BY JACOB JOHNSON

DESK EDITOR
S
tanford Athletics will sell seats in
Section 13 of Maples Pavilion for
the men’s basketball games against
No. 20 UCLA and USC this week-
end.
Tickets in this section will only be avail-
able to season-ticket holders and
Buck/Cardinal Club members. Section 13
was previously reserved for Sixth Man mem-
bers, provoking an outcry from sections of
the student body.
The Sixth Man is organized and run by
students, with assistance from the Stanford
men’s basketball program. Last Tuesday, the
athletic department announced that the
Sicth Man will be restricted to Sections 9-12.
The Stanford Band usually occupies Section
9, but there is room for some Sixth Man
members as well.
On Wednesday, Sixth Man Managing
Director Alexis Link ‘10 released a state-
ment to the group’s email list, protesting the
decision. The email included a survey in
which students, alumni, University employ-
ees and others were asked to respond to the
athletic department’s decision. One of the
questions asked students if the decision to
sell seats in Section 13 to season-ticket hold-
ers and donors bothered them. With 1000
votes tallied, 89.5 percent of respondents
said, “Yes, it is a student section.”
Furthermore, Link claimed that she and
the other Sixth Man organizers were not
informed by the Athletic Department of the
coming sale.
“I was never informed by the members of
the athletic department who were responsi-
ble for this decision,” Link wrote in an email
to The Daily on Friday. She claimed she
found out about the sale of tickets in Section
13 from a member of the men’s basketball
program and was never directly contacted.
“There were discussions earlier in the
season regarding selling Section 13 to the
Buck Cardinal Club,” Link admitted.
However, she said the idea was “shot down
completely after vehement opposition from
both the Sixth Man Committee and the
By KAMIL DADA and ANDREA FULLER
Condoleezza Rice will formally return to
Stanford on March 2, said her chief of staff, Colby
Cooper. Rice has been settling into her Hoover
Institution office in recent weeks, and her staff
arrived on campus Dec. 15 to prepare for her
return.
The former Secretary of State will not immedi-
ately return to teaching but has publicly stated she
expects to work on a book and eventually return to
the classroom. She will also participate in Hoover
task forces dealing with issues including national
security, according to Hoover Senior Associate
Director Richard Sousa.
Stanford administrators and some of Rice’s old-
est friends applaud her renewed relationship with
the University, though others who oppose Bush
administration policies or clashed with her as
provost are less enthusiastic.
“Prof. Rice’s return to Stanford will provide our
students and the academic community with a great
opportunity to learn from her experience in public
service and international affairs,” University
President John Hennessy told The Daily in a state-
ment. “We are proud and pleased that she has cho-
sen to return to her faculty appointment and to pur-
sue her future teaching and research interests here.”
Future as a Political Science Professor
While Rice will not immediately return to the
classroom, a number of professors look forward to
her interactions with students.
Larry Diamond, a senior fellow at Hoover,
believes Rice has a lot to contribute in terms of fos-
tering policy debate, providing analysis and engag-
ing students.
“Many people will want to find ways to discuss
and evaluate her role as Secretary of State and, pre-
vious to that, as National Security Advisor, in an
extremely controversial period and one in which
the United States did things that were very trou-
bling, frankly,” Diamond said.
When Rice will resume teaching, however, is still
unclear.
Coit Blacker, director of the Freeman Spogli
Institute, is one of Rice’s close personal friends and
Index Opinions/5 • Sports/6 • Classifieds/7
Recycle Me
Courtesy The Associated Press
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice waves goodbye as she leaves
the State Department in Washington on Jan. 16, 2009. Since
leaving the capital, Rice has been making the transition back to
Stanford, where she is a tenured political science professor.
Rice’s history marked by conflict
Few equate Rumsfeld, Rice
By ANDREA FULLER and KAMIL DADA
Condoleezza Rice’s return to Stanford has been quiet
so far, despite the clamor over George W. Bush’s 2006
visit and Donald Rumsfeld’s 2007 appointment at the
Hoover Institution.
Following Rumsfeld’s selection as a Distinguished
Visiting Fellow in fall 2007, faculty and students circulat-
ed petitions in opposition. Debate over his appointment
consumed Faculty Senate and ASSU meetings. Despite
claims by student activists that Rice was also complicit in
“war crimes,” the anti-Rice movement pales in compari-
son to that targeting the former Secretary of Defense.
Rice will be taking up a position at Hoover, just as
Rumsfeld did, but few equate her arrival with his contro-
versial appointment. The former Secretary of State, after
all, is a tenured political science professor and a former
Stanford provost.
“[Rice] is returning to a long-established position,
whereas Rumsfeld was appointed to something he had
not held before and in a much more minor role as a dis-
tinguished visiting scholar,” said senior Hoover Fellow
Larry Diamond. “I also think Rumsfeld’s service as
Secretary of Defense was far more ignominious than
Condi Rice’s service in either of her positions, where I
think the ultimate record is at least more mixed.”
George Shultz, a distinguished fellow at Hoover,
argued that Rice never truly left campus and compared
her return to his own experience coming back to Stanford
after serving as Secretary of State under President
Reagan.
RICE RETURNS
Former Secretary of State officially starts March 2 at Hoover
Please see SIXTH MAN, page 8
Please see RETURN, page 3
MAJOR EVENTS IN THE LIFE OF CONDOLEEZZA RICE
MASARU OKA/The Stanford Daily
With a near-empty Sixth Man section at men’s basketball games throughout the season, the
athletic department decided to open Section 13 to season ticket holders.
SIXTH MAN MELTDOWN
Please see RUMSFELD, page 4
Stanford Daily File Photo
Condoleezza Rice stands in the Quad in October
1993, shortly after her appointment as Provost. In
her early days, Rice handled dramatic budget cuts.
“There was a big sigh of relief
in many quarters [when she
left] because she had not been
a popular provost.”
— JOHN MANLEY,
political science professor emeritus
www.stanforddaily.com
MONDAY Volume 235
February 23, 2009 Issue 15
Today
Rainy
60 50
Tomorrow
Showers
62 46
SPORTS/6
FRESH APPROACH
Freshmen jumpstart 25-0 run to lift women’s
basketball over Oregon, 68-49
The Stanford Daily
A n I n d e p e n d e n t P u b l i c a t i o n
SPORTS/6
DUCKING OUT
Men’s basketball falls apart on the road,
dropping to Oregon, 68-60
Rice’s time on Farm gets mixed
reactions from students, profs.
By ANDREA FULLER and KAMIL DADA
SENIOR STAFF WRITERS
Barton Bernstein still remembers where he was
sitting —at the end of a long table, Condoleezza
Rice to his right, and three seats away from the
speaker. It was the early 1980s, and the history pro-
fessor and new political science assistant professor,
respectively, had gathered at Galvez House, the
building that once housed the arms control center.
Those gathered in the room went around the
table, discussing what they wanted to accomplish in
their life. Bernstein distinctly remembers Rice say-
ing that she hoped to be Secretary of State or
National Security Advisor.
“I remember thinking, ‘Highly unlikely,’” he
admitted over 20 years later.
Rice would go on to fulfill not one but both of
those goals. Her time in Washington would cap off
nearly two decades spent as a well-liked Stanford
professor and sometimes-controversial provost.
While her return to the Farm means a return to
some of her most beloved friends, it also marks a
return to some of her oldest enemies.
A Charismatic Lecturer
At age 19, Rice received her bachelor’s degree in
political science from the University of Denver,
where she would receive her Ph.D. in 1981 after
receiving a master’s degree in the same subject from
Notre Dame. The young scholar came to Stanford in
1981 after receiving a Ford Foundation post-doctor-
al fellowship, and she began teaching as an assistant
political science professor in 1982.
Rice was tenured in 1987, becoming an associate
professor. From 1989-1991, she served as a Soviet
expert on the National Security Council, and many
lamented her parting. In a 1989 Daily article, she
was labeled a “charismatic and innovative teacher,”
and one student recalled giving the popular profes-
sor a birthday cake and singing during class. (“Rice
offered posts in Bush administration,”Jan. 12, 1989).
Rice received the Gores Award for Excellence in
Teaching in 1984 and the School of Humanities and
Sciences Dean’s Award for Distinguished Teaching
Less outcry on campus over return
of Bush’s top diplomant
Please see HISTORY, page 2
in 1993. Over a decade later, students still
remember her engaging lectures, particularly
in her class entitled “The Role of the Military
in Politics.” Her classes enjoyed the political
simulations she conducted, and students later
praised her intelligence and ability to synthe-
size information.
“She was always extremely prepared as an
instructor and a lecturer,” said Chris Aguas
‘92. “She very clearly had a deep intimacy
with the material in terms of the historical
basis.”
But it was her personable nature that
drew many undergraduates to Rice. Her will-
ingness to talk with students about every-
thing from classes to football built her a fol-
lowing in the political science department.
