassidy and all the Philadelphia Police who serve as tirelessly as he did deserve more respect than I can give them with the feeble words in this column. They certainly don’t deserve the quick, pointless end that was served up to Chuck Cassidy by an unthinking, would-be stick-up kid.

The greatest horror of the wave of homicides in this city is precisely that: how utterly, completely and totally arbitrary each death is. There is no thought or necessity or justification, no grand drama that leads to a bitter death, like in a movie.
It is only the grim finality of the gun, in its absolute power to take life vested in the hands of those least able to wield that power responsibly. Kids that have never seen outside the walls of their neighborhood, disgruntled teens that have been failed by every institution they have ever known, usually starting with their own family; adults that never had anything in their life they really cared about, or never knew care. That is the greatest tragedy; that no one even cares enough to think about the effect their actions have on others, even in this most terminal of situations. Where is the antidote for total thoughtlessness? What is the cure for not caring?

I hope I have not provided an excuse for Officer Cassidy’s killer; as ethical as I try to be some dark part of me hopes in secret that he dies a long slow death. I hope I have not lionized every police; they must be subject to scrutiny like everyone else in a position of power. I don’t want to even use the word “hero” because I think it whitewashes the good and bad that makes every person who they are, that it removes all humanity from an individual and makes them something unknowable, almost of legend.

Chuck Cassidy was a man, who had faults and strengths, just as you and I do. But Chuck Cassidy was a brave man. He was the kind of man who lived each day of his life knowing that in a split second, a moment’s lapse in vigilance, he could be shot down, and yet he still put himself in front of a loaded gun, he risked his life. He did that for no other reason than because that was part of his duty in serving each and every Philadelphian regardless of who they are and he did that because sometimes, someone has to stand against violence.
In the horror of that great violence is something to marvel at. The marvel is that men like this exist and risk their lives for us. So remember Charles “Chuck” Cassidy as that, a man who did something truly miraculous. Let this overshadow the violence of his death. Remember the love he had for his community that was greater than his coward of a murderer, whose hate is completely unremarkable. Let the memory of his assailant fade into the total blackness of obscurity while Officer’s Cassidy’s love still shines bright.

A $153,000 bounty has been posted for any information leading to the arrest of Cassidy’s murderer. Newspapers yesterday revealed that the police have named John “Jordan” Lewis as the primary suspect in the officer’s slaying, pictured at right. He has tattoos on both hands reading “NP” and “HP”, and a distinctive limp. Anyone with knowledge of the suspect’s whereabouts should contact the Philadelphia Police Department at 215-683-8888.

Ronnie Polaneczky, in a column on philly.com, suggested that a legal and just trial and execution would be “too good,” for the shooter of Officer Cassidy, a Philadelphia policeman shot in the head during a robbery. She also suggested that a proper punishment might be putting the shooter into a room with Cassidy’s friends and family, and letting them have at it.

Really?

So, forget the law that Cassidy died trying to uphold? Forget any ideas about this being a free country? Forget innocent until proven guilty, due process, fair and speedy trials, public trials? This column is shamefully perpetuating mob mentality, not too mention dangerous. If we take Polaneczky at her word, which I’m sure we won’t, barbarism is just cause for barbarism in the other direction. This is exactly what is making the violence in Philadelphia so bad. Murder in response to murder, over and over again.

In that case, wouldn’t Polaneczky’s version of justice give cause to any friends and family of the shooter to come and attack, in whatever way they see fit, the suspect’s family?

The worst part about this is not that Polaneczky said, or thought, what she did. It is that those thoughts were printed in a newspaper, as if it were a viable and reasoned opinion. Angry rants may sell papers, and might be excused by claiming the author is simply saying what everyone else is thinking. But if you really want to contribute to public discourse, maybe you should try saying something everyone hasn’t thought of yet.

I understand the feeling of wanting to get revenge. And if John Lewis Jordan, a suspect identified by police, is convicted, he should be prosecuted and punished. But that doesn’t mean we should bypass precedents that may very well have never been set down before. There’s a reason the founders believed in due process and fair public trials. They, unlike most of us, knew what happened when these practices weren’t followed.

Many readers of our wonderful web properties may not realize that last week was Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. Former Senator Richard Santorum was on campus to speak about the dangers of Islamo-Fascism and to promote the week of awareness. However, I regret to write that the dear former Senator’s efforts fell far short in terms of campus penetration. I feel it is my duty to continue to promote the message of Rick Santorum. That is why I am declaring next week, “Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week” Awareness Week. During the week, I will promote the idea that last week was, in fact, Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. People need to know that a message was being put out during that time.

Last week’s Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week was meant to warn Temple students and young people from the surrounding communities about the dangers of getting caught up in Islamo-Fascism. These days, it is easier than ever. I think everyone has at least one acquaintance that is mixed up in the Islamo-Fascism, and peer pressure is a powerful tool of recruitment. During my undergraduate college days at Tulane University, I found myself at a number of parties where my friends began involving themselves in Islamo-Fascism. They would ask me if I was interested, but I would decline. It was not always easy. I was tempted, but I would always remember the slogan from the videos Mother had me watch as a child: reject Islamo-Fascism, it’s not a euphemism. Learn more about what Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week was promoting by talking your local college Republican.