“She was approachable; she was extreme-
ly caring and warm and kind and [had] all
sorts of qualities that I wouldn’t have neces-
sarily expected in an advisor or professor,”
said Erin Alaimo ‘88, who would later work
in Washington. “She had a truly profound
impact on my life, my career.”
Emmanuel Bart-Plange ‘93 not only took
Rice’s popular lecture course, but also stud-
ied with her in directed readings. (He joked
he’s still bitter about his A- grades.) The foot-
ball player would also work with Rice and
her father at The Center for a New
Generation, an after-school enrichment pro-
gram for East Palo Alto students that Rice
co-founded.
For Bart-Plange, Rice was more than an
ordinary professor. She kept in touch with
him over the years, and even got to know his
mother.
“When I got married she sent me a gift
with a card from the White House,” he said.
“She didn’t have to do that, and she did.”
Her love of sports and music enabled
many students to relate to Rice on a person-
al level as well. Alan Brown ‘85, an advisee of
Rice’s, said that he talked with the professor
about football as much as the Soviet invasion
of Afghanistan.
“It’s hard sometimes for kids to approach
a Stanford professor,” he said. “I never felt
that with Prof. Rice. You could question any-
thing, you could discuss anything. She was
open to ideas as opposed to spewing some-
thing she’d already written.”
“Her office door was always open, if I ever
needed to talk about a paper I was writing or
classes I was taking,” added Eric Abrams ‘85,
another advisee. “It was really cool to engage
her in conversation about things outside of
academia. She was a huge football fan.”
These personal connections have changed
how many of Rice’s former students feel
about her time in the unpopular Bush admin-
istration. Most jumped to her defense, saying
they fully believed that she did what she
thought was right for the country and
believed her intelligence enabled her to
make the best decisions possible.
“My feeling is she will be judged favorably
as someone who did the best job that she pos-
sibly could have,”Alaimo said. “I have never
known her not to do the best job, not to put
her absolute everything into everything she’s
ever done.”
And while some students are disappoint-
ed with her political legacy, their memories of
Rice as a professor remain untarnished.
“She was absolutely one of my favorite
professors, maybe in the top two or three in
the whole time I was there,” said Edward
Anderson ‘91. “I think it’s unfortunate that
she had such a long association with the Bush
administration, but I was excited to see her
get into politics and do so well. Over time I’ve
respected her less, but she’s obviously an
incredible person.”
The Young Professor
Many professors, too, would look fondly
on Rice’s early time at Stanford, even those
who would later go on to criticize her tenure
as provost.
“Many, many afternoons, Condi would
come out of her office, sit down at the secre-
tary’s desk, take off her shoes, and the two of
them would cackle,” said Political Science
Prof. Emeritus Hubert Marshall, whose office
was close to Rice’s. “It was just little things
like that that I liked about her.”
Other professors vividly recalled fond
memories of their early exchanges with Rice.
George Shultz, former Secretary of State
under President Reagan and distinguished
fellow at the Hoover Institution, said that he
first met Rice after her stint in Washington on
the National Security Council for the first
President Bush.
“The reason why I remember [her] so
vividly is that [she] has such a capable and
interesting personality,”he said. “She is fun to
be with, she’s interesting, she’s got a lot to say.
So, she’s a person that I like to have on my list
of good friends.”
History Prof. Emeritus David Kennedy
agreed and admired Rice’s strong character.
“She was one of the most poised and self-
possessed individuals on the face of the plan-
et,”he said. “That was evident to me from the
very first day that I met her, which I believe
was her first day on the campus.”
Kennedy said that during Stanford’s cen-
tennial campaign in the late ‘80s and early
‘90s, he often travelled with Rice to various
Stanford events and tried to envision what a
world after the Cold War might look like.
“We were a little bit ahead of our time
because the Cold War hadn’t quite ended
then,” he said. “I got to know her best in that
context, and I was consistently impressed
with how well-informed she was and how bal-
anced her judgment was and how extraordi-
narily well-spoken she was.”
Larry Diamond, a senior fellow at the
Hoover Institution, was also very impressed
with her poise, articulateness and ambition.
He was also surprised to hear of her political
affiliations.
“You would expect a young African-
American political science professor, espe-
cially back in those days, to be a liberal
Democrat,” he said, “and so, when I found
out she wasn’t, I was surprised and it certain-
ly made her all the more interesting.”
But Rice was not without detractors in her
early years. Her time in the first Bush admin-
istration and political zeal sat poorly with
some of her fellow scholars.
“I had no negative personal interactions
with her except that I found her very early on
to be a very rigid ideologically oriented pro-
fessor,” said Political Science Prof. Emeritus
John Manley. “It didn’t appeal to me very
much.”
And while many found the young profes-
sor amiable, some were less than impressed
with her scholarship.
“I’m still surprised that she would want to
return to Stanford and a professorship,”
wrote History Prof. Emeritus Paul Seaver,
who would later butt heads with Rice over
the Cultures, Ideas and Values (CIV) pro-
gram. “As I understand it, Russianists did not
regard her as particularly distinguished as a
scholar; on the other hand, I believe that stu-
dents who took her courses regarded her as a
good teacher.”
Bernstein, who knew the professor from
various committees, seminars and personal
interactions, agreed.
“Condi Rice is only somewhat better than
a mediocre scholar,” he said. “Her strengths
are vigorous right-wing opinionation, marked
social poise and a fluency in oral presenta-
tion. Among the Stanford scholars in the
Soviet-Russian area, she would rank near the
bottom in the University. Over the years, in
my talking with at least four people in the
field, each of them would rank her at or near
the bottom and this was true before she went
to the Bush administration
and became prominent.”
“Most of the people
who think she’s brilliant
haven’t read her, haven’t
heard her, can’t judge, are
being kind and are taken
in by social poise and
superficial fluency,”
Bernstein added.
Appointment as Provost
Rice’s life would
change dramatically in
May 1993, when
University President
Gerhard Casper
announced that the politi-
cal science professor
would take on the No. 2
job at the University:
provost. Casper met Rice
a year and a half prior,
when she was a member
of the presidential search
committee that selected
Casper.
The President told The
Daily in 1993 that he
believed her experience in
government would help
her deal with complex
issues, and that the her
selection signaled the
importance of diversity to
the University (“Casper
names Condoleezza Rice
as new provost,” May 13,
1993).
In an exclusive inter-
view with The Daily a few
days after, Rice praised
diversity and dismissed
her politics as irrelevant
—two issues that students
would view in a substan-
tially different light in
later years (“Experienced
in the business of change,”
May 21, 1993).
The first crisis Rice
would face, however, was
balancing the budget.
Soon after becoming
Provost in 1993, Rice
announced that the
University would face
massive cuts to curb
Stanford’s deficit and
hoped that administrative
restructuring would solve long-term prob-
lems (“Additional budget cuts looming for
University,” Oct. 1, 1993).
The Daily reported that Rice said the situ-
ation is so serious that if she were
approached “tomorrow with the greatest idea
since the silicon chip, [she’d] have to say,
‘Sorry, we can’t afford that.’”
The Provost would announce that she
planned to slash another $18 to $20 million
from the budget, drastically reducing central
administrative costs over the next three
years.
Budget cuts would make Rice a fair num-
ber of enemies, and few departments were
pleased about the cost reduction estimates
they were asked to submit. Some faculty felt
that little was left to cut after other cuts in
recent years. Students would also complain
that they were not involved enough in the
process, to which Rice responded that the
budget “has to be on my timetable” (“Rice,
Senate discuss cuts,” Feb. 2, 1993).
Further controversial changes by Rice
included contracting out management of the
Faculty Club and the Stanford University
Press (“Budget stable, provost says,” Nov. 11,
1996).
“I am often asked if [in contracting out],
we are trying to run Stanford like a business,”
Rice said. “The answer is no. We have to look
at ways to cut costs.”
Coit Blacker, director of the Freeman
Spogli Institute and a long-time personal
friend of Rice, told The Daily last week that
the budget cuts were especially trying on the
former Provost.
“[The budget cuts] earned Provost Rice a
lot of animosity or hostility from groups that
felt that they had been targeted,” he said. “So
I think it was a very difficult time for her, but
she has never been one to shy away from
making difficult decisions, if in her judgment,
they are the right decisions, and that’s what
she did.”
But as the years passed, budget cuts grew
less controversial. Rice sliced $6.1 million
from the budget in her first year, a figure
that decreased over the next few years. She
ultimately cut $16.8 million from the budg-
et between 1994 and 1996, and the
University went on to enjoy multi-million-
dollar surpluses.
The Diversity Debates
Though many lauded the pick of Rice as
provost as a sign of Stanford’s commitment
to diversity, tension soon built between Rice
and women and minority groups on campus.
When she pushed for more U.S.-born
minority faculty, some students claimed she
was fueling “anti-immigrant hysteria” (“U.S.
born hiring policy questioned,” Oct. 6, 1993).
But the most heated controversy involving
Rice and diversity in her early years would
come as a result of her budget cuts. As the
budget was pared down, campus ethnic com-
munity centers became wary that they would
be affected, and the Provost did little to
assuage their concerns.
Tensions boiled over at a meeting in 1994,
when Rice tried to address the community
centers’ concerns, at one point drawing scoffs
from the crowd (“Skeptical crowd grills top
officials at a forum on ethnic center cuts,”Jan.
13, 1994).
“You don’t have the standing to question
my commitment to minorities and minority
issues,” Rice said at the forum. “I’ve been
black all my life.”
At another forum the following month,
the Provost also drew snickers when she told
the audience “you have to trust me.”Students
told The Daily they felt like the Provost did
not respect them, and that they feared she
had a conservative agenda. The Daily called
her “impatient, even testy” and one senior
labeled her “unprofessional, personally
insulting and obnoxious” (“Out of the loop,
students fear ‘conservative agenda,’” Feb. 25,
1994).
Though the ethnic centers would ultimate-
ly escape budget cuts, Rice’s decision to elim-
inate the position of Cecilia Burciaga, associ-
ate dean of Student Affairs and Casa Zapata
resident fellow (RF), drew the ire of students.
Rice claimed the dismissal of the 20-year
employee was strictly for fiscal reasons, but
the firing outraged students.
A group of students soon began a hunger
strike, with over 40 people fasting for 24
hours in the Quad, and four continuing for
three days. The strike protested Burciaga’s
layoff and called on the University to better
address a number of Chicano/a issues. The
strikes ultimately ended after three days, and
the University agreed to sign a letter declar-
ing its commitment to diversity (“Strike ends
after three days, agreement reached,” May 9,
1994).
“Condi is one tough nut,” said Jim Leckie,
a civil engineering profes-
sor who observed the
negotiations between fac-
ulty and students. “You
would have thought she
was negotiating with the
Russians and not with stu-
dents. She clearly received
her management training
in the Pentagon.”
Female faculty, too,
were displeased with Rice.
Some expressed outrage
in 1993 with the decision
of the Provost’s
Committee on the
Recruitment and
Retention of Women
Faculty to remove a num-
ber of personal anecdotes
about discrimination from
its report. Some female
faculty suggested she was
worried about Stanford’s
image; the committee
countered that quotes
were eliminated to protect
privacy.
Rice’s commitment
to women faculty would
again be questioned fol-
lowing the denial of tenure
to Assistant History Prof.
Karen Sawislak. Though
her department approved
her for tenure, she was
rejected by the deans of
the School of Humanities
and Sciences. Students
would form the Student
Coalition to Tenure Karen
Sawislak, though Rice
would eventually deny her
appeal in 1998, sparking
further outcry.
Women faculty would
cite Sawislak’s case as one
example of the Provost’s
insensitivity to their issues.
A group of female profes-
sors released a report in
1998 declaring that
Stanford had a poor record
of tenuring women faculty
in recent years. Rice would
call the report “error-rid-
den” and “a polemic,” dis-
missing their concerns
(“Tenure criticized,” Feb.
25, 1998).
“I don’t believe myself that there is a cri-
sis,” Rice would say at a later meeting. “I
think Stanford is a good place for women.”
(“Caucus reports on female profs,” May 11,
1998.)
“I very strongly feel that tenure is an eval-
uation,” she added. “You’ve had seven years
to prove it. If we start to introduce affirma-
tive action policies into our tenure practices,
we’ve entered a slippery slope.”
A group of faculty and staff would go on
to submit a complaint to the U.S. Department
of Labor in November 1998, alleging gender
discrimination in University hiring and pro-
motion practices including tenure. The inves-
tigation did not end until December 2007,
when the Department of Labor ruled in favor
of the University.
“No one in this complaint is asking for a
preference,” Sawislak said. “We’re asking to
be evaluated based on our qualifications.”
(“Labor Dept. may probe University,” Feb. 3,
1999.)
The Final Provost Years
Rice’s final years as Provost would not be
free of controversy. Many of the decisions
cited as her major accomplishments would
receive mixed reactions.
While the Provost’s push for graduate
housing is considered one of her achieve-
ments —she fought for short-term reconfig-
uration to allow more students on campus
and announced in 1998 that $15 million
would go to building long-term housing —
students at the time were not fully satisfied.
In May 1998, over 100 graduate students
camped out in the quad to protest lack of
adequate housing options. Her attitude
rubbed some students the wrong way.
“I didn’t need students on the Quad to tell
me that there was a housing problem,” Rice
later remarked (“Room for protest on cam-
pus?” Oct. 6, 1998).
“People protesting in the Quad would
never get me or, I think I can speak for
Gerhard [Casper] too, to do something that
we wouldn’t do —to violate our personal
principles or to do something that is not in
the interest of the University,” Rice added,
speaking about the protests that had
occurred in recent years.
Rice’s formation of introductory seminars
and Sophomore College were undoubtedly
popular enhancements to undergraduate
education. But her support of replacing the
Cultures, Ideas and Values program with
Introduction to the Humanities (IHUM) gar-
nered mixed reactions.
In 1995, a committee supported by the
Provost began to reevaluate the CIV pro-
gram, which received varied responses from
students, some of whom complained about
the excessive yet superficial reading. Some
professors vehemently objected to the evalu-
ation process, and History Prof. Carolyn
Lougee Chappell complained it was shroud-
ed in secrecy (“CIV professors object to
shortening program,” May 29, 1996”).
Although the CIV committee began
meeting in October 1995, the first meeting
held with CIV faculty to discuss their con-
cerns took place a full year later.
“Instead of CIV faculty and student-pro-
pelled changes, the push is coming from the
top down,” Lougee Chappell said. “This
administration wants to do away with every-
thing that was in place before they came to
makeover the University’s image.”
(“Students award CIV high marks,” Jan. 27,
1997.)
History Prof. Emeritus Paul Seaver peti-
tioned the committee’s review, saying it was
inadequate, but to no avail —IHUM was
fully implemented in 2000.
“I was always glad that I had tenure,”
Seaver said. “Otherwise I would have been
out on my ear for refusing to be a ‘team play-
er’ in my unsuccessful defense of the fresh-
man CIV program.”
His battles with Rice over CIV scarred his
impression of her.
“She was the least collegial colleague I can
remember of any academic I met at Stanford
in more than 40 years,” Seaver recently said
to The Daily. “Her style was authoritarian;
she had no time for faculty governance.
Hence committees were regarded as a waste
of time, told what to do rather than consult-
ed, and constituted of those too intimidated
to stand up to her bullying; given her control
of the budget, faculty were relatively easy to
intimidate.”
Resignation
In December 1998, Rice announced that
she would step down as Provost the following
summer. Casper and others heaped praise on
the departing Provost, as did a number of
other faculty. But others were less enthused.
“I think most people were happy to see
her leave once Bush stole the first election in
2000,” Political Science Prof. Emeritus John
Manley told The Daily. “There was a big sigh
of relief in many quarters because she had
not been a popular provost.”
“Her role as provost was very authoritari-
an, very rigid, very dogmatic and not well-
appreciated by the people with whom she
had to interact,” he added.
History Prof. Barton Bernstein agreed.
“Almost everybody I know who dealt with
her came away annoyed, if not angry,” he
said. “One heard of various tales where she
would get a long report from somebody, one
of the deans, and send it back within hours
with a one-word to one-sentence negative.”
“I liked Condi when she was without
power,” he added. “I found her pleasant, try-
ing to grow, not very well educated, but eager
to know. As she gained power, I found her
arrogant, not any smarter, not likely to do her
homework, but ferociously opinionated and
willing to impose her dictates. She’s a very
authoritarian person, although she’s probably
very good at sucking up to power.”
At the time, Rice dismissed rumors that
she would assist George Bush in his run for
the presidency and said she was hesitant to
return to government. That would all change,
of course, and Rice would go on to support
Bush and become his National Security
Advisor. Long before the world would
debate her performance in that role and as
Secretary of State, Stanford was deeply
affected by the popular professor and often-
controversial Provost.
Looking back, Blacker suggested that no
one was surprised that Rice would go into
politics.
“I think both by temperament and inclina-
tion, Secretary Rice is on the activist end of
the spectrum in the academic world,” he said.
“Plus, it’s hard to say no when the President
asks you to do something.”
Marisa Landicho, Paul Craft, Nikhil Kamat,
Anna Dearybury, Joshua Alvarez and Eric
Messinger contributed to this report.
Contact Andrea Fuller at anfuller@stanford.edu
and Kamil Dada at kamild@stanford.edu.
2 N Monday, February 23, 2009 The Stanford Daily
Continued from front page
HISTORY
|
Former Provost tackled budget cuts, diversity, IHUM
I Slashing the University budget by $16.8
million between 1994 and 1996
I Eliminating the position of Cecilia
Burciaga, associate dean of Student
Affairs and Casa Zapata resident fellow
in 1994
I Denial of tenure to Assistant History Prof.