In an assault on creativity and a reminder that their primary readership is made of the wealthy and unaware, Philly Magazine featured what could only be a joke for today’s poll.

Rick Santorum, the former Senator from Pennsylvania, spoke at the Student Center on Wednesday. The controversial politician, seen as a right-wing extremist by some, and a courageous defender of conservative values by others, was voted out of office in the 2006 elections.

I went to his speech. It was a charged atmosphere, to say the least. The room, filled to standing room only, didn’t take long to establish its feelings about the former Senator. As soon as he walked in, loud clapping erupted, along with boos. During his forty-five minute speech, though, the room remained calm. During the question-and-answer session, though, the divide re-emerged.

Some people praised him as saying what needed to be said, and other people derided him as a hypocrite.

The session went well for the most part, aside from some outbursts. One thing that did seem less than professional, though, were some of Santorum’s comments. In particular, a derisive comment about France struck me as counter-productive for a person trying to establish credibility for a cause that needs to convince many as to its validity.

The comment concerned France’s refusal to help turn back the Turkish empire in the 1680’s, after its army had been defeated in Vienna. Santorum said, “All of the European countries united against Muslim invasion except, guess who? France.”

Santorum, it was clear from the speech, is an intelligent man. There is no doubt that he knows that France’s refusal to fight had nothing to do with their much discussed cowardice and inability to fight, and everything to do with politicized religion and Louis XIV, the king of France at the time, and his ambitions for power.

The comment was greeted by chuckles from supporters, and that is probably why Santorum made it. But it challenges his credibility for anyone who hears it. And if Santorum really wants to raise awareness about Islamo-Fascism, he can’t afford to alienate people.

Thomas Snyder won $10,000 and a trip to India last week. Proving that your elementary school substitute teacher was doing you a favor by forcing you to do crossword puzzles to pass time, Snyder won the cash and the free ride by completing a Sudoku puzzle super fast.

The Philadelphia Inquirer hosted the first annual Sudoku National Championship on Sunday Oct. 21.

Snyder, 27, from Palo Alto, Calif., won the grand cash prize, in addition to a trip to India to defend his title at the world championship. The competition, which featured three levels of difficulty, was held at the Convention Center and commented on by Will Shortz, whose name has been forever linked to puzzles.

Is this all ridiculous? Absolutely yes. But, Brian Tierney, chief executive officer of Philadelphia Media Holdings, owner of The Inquirer, the Daily News and Philly.com, knows about marketing. He knows hosting the only national competition for an awfully popular game will, at the very least, get people mentioning the Inqy across the country again.

What’s more, the game brought people to town from throughout the country, even British Columbia.

Pretty good for Tierney, who has ushered in a redesigned Philly.com, a regional focus, and tighter coverage, considering when he was first highered he was called an “enemy of the First Amendment.”

*Photo courtesy of the Philadelphia Inquirer, taken by ELIZABETH ROBERTSON, depicts Philadelphian Matt Fabrizio, who won second place at the intermediate level

The gun control debate has raged for years, showing no sign of abating. Philadelphia’s crime spike has only hardened the battle lines. One popular notion is that in the 2^nd Amendment, “A well regulated militia,” refers to citizens keeping guns in their home for the common defense of the state rather than condoning personal concealed weapons.

This is hogwash. If I cannot carry a concealed weapon, what am I to do if King George himself accosts me? Every time I make this assertion, I get the same answer: King George is dead. Wrong! We do not know for a fact that he is dead. He may be undead. That’s right, I am referring to zombies. After our nation’s won its independence in 1737, it was initially governed by the Articles of a Confederation and was nothing more than a loose trade alliance with no zombie contingencies. This was one of the primary reasons the Articles of a Confederation failed as our first national governing document.

When the second constitutional convention was convened, much discussion went into how to properly deal with the zombie threat. The British monarchy has had three royal lines: Tudors, Stuarts, and Hanover/Windsors; three potential sources for royal zombies seeking to rule us with a pro-brain agenda. The Second Amendment was written in response to this threat. In Federalist Paper 252, John Jay writes, “In every story about the undead attacking, the character with a musket in his trousers is the one who survives.” If we let the government make laws against carrying concealed handguns, we will be ripe for invasion by Tudor Zombies, Stuart Zombies, and Hanover/Windsor Zombies.

Whenever I proffer this argument, I always meet heavy resistance from liberals. They assert that our founding fathers did not believe in zombies. That is flatly untrue. Many of our founding fathers had a strong belief in the undead. I would go as far as to assert that this nation was founded on the principle that zombies exist. Many liberals also claim that zombies are not real, negating the need for a War on Zombies. Well, that is just pathetic. That kind of talk emboldens the zombies. Unfortunately, these zombie deniers are winning the war of ideas. People such as Michael Jackson tried to warn us in the 80’s, and the media crucified them. That is just regrettable.