Karen Sawislak in 1998
I Making a commitment to expanding
graduate housing in 1998
I Formation of Sophomore College in
1995
I Creation of introductory seminars in
1997
I Replacing Cultures, Ideas and Values
(CIV) with Introduction to the Humanities
(IHUM) in 2000
MAJOR DECISIONS AS
PROVOST:
“She was the least
collegial colleague I can
remember of any
academic I met at
Stanford in more than 40
years.”
— PAUL SEAVER,
history professor emeritus
“She was extremely
caring and warm and
kind and all sorts of
qualities that I wouldn’t
have necessarily expected
in an advisor or professor.”
— ERIN ALAIMO '88
Stanford Daily File Photo
Condoleezza Rice is known for her love of piano and is a trained concert pianist.
The former Provost is also an avid football fan and once was an ice skater. She has
maintained her passion for piano over the years, despite her busy schedule.
has known her for close to 30 years
through teaching and writing
together. He suggested that the for-
mer Secretary of State would need
some time to decompress.
“She is at a point in her career
where she can define her relation-
ship with Stanford,” Blacker said.
“She’s been on a professional tread-
mill that most people would find
utterly exhausting for the last 15
years. So it’s really up to her to
define the nature of her relationship
with the University going forward.
She’s just trying to catch her breath
now. I don’t think she’s thought very
hard about it.”
Chair of the Political Science
Department James Fearon said he
had not spoken to Rice personally
about teaching, but added that Rice
would be able to return to teaching
should she wish to. He said that if
she resumed her role as an active
faculty member in the department,
she will have teaching obligations, as
all faculty do.
Blacker explained that it was dif-
ficult for him to think of Rice on
campus for any period of time with-
out going back to the classroom.
“She considers Stanford her
home,” he said. “I don’t think she
would ever leave Stanford in that
sense. I don’t think she would ever
resign her professorship. She loves
this institution.”
Blacker added, however, that
Rice has always been a bit restless.
“If there is a really interesting
challenge that comes her way, I have
no doubt that she would seize that
opportunity, as long as she can take
another leave of absence from
Stanford,” he said.
Enthusiasm for Her Return
Though Rice has made enemies
in the political sphere, the professor
has many friends and supporters on
campus, particularly at Hoover.
George Shultz, former Secretary
of State under President Reagan
and distinguished fellow at Hoover,
was pleased to hear of her return to
campus and is looking forward to
interacting with another high-level
policy-maker.
“She’s a gifted person —intellec-
tually, musically and in terms of
capacity of friendship and good con-
versation,” he said.
Political Science Prof. Stephen
Krasner arrived at Stanford the
same year that Rice did (1981) and
is glad to see her return. He
explained that over the years, the
two spent a lot of time together,
sharing similar interests in every-
thing from political theory to tennis.
“She’s a good tennis player; she
hits the ball hard,” Krasner joked.
Krasner went on to work for the
National Security Council and then
reported directly to Rice as director
of policy planning at the State
Department. He believes Rice was
successful in her time as Secretary of
State.
“She was very proactive about
linking the U.S. with the Europeans
in terms of negotiating with Iran,”
he said. “She was very committed to
the Six Points talks with North
Korea.”
Thinking back to their time
together in Washington, Krasner
pointed out that Rice was an excel-
lent athlete and musician. He noted
that Rice played the piano regularly
with a small group of musicians in
Washington and was very talented.
“As Secretary of State, she decid-
ed to take up golf,” he said. “She
actually got to be a decent golf play-
er, which is not something you expect
given the demands of the job.”
He added that Rice had an active
social calendar in Washington, mak-
ing time for her friends despite her
near around-the-clock schedule.
“She’s kept her friends through
all her stages of her life,” he said.
“The people that she knew when
she came to Stanford, when just a
research scholar in 1981 —many of
those people are people she’s still
friendly with.”
Opposition to Rice
But Rice’s return will not be cel-
ebrated by all. She made a number
of enemies during her tenure as
provost, and some of those wounds
have yet to heal a decade later. Her
role in the controversial administra-
tion of President George W. Bush
has only exacerbated feelings of ill
will among some professors.
Few of her objectors deny Rice’s
right to return as a tenured profes-
sor, but some are dismayed with her
choice to come back.
Political Science Prof. Emeritus
Hubert Marshall said that, although
he personally liked Rice, he believes
professors should not mix policy-
making with teaching because it
precludes objectivity. Rice’s case, he
said, was exacerbated by her
involvement in the controversial
Iraq War and accusations that the
Bush administration endorsed tor-
ture and the denial of habeas corpus
in Guantanamo Bay.
“People who’ve been working
at Washington at that level are
going to be preoccupied with their
place in history,” Marshall said.
“Almost all of them write books
and almost all of their books are
defensive. I’ve never known the
highest-level person to say, ‘Well, I
was wrong.’”
“I know that nobody who teach-
es in the social sciences is absolutely
objective, but I do think that the
rank and file of those people who
teach in the social sciences really
make an effort to be objective,” he
added. “People who have really
been policy-makers just really can’t
meet that test.”
Political Science Prof. Emeritus
Charles Drekmeier similarly
believed Rice’s image had been
compromised by her time in
Washington, though he admitted she
has the right to be at Stanford.
“Why she didn’t extricate herself
[from the Bush administration] I
can’t understand,” Drekmeier said.
“She compromised her integrity in
ways that will make it hard for her
to be trusted . . . There is no ques-
tion that she colluded in the denial
of the use of instruments of torture.”
Even though Rice has the right
to return, Political Science Prof.
Emeritus John Manley said students
and faculty should not keep their
objections quiet.
“The fact that she’s tenured and
that the administration would wel-
come her back is no reason for peo-
ple at Stanford who object to her
return to stifle themselves,” he said.
“People have a right to speak out
whether she’s tenured or not.”
“I cannot think of Condi as my
former colleague without her hands
stained by the blood of over 4,000
American soldiers and untold num-
bers of Iraqis,” Manley added.
Blacker, however, emphasized
that he hoped the Stanford commu-
nity would give Rice time to read-
just. He said that regardless of what
one thinks of the policies and the
conduct of the Bush administration,
the mental, emotional and physical
demands that were placed on the
former Secretary of State were
extreme.
“I hope people will suspend judg-
ment about what Condi’s return
means until Secretary Rice has time
to figure out what her return
means,” he said.
The Daily is scheduled for an exclu-
sive interview with Rice next week.
Contact Kamil Dada at kamild@stan-
ford.edu and Andrea Fuller at
anfuller@stanford.edu.
RETURN
Continued from front page
The Stanford Daily Monday, February 23, 2009 N 3
STUDENT GOV’T
ASSU pushes budget survey at meeting
By ZOE RICHARDS
The ASSU continued budget talks
with students at the third Town Hall
Meeting at 5pm in Old Union Friday.
ASSU executives Jonny Dorsey and
Fagan Harris as well as Senate Deputy
Chair, Shelley Gao and Admin &
Rules Chair, Luukas Ilves, urged stu-
dents to fill out a survey that they
began circulating Thursday evening
asking students for more detailed
input about their budget priorities.
Preliminary results from the sur-
vey indicate that students listed
Undergraduate Advising and
Research (UAR) research grants and
fellowships, Vaden Health Center,
Counseling and Psychological
Services (CAPS) and The Bridge
among the top priorities that should
be most insulated from budget cuts.
Athletic programs and club sports are
also among the high-ranking student
priorities along with introductory
seminars and Haas Center program-
ming. Some areas that could be com-
promised according to the survey
include, Varsity Athletics, IHUM, stu-
dent government, and new student
orientation (NSO).
In response to the latest survey
results, Jordan McCarthy ‘11 suggest-
ed that NSO organizers should be
careful about what they cut.
“Preserve the kernel without keep-
ing all of the flashy stuff,” he said.
Many students agreed that trim-
ming the overstuffed freshman orien-
tation could save the university quite a
bit of money.
Opening the floor to student dia-
logue, Harris emphasized the impor-
tance of not just re-allocating dollars,
but integrating programs, looking at
the problems holistically and figuring
out how the University can run more
efficiently.
University spending sparked
debate as attendees raised issues
about student employment and
salaries. Angelina Cardona ‘11, ASSU
chair of mental health initiatives,
noted that cutting resident assistant
(RA) salaries in half could save the
Please see BUDGET, page 4
Stanford Daily File Photo
Condoleezza Rice and Residence Dean Thom Massey stand in the Quad in the
early morning hours of May 29, 1998. Rice spoke with protestors who called
for graduate housing reform, decrying the lack of affordable options. Rice
would champion the increase in graduate housing funds to the Faculty Senate.
McFaul selected as National
Security Affairs special assistant
By THE DAILY NEWS STAFF
Political Science Professor Michael McFaul has been
selected by President Obama to serve as special assis-
tant to the President for National Security Affairs and
senior director for Russian and Eurasian affairs at the
National Security Council.
McFaul is currently the deputy director of Stanford’s
Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and
director of the Center on Democracy, Development and
the Rule of Law. He was also a senior adviser to
Obama’s campaign on Russia and Eurasia issues, and he
continued to advise on foreign policy issues during the
transition period.
“President-elect Obama was fortunate to have the
benefit of Mike’s counsel on a range of vital issues dur-
ing the campaign —including dealing with a resurgent
Russia,” said Freeman Spogli Institute Director Coit D.
Blacker in a statement. “Now, from the White House, the
President can call on Mike’s expertise and experience in
the region to build more constructive relationships with
Russia, Eurasia and our allies across a broad strategic
front.”
McFaul graduated from Stanford with a bachelor’s
degree in international relations in 1986 and a master’s
in Russian and East European studies also in 1986. He
went on to receive a doctorate in international relations
from Oxford in 1991.
NEWS BRIEFS
Daily Poll Question
What do you think of Condoleezza Rice’s return
to campus?
a) I think it’s great; we’re lucky to have her
b) She’s a valuable asset, but I don’t agree
with her politics
c) She’s a war criminal and has no place here
d) I don’t care
vote today at stanforddaily.com!
“Why she didn’t extricate herself [from the
Bush administration], I can’t understand.
She compromised her integrity in ways that
will make it hard for her to be trusted.”
— CHARLES DREKMEIER,
political science professor emeritus
“Professor Rice’s return to Stanford will
provide our students and the academic
community with a great opportunity to
learn from her experience in public service
and international affairs.”
— JOHN HENNESSY,
University President
4 N Monday, February 23, 2009 The Stanford Daily
50 YEARS OF
KlND OF BLUE:
/:7D38/HH
:/0=@/B=@G
MON 23 FEB ! 8:00 PM
AN EVENlNG WlTH JlMMY COBB
AND FRlENDS
CCRM/ ST/GE l Admission Free
Livèlv /rts ano CCRM/ prèsènt orummèr ano Milès Davis
sioèman Jimmv Cobb in convèrsation with Jim Naoèl,
Dirèctor, Staníoro Jazz Vorkshop, with spècial guèst
musicians John Viitala, bass ano Davio Hazèltinè, piano,
pèríorming sèlèctions írom Davis' iconic ¹959 rècoro
Kino oí Pluè.
Presented in collaboration with the National Jazz Museum in Harlem, the Stanford Jazz
Workshop, and the Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics (CCRMA).
Generously supported by Abraham and Marian Sofaer.
IiveIyarts.stanford.edu/campus
AB/<4=@2
SPEAKERS & EVENTS
Ensler brings insight on Congo
By ZOE LEAVITT
Eve Ensler, writer of the “The Vagina Monologues,”
called on students to take a stand against the atrocities com-
mitted toward women in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo (DRC) on Friday. In a discussion with Congolese
gynecologist Dr. Dennis Mukwege, Ensler outlined horror
after horror witnessed in the DRC, and argued that violence
against women was a universal issue.
“I wish I could tell you violence against women was a
particularly cultural thing,”Ensler said. “In fact, it isn’t. It’s a
human thing. I have yet to be in any village or town in the
entire world where violence against women isn’t rampant.”
Ensler began her speech with a bang, drawing in the audi-
ence with a monologue based on the experiences of
Congolese rape survivors. From the perspective of a girl kid-
napped by soldiers, Ensler hammered home her points
through a series of rules for survival.
“Get over this ‘It can’t happen to you . . . these soldiers
are here to protect me’ thing,”Ensler said in her monologue.
“It will only confuse you. Never look at him when he is rap-
ing you . . . build yourself a hole and crawl inside . . . After
the first 20 times, it will no longer hurt you. Your insides will
no longer belong to you.”
Mukwege further opened the audience’s eyes by dis-
cussing his experiences as a doctor in the Panzi hospital, a
hospital he helped establish to aid rape survivors —with
women ranging from tiny, six month-old infants to 80-year-
old grandmothers.
Though Mukwege began work in obstetrics and gynecol-
ogy, helping women injured in childbirth, he soon began to
see other cases of physical damage to women’s bodies as the
war in the DRC developed.
“I started seeing cases of rape with assault, not ‘normal’
rapes,” Mukwege said through an interpreter. “Rapes with
atrocities, with psychological tortures, with the aim of
destroying a woman’s genital organs. When I saw the first
instance, I thought it was the only incident, but I started see-
ing more and I realized this was part of the war.”
Since 1999, Mukwege estimates the hospital has helped
24,000 women. He performs about 10 surgeries each day to
repair fistulas, or holes in women’s genital areas. He has
repeatedly described this rape and mutilation practice as
sexual terrorism.
“When you meet these women, families, communities,
that have been terrorized by rape, you realize rape is as ter-
rible as any major biological weapon you can use,”
Mukwege said.
Mukwege further challenged the audience to think about
the consequences of rape.
“Not only are these women infected by HIV/AIDS, but
they also have no chance of being able to have children in
the future,” he said. “These things also destroy any social
cohesion within the community.When a father is not able to
protect his child or his wife, then those family links are bro-
ken, leading to a total lack of social cohesion.And in the end
these populations end up moving away, so you have a huge
number of displaced persons.The end result is the result of a
terrorist action.”
Ensler emphasized that just like any terrorist action, rape
and genital mutilation are problems not specific to race or
particular groups of people.
Economically, she explained that the cell phones and
DVD players that most Stanford students own help fund the
terrorism taking place in the DRC. Since the Congo holds
much of the world’s reserves of coltan, a mineral vital to such
electronic devices, the resource attracts militant groups.
While Ensler has traveled across the world and talked to
thousands of victims of rape and violence, she said nothing
in her experiences prepared her for what she witnessed in
the Congo. She used her speech to pass on this knowledge to
the Stanford community and to inspire people to action, or
at least awareness.
“I really didn’t want to know what was going on in the
Congo, because once you know, there’s a kind of sacred
responsibility,” she concluded. “Now you all know what I
know, so now you are all equally responsible.”
Contact Zoe Leavitt at zleavitt@stanford.edu.
“Monologues” writer, Mukwege
discuss violence against women
“I was received warmly,” Schultz
said, “but I didn’t feel as though I
was coming back to anything. I felt
as though I never left the
University.”
Shultz said he had been involved
with universities continuously ever
since he joined the MIT faculty after
serving as a marine in World War II.
He said he never sold his house on
campus and would visit the Farm
regularly.
“It was just continuity and a nat-
ural place to come back to; I think
Condi has the same situation,” he
said. “She’s basically been a univer-
sity person for all of her adult life.
She’s taken this detour into govern-
ment for a while, but she has shown
that she can get back into the swim
very fast.”
Rumsfeld, Shultz argued, did not
have the same long-term academic
connection.
“Don had been an overseer at
Hoover, but has never been a uni-
versity person,” Shultz said. “His
career has been in politics.”
Director of the Freeman Spogli
Institute Coit Blacker —who
served as a former special assistant
to President Clinton for National
Security Affairs —believes it would
not be appropriate to apply political
standards to people who go on leave
for public service positions.
“I am sure there were many peo-
ple who were unhappy with some
things that the Clinton administra-
tion did, but I had taken a leave of
absence, and I think it is appropriate
that when a faculty member does
that, you hold on to that position for
him or her,” Blacker said. “That is
just a matter of principle.”
He added that there was never
any prospect that Rumsfeld was
going to move to Palo Alto so that
he could be a full-time fellow at
Hoover.
“So his status vis-à-vis Stanford
is completely different from
Secretary Rice’s, who is a tenured
member of the political science
department’s faculty —kind of
apples and oranges,” Blacker said.
A number of professors involved
in the anti-Rumsfeld movement
have also told The Daily that they
do not object to Rice’s return to
campus, even if they disagree with
her politics.
Humanities Prof. Rob Polhemus
said his objection to Rumsfeld was
largely based on his lack of creden-
tials as an academic, a problem that
does not apply to Rice. Polhemus
pushed forward the petition that
called Rumsfeld’s appointment
“contemptible.”
“She’s a full professor who does
have the right to be here,” Polhemus
said. “I don’t have any objection to
her being here.”
“I know a lot of people don’t like
what her role in American history of
the last eight years [was], but that’s
a separate issue,” he added. “You
don’t bump somebody from tenure
[for that].”
Associate French and Italian
Prof. Joshua Landy, another
Rumsfeld objector, agreed that
Rice’s return should not be equated
with Rumsfeld’s.
“It’s a completely different case,”
Landy said. “For one thing, she’s
returning to a job that was kept
open for her as opposed to Donald
Rumsfeld having a position created
for him. . . Prof. Rice has a distin-
guished academic career behind
her. There’s every reason for her to
be here and every reason to return.”
While students rallied in White
Plaza over Rumsfeld’s appointment,
Rice’s return has received a more
tepid response from student
activists. No formal coalition has yet
developed to oppose Rice, although
some students consider both her
and Rumsfeld war criminals.
Daniel Murray, a first-year Ph.D.
candidate in Modern Thought and
Literature, said several students in
his program are concerned about
Rice’s role in sanctioning torture.
The students are trying to put
together a fall symposium about
torture and accountability, featuring
legal scholars, journalists and others
who study human rights issues.
On Feb. 3, Stanford Amnesty
International (SAI) held a screen-
ing of “American Faust: From Condi
to Neo-Condi,” a documentary on
Rice that approximately 50 people
attended. Both Murray and SAI co-
President Emma Laughlin ‘09 said
raising awareness of Rice’s potential
human rights violations was a key
goal —a point echoed by Adam
Hudson ‘10, president of Stanford
Says No to War, who said his group
has no firm plans yet, but eventually
hopes to work with other organiza-
tions in opposing Rice.
“[SAI members are] very flab-
bergasted that she would be coming
back and that there’s not massive
protest going on,” Laughlin said.
“I’m certainly in favor of academic
freedom, and people can talk about
whether or not torture works, but
that’s a lot different than actually
going out and doing it.”
Students like Laughlin deem
Rice a “war criminal” for her
alleged sanction of torture and her
push for war in Iraq. Laughlin said
she knew one alumnus who met
people in Europe who nicknamed
Stanford “War Crimes University,”
based on its affiliation with Rice and
Rumsfeld.
The Stanford Democrats do not
plan to take an official stance on
Rice’s return to campus, according
to President Ashwin Mudaliar ‘09,
who said he personally opposed
many of Rice’s decisions.
“We need to give her a full
review before giving her job back,
even if she is tenured,” he said. “I
promise that if any professor lied
the way she did, they would not be
at this university anymore.”
Contact Andrea Fuller at anfuller@
stanford.edu and Kamil Dada at
kamild@stanford.edu.
RUMSFELD
Continued from front page
“Professor Rice has a
distinguished
academic career
behind her. There's
every reason for her
to be here and every
reason to return.”
— JOSHUA LANDY,
associate French and
Italian professor
university 2 million dollars. Other stu-
dents protested that student salaries
are very important, noting that per-
haps Peer Health Educators and
freshman RAs should be paid more.
Going back to the pre-established
priorities of maintaining front-line
employees, Harris reminded the
group that student welfare was the
most important.
“One priority of the students is
caring about the welfare of others,”he
said.
Dorsey added that the process of
cutting back on programming is a dif-
ficult path for all of those involved
including the University’s administra-
tion.
“Have empathy for these adminis-
trators who are losing things they care
a lot about,” He said. “[They are] also
making personal sacrifices.”
As budgeting decisions draw near-
er, the ASSU is considering compiling
a student-friendly website that will
make updates made by the Provost
and Budgeting Committee and gener-
al information about the budgeting
process more easily accessible to
interested students now and when
budget cuts continue in the fall.
In the end, ASSU Executives
implored students to rally their
friends to let the University know
what matters most in budgeting deci-
sions.
“We’ve got to look in the mirror
and see what we’ve never seen
before,” Harris said.
Contact Zoe Richards at iamzoe@stan-
ford.edu.
BUDGET
Continued from page 3
The Stanford Daily Monday, February 23, 2009 N5
Contrary to popular belief, I am NOT Black,
Indian or Hispanic.
I could go shopping for days and buy every-
thing I see!
I know it’s college, but sometimes I wonder if I
have a drinking problem. For real.
I LOVE standardized tests.
I’ve been to therapy and taken medication for
anxiety. People think therapy is only for crazy
people,but I think everyone in the whole world
would be happier if they went to therapy.
I didn’t cry in The Notebook,but I tell everyone
I did.
My brother killed himself when I was seven. I
was there but I can’t remember it.
I can never have enough purses.
I know I don’t deserve to go to war, but some-
times I feel guilty that I’m at Stanford while my
high school friends get blown up in
Afghanistan.
I make my bed every day.
— Notes on Matt’s Facebook News Feed,
2/11/2009
W
here did this phenomenon come
from? Over 4,000,000 people have al-
ready jumped on Facebook’s “25
Random Things About Me” bandwagon, with
over 100,000,000 random facts posted in less
than two weeks. In two weeks, a lifetime of
hopes, fears, dreams and shampoo preferences
have been spilled out into cyberspace for all the
world to read. It all just seems a little strange.
First off, to get things straight, most of the
“facts” on the lists are meaningless crap, com-
pletely inconsequential drivel that reminds you
why it’s been years since you’ve even seen most
of your Facebook friends. Some, though, are
genuinely mind-blowing stuff. Take the ten I
pulled for this column: they’re funny, clever, ir-
relevant, self-indulgent and heart-wrenching,
often all at the same time.
More than anything else, I think it has to do
with the advent of online social networking and
how it’s reshaped our conceptions of our own
identities. Advances in technology have made
us both the best and worst connected college
students in history.We have access to hundreds
of mediums by which to communicate, but
most of them grant us an almost absurd amount
of psychic distance in our relationships, not to
mention free reign to wholly detach ourselves
from first-person interaction. We share our
text-based fears on AIM.We whisper our text-
based secrets on Facebook. We recount our
text-based dreams on G-chat. Technology lets
us communicate without communicating, to in-
dulge in an online super persona and create a
more crafted, calculated self. Unlike life, there’s
no randomness to online discourse, no chance
of “saying” the wrong thing —it’s damn near
impossible to put your text-based foot into your
text-based mouth when you get an infinite
amount of chances to revise your presentation
and phrasing. Say the wrong thing in an AIM
box and you get to delete it; say it in the real
world and you have to deal with the conse-
quences.
Facebook exploded so quickly because it
was a way for us to learn everything we wanted
to know about our peers without them realizing
that we were interested, and a way for individ-
uals to control and precisely manipulate how
their own image was presented to the world.
It’s impersonal and fake on both ends, and I
think the 25 Things phenomenon is an exten-
sion of this. Maybe the lists are only smoke and
mirrors, more artificially rendered fluff that
bears no resemblance to real life, but maybe
they’re so popular because people are excited
and relieved to find out that their classmates
are just as weird, scared, and generally twisted
as they are sometimes. Maybe the world just
gets complicated when we stake very real emo-
tions on very fake, detached interactions.
As obnoxious as reading that your high
school ex loves backrubs and barn dances
(sigh) might be, I still think anything that pulls
people away from their micromanaged public
image, even if it still has to be hopelessly re-
moved from the real world,is probably a step in
the right direction. Sure, most everything in
these notes is immaterial and serves no purpose
but to further shape one’s self-styled cyber per-
sona,but a few of these things I wish so badly I’d
found out face to face over a beer instead of on
my laptop in Meyer.These are big, meaningful,
brave statements, but this medium makes them
seem trivial and worthless.
During NSO, dorms have incoming resi-
dents anonymously write secrets that get put up
on an all-dorm poster, and people never fail to
be shocked at what their classmates have dealt
with in their lives. Not signing our names may
make us more comfortable, but what if
anonymity isn’t the answer? What if all we’ve
needed this whole time was just a real conver-
sation?
Now forward this to 25 people or you’ll never
be able to have children.
Matt Gillespie holds his breath in tunnels and
wiped back to front until he was fourteen years
old. Share your earth-shattering secrets with him
at mattg3 “at”stanford “dot”edu. Or, you know,
just tell him in person.
OPINIONS
Managing Editors
The Stanford Daily
Es t abl i s he d 1892 A N I N D E P E N D E N T N E W S P A P E R I nc or por at e d 1973
Tonight’s Desk Editors
Kamil Dada
News Editor
Haley Murphy
Sports Editor
Alex Yu
Photo Editor
Charlie Olson
Copy Editor
Cris Bautista
Graphics Editor
Devin Banerjee
Deputy Editor
Nikhil Joshi
Managing Editor of News
Wyndam Makowsky
Managing Editor of Sports
Emma Trotter
Managing Editor of Features
Masaru Oka
Managing Editor of Photo
Joanna Xu
Managing Editor of Intermission
Stuart Baimel
Columns Editor
Tim Hyde, Niko Milonopoulos
Editorial Board Chairs
Cris Bautista
Head Graphics Editor
Samantha Lasarow
Head Copy Editor
Board of Directors
Christian Torres
President, Editor in Chief
In Ho Lee
Chief Operating Officer
Someary Chhim
Vice President of Advertising
Devin Banerjee
Kamil Dada
Michael Londgren
Theodore Glasser
Robert Michitarian
Glenn Frankel
Contacting The Daily: Section editors can be reached at (650) 723-2555 from 3 to 10 p.m. The Advertising Department can be reached at (650) 723-2555 ext. 401, and the
Classified Advertising Department can be reached at (650) 721-5803 during normal business hours.
T
his past week, Stanford hit the bottom
of the barrel —or waste bin —secur-
ing third-to-last place in the “Waste
Minimization”competition for Week Four of
RecycleMania, a 10-week competition that
promotes recycling and waste reduction on
college and university campuses across the
nation. RecycleMania, an annual contest put
on by the College and University Recycling
Council (CURC) and the National Recycling
Coalition (NRC), seeks to heighten aware-
ness of school’s waste management and recy-
cling programs. The competition has come a
long way since the inaugural contest between
Miami University and Ohio University in
2001. According to the RecycleMania Web
site, 514 schools are currently registered for
the 2009 competition, and 148 participated in
the waste reduction component of the com-
petition.
Stanford students generally pride them-
selves on being environmentally conscious
and socially aware. So what did we do to de-
serve the unimpressive 146th-place finish?
Apparently, we produced a larger amount of
solid waste per capita, including recyclables
and trash, than almost any other school in our
peer group.While Virginia Wesleyan College
put competitors to shame with a mere 1.56
pounds of waste per person, Stanford
claimed one of the largest trash heaps, al-
legedly generating 32.43 pounds of munici-
pal solid waste per person.
Although the editorial board is somewhat
skeptical about the reliability of the NRC’s
methods for measuring campus waste —re-
sults are calculated by taking the volume of
recyclables, adding it to the volume of trash
and dividing this number with the population
figure —Stanford’s dismal performance
serves as a wake-up call for the reexamina-
tion of University recycling and solid waste
management programs.
On one hand, the board is proud of the
steps that Stanford has taken to minimize
waste production and promote the collection
of compostable material. According to the
Stanford Recycling Center Web site, the Uni-
versity is currently diverting 61 percent of its
waste away from the landfill.
On the other hand, there is still significant
room for improvement. For starters, Stanford
Hospitality & Auxiliaries, the group that oper-
ates Tresidder Memorial Eateries,should place
highly visible and clearly labeled compost bins
in the dining area at Tresidder Union. The ab-
sence of these bins undermines the education-
al component of Stanford’s composting and
recycling programs, as students are not neces-
sarily aware of what they can do to reduce
waste. The editorial board commends efforts
to sort compostable material off-site, but be-
lieves that the sustainability initiative would be
far more effective if students were informed of
what items constitute compost versus trash,
and were encouraged to sort it themselves.
The board acknowledges that composting
and recycling programs are expensive for the
University. Nevertheless, there are a number
of steps Stanford can and should take to en-
courage waste reduction while simultane-
ously cutting costs. Stanford Dining should
move in the direction of New York Universi-
ty and implement “tray-less”dining. By elim-
inating trays in residential dining locations,
Stanford can conserve water, reduce the
amount of chemical detergents released into
the environment and lower energy costs.
Tray-less dining also has the added benefit of
reducing the volume of food wasted in dining
halls. While some dining halls have fliers en-
couraging students to refrain from using
trays when possible, taking them out of the
dining halls altogether is the best way to have
a significant effect.
Ultimately, if it wants to climb in the Re-
cycleMania rankings, Stanford should work
harder to ensure that students are active,
rather than passive, participants in a sustain-
able food system. Visual cues such as labeled
waste bins and informational signs are key to
increasing campus environmental aware-
ness. With more students doing their best to
generate less waste, recycle and compost the
appropriate materials each and every day,
Stanford can reduce energy costs and pro-
mote sustainability. Who says you can’t have
your cake and eat it too?
Stanford not yet a top-tier
sustainable school
EDITORIAL
Dear Distinguished Faculty of Stanford
University,
I
t was recently announced that as part of
the cuts in programs under the Vice
Provost of Undergraduate Education
(VPUE), the Peer Mentor program and hon-
oraria for pre-major faculty advising would
be cut. As a two-time Peer Mentor, I think I
speak for most students that the Peer Men-
toring program was never particularly well
organized and constantly underutilized, and
most students were content to see it go.
The loss of honoraria for pre-major advis-
ing is far more concerning, however. Pre-
major faculty advising has been a constant
complaint among undergraduates at Stan-
ford. Many students rush to declare a major
simply to get the quality advising from facul-
ty that they so need.The participation rate for
faculty is already low, even with a monetary
reward, and it will likely decline even more.
Many incoming students already receive fac-
ulty advisers who are poorly matched to their
interests and cannot really help them. This
phenomenon will likely get worse.
We’ve had a long history of mediocre fac-
ulty advising.While doing research for this ar-
ticle, I read a 1995 Stanford Report article
about a report discussing reform of faculty
advising. The article could have been written
today. The Stanford Daily’s Editorial Board
writes an article about advising every year. A
review of Faculty Senate minutes from the
past decade indicates that the issue has been
discussed every year. At this point, talking
about improving advising seems moot in the
era of budget cuts. I am willing to concede
that point.
For all students, that first meeting with
their faculty adviser during New Student Ori-
entation is their first interaction with Stan-
ford faculty. I remember mine well —vastly
over-preparing by doing extensive research
and making an agenda for the meeting. I took
this meeting seriously, and I was pleased that
my adviser attempted to answer the million
questions I had and directed me to others
who could answer the ones he could not. He
valued my intellectual development. The ex-
perience for me, and every other student at
Stanford is formative: a good adviser can
open doors to other interesting professors
and direct a student’s interests. A bad adviser
can instill disillusionment in a freshman even
before Fall Quarter classes have started. Stu-
dents take these interactions seriously, but it
is clear from the highly variable quality and
low participation rate that some faculty do
not.
Many faculty members seem content to let
Undergraduate Advising and Research
(UAR) handle the workload. UAR, I am sure,
is under significant strain as it is a “soft” area
that is easy to get cut. Professional staff
should certainly play a role, but in the end
they can only facilitate interaction with facul-
ty and cannot replace one-on-one interaction
with scholars.
What I am asking, faculty, is to not let the
situation get worse, as it very well could. Your
salaries have not been cut. Faculty has not,
nor will they be, laid off. Your jobs are not in
danger. We recognize that decreasing re-
search budgets and fewer graduate students
are a problem, but research and teaching at
Stanford will continue.
What I am asking for is an increase in fac-
ulty participation in the pre-major advising
program, and even more importantly, for pro-
fessors not to take this lightly. If every tenure-
track faculty member participated, each
freshman could have his or her own adviser.
While the faculty participation rate has not
been publicized in recent years, Faculty Sen-
ate minutes from years past indicate it is
about 10 percent. One in 10. Anecdotal evi-
dence based on adviser-student ratios for cur-
rent students indicates it is about the same.
Students have had their freshman-year advis-
er be health care personnel, Graduate School
of Business administrators and other people
essentially unrelated to undergraduate edu-
cation. While those people might be great ad-
visers, it speaks to the dearth of tenure-track
faculty.
If more faculty participate, it will benefit
faculty —fewer advisees per professor, mak-
ing the program more attractive overall —
meaning each student would have an adviser
close to the interests listed on each person’s
Approaching Stanford forms.
So this is my appeal to you: in an era of
budget cuts, it is up to you, the faculty of Stan-
ford University, to preserve and maybe even
improve the quality of advising at Stanford.
You will find that students are better pre-
pared to work with major advisers, who many
of you are, seriously. You should participate,
but even more importantly, value the oppor-
tunity to shape and hone a young, bright
mind.
Stuart Baimel is currently devising plans so that
each student has personal assistants, along with
personal faculty advisers. Join the planning at
sbaimel@stanford.edu.
Unsigned editorials in the space above represent the views of The Stanford Daily's editorial board and do not
necessarily reflect the opinions of the Daily staff. The editorial board is comprised of two former Daily staffers,
three at-large student members and the two editorial board co-chairs. Any signed columns and contributions
are the views of their respective writers and do not necessarily represent the views of the entire editorial board.
To contact the editorial board for an issue to be considered, or to submit an op-ed, please email
editorial@daily.stanford.edu.
PITH AND PLEONASM
Matt Gillespie
Write to us. We want to hear from you.
SEND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR TO
EIC@DAILY.STANFORD.EDU AND SEND OP-EDS TO EDITORIAL@DAILY.STANFORD.EDU
Stuart Baimel
“25 things I hate about you”
STU’S VIEWS
An open letter to the Stanford faculty
WOMEN’S BASKETBALL
2/21 vs. Oregon W 68-49
UP NEXT UCLA
(16-9, 7-7 Pac-10)
2/26 Los Angeles
7 P.M.
Baseball rallies to win Vandy series
By DENIS GRIFFIN
SENIOR STAFF WRITER
The No. 5 Stanford baseball team came out
of its soggy opening weekend successfully, tak-
ing two out of three from Vanderbilt before a
game scheduled for Sunday against UC-River-
side was rained out.The Cardinal showed plen-
ty of heart throughout the weekend, staging late
rallies in all three games.
On Friday and Saturday, Stanford came out
strong, taking its season opener with a 6-5 extra-
innings victory over the Commodores, and won
again 6-5 in the series’ final game to earn the se-
ries victory.
Friday night’s home opener featured a
matchup of top-tier collegiate pitchers, as Stan-
ford junior Jeff Inman went up against Vander-
bilt lefty Mike Minor. Both of the pitchers were
named to the preseason watch-list for the Gold-
en Spikes Award, which annually honors the
best player in college baseball.
Minor was tough on the Cardinal early,
keeping Stanford off the board through the first
three innings of play. Minor appeared to be in
fine form to start the season, showing off a live
arm as his fastballs popped loudly into the
catcher’s mitt.
“Minor was good,” Stanford coach Mark
Marquess said. “Thank God we got him out of
there. He was tough.”
Inman, meanwhile, ran into trouble early, as
Vanderbilt scored a pair of runs on three hits in
the second inning and three runs on four hits in
the third to take a 5-0 lead. But the Stanford
junior, who went 7-2 last season with a 4.27
ERA, settled down, allowing no runs and just
one hit over the next four innings of play.A key
part of Inman’s success was his ability to keep
the ball down, inducing the Commodores to
ground out eight times, compared to just two
fly-outs over that span.
“I was very pleased with Inman; I thought he
did a real nice job of coming back,” Marquess
said. “He started off a little shaky then gave us
three or four shutout innings after they scored
the five on him.And then Pries . . . that’s a great
performance for a freshman.”
“My control was there the whole time,”
Inman said. “I was making them put it in play,
but I think later in the game I was starting to hit
my spots a little better.”
Meanwhile, the Cardinal offense was mak-
6 NMonday, February 23, 2009 The Stanford Daily
SPORTS
Diamond
in the
rough
I
n case you missed it —and odds
are you did — the Stanford
baseball team opened its 2009
season this past weekend with a
three game series against Vanderbilt.
The results? Not perfect, but all in all,
a series victory against one of the na-
tion’s new marquis programs is a re-
sult the Cardinal will gladly accept.
And so should its fans.
The season opening series for
Stanford featured a solid turnout,
but for the most part one didn’t get
the sense that it was students filling
the stands. And I, for one, have no
idea why that is.
I’ll be the first to admit: I certain-
ly wish collegiate baseball were
played with wooden bats —it would
add an additional bit of aesthetic ap-
peal to the game and give the casual
fan a better grasp of the statistics
without needing to stop and think as
much about the inherent differences
between the college and professional
games.
But, that said, there’s still an awful
lot to like out at the Sunken Dia-
mond, starting with an absolutely
gorgeous field and progressing on to
one of Stanford’s most consistently
Freshmen overcome early deficit by Card
By NATE ADAMS
CONTRIBUTING WRITER
The Stanford women’s basketball team
managed to cruise past the Oregon Ducks
after a rough start Saturday night, ultimately
winning by a comfortable 68-49 margin.
Freshman Nnemkadi Ogwumike led the
Cardinal with 13 points, while fellow class-
mate Sarah Boothe and sophomore Jeanette
Pohlen each added 11 of their own. With the
win, Stanford remains tied with California
atop the Pacific-10 Conference as it heads
into its final road trip of the regular season.
Oregon (9-17, 5-10 Pac-10) started off
strong, with five different players scoring in
the first seven minutes of the game as the
Ducks opened up an early six-point lead.
During this stretch, the No. 4 Cardinal (22-4,
13-1) shot only 3-for-10 from the field and
gave up three sloppy turnovers.
“We didn’t have anything going at the be-
ginning of the game,” said Stanford head
coach Tara VanDerveer.“It was disappointing
to see lack of focus and lack of effort.”
Less than seven minutes into the game,
with her team trailing 12-6, VanDerveer de-
cided to take action, simultaneously subbing
out all five of her starters.Three of the players
she put in to replace them—Ogwumike,
Boothe and Lindy La Rocque —were fresh-
men, each averaging under 20 minutes per
game. It was the only time VanDerveer could
recall having ever replaced her entire starting
crew at once.
“When the game started, it had a slow feel
to it,” she recalled. “When we had that time-
out, I told them, ‘We just need a change. We
need more energy and more people working
hard defensively.’”
A set of fresh legs —all 10 of them—cer-
tainly made the difference. Following that
timeout, the Cardinal went on a 25-0 run, the
first 20 of those points coming from freshmen.
Boothe and Ogwumike went back and forth
scoring field goals for a full seven minutes,
driving the score to 19-12 and going 6-for-8 in
the process. Ogwumike had an impressive
five of her six total rebounds during that
stretch, and she and Boothe each went on to
score a game-leading nine points in the half.
“I was pleased with how Sarah and Nneka,
and all our young players, came in gave us a
great spark in first half, and really continued
to play hard,”VanDerveer said. “It was great
to see all the contributions. They’re talented
players and they took the opportunity. If I
could’ve decided things, I would’ve had the
starting players take care of that, but some-
times you have to make some changes.”
After clearly displaying its depth of talent,
the Cardinal continued to play well as Van-
Derveer mixed her regulars in one by one.
Pohlen in particular stood out among the
non-freshman contributors in the first half,
scoring a momentum-stealing three-pointer
MEN’S BASKETBALL
Third time with-
out the charm
By DENIS GRIFFIN
SENIOR STAFF WRITER
Just when you thought it couldn’t
get any worse for the Stanford men’s
basketball team, it did. On Saturday,
the Cardinal authored a fitting fol-
low-up to a pair of gut-wrenching de-
feats at Cal and Oregon State when it
handed the Oregon men their first
Pacific-10 Conference win of the sea-
son, 68-60. The win was the Ducks’
first victory since a contest against
Long Beach State on Dec. 29, snap-
ping a 14-game losing streak.
The loss marked the third consec-
utive defeat for the Cardinal (15-10,
4-10 Pac-10) and has to be consid-
ered the low-point in a season that
has now had plenty of them. On Feb.
14, Stanford fell in Berkeley 82-75,
after leading by more than 20 points
in the first half. The team followed
that up with a Thursday game against
the Beavers in which the Cardinal
scored just 17 points in the first half.
And now, the Stanford men have
lost to a Ducks squad that came into
the game at 6-20 overall on the sea-
son and 0-14 in the Pac-10.
Had the Ducks lost to the Cardi-
nal, they would have been just the
second team ever to start the season
off at 0-15 in the Pac-10 since the
conference went to its current, 18-
game schedule in 1978-1979.
“We grew tonight as a team, we
made plays we haven’t been mak-
ing,” Oregon’s Joevan Catron told
the Associated Press after the game.
“Those were some of the worst eight
weeks of my life, and to fight through
it just shows what this team has and
the fight we’re going to have down
the line.”
Junior Landry Fields and seniors
Lawrence Hill and Anthony Goods
each reached double-digit point to-
tals in the loss, with tallies of 19, 18
and 16, respectively. But Oregon’s
defense flummoxed the rest of the
Cardinal attack, as freshman Jack
Trotter (two points) and senior
Mitch Johnson (five points) were the
only other Stanford players to score
in the game.
The Ducks, meanwhile, made
good use of a more balanced attack.
While Oregon also featured three
players in double digits offensively,
its bench came through with 23
points to augment this attack, which
was led by center Michael Dunigan’s
14 points and eight rebounds.
“We know that they play hard for
40 minutes,” Stanford head coach
Johnny Dawkins told the San Jose
Mercury News. “They’ve done that
even though their record doesn’t re-
flect that. They never quit. We
watched enough tape on them, and
talked to our guys, so we knew what
type of team we’d face from the
standpoint that they are going to play
hard.”
But it was in ball security that the
Ducks truly made their dent in the
Cardinal’s hopes. While Stanford
players turned the ball over 12 times,
Oregon turned it over only eight
times. Thus, the Ducks were able to
attempt five more shots on the night,
a margin that was largely responsible
for their victory.
The game was tightly contested at
both the start and finish of the first
half, but in keeping with a recent
theme for the Cardinal, there was a
point at which Stanford seemed
close to pulling away. With nine min-
utes remaining in the half, a three-
pointer from Goods and a basket
each from Johnson, Fields and Hill
had helped put the Cardinal on top,
21-14. But by the 3:02 mark, a layup
by Tajuan Porter put the Ducks back
within one, 23-22. Oregon held a 29-
28 lead going into halftime with a
MASARU OKA/The Stanford Daily
Freshman Nnemkadi Ogwumike led all scorers with 13 points, and secured six rebounds for the Card,
setting Stanford on track for its ninth consecutive conference win against Oregon on Saturday.
Card drops third
straight at Oregon
Denis
Griffin
Rants and Raves
COMEBACK KIDS
Please see GRIFFIN, page 7
GIULIO GRATTA/The Stanford Daily
Sophomore Michael Marshall and fellow pitchers went head-to-head with a deep Vanderbilt bullpen. Although Marshall was unable to find the
win in the first of Saturday’s games, Stanford found its second 6-5 victory in the back half of the day’s double-header.
MEN’S BASKETBALL
2/21 vs. Oregon L 68-60
UP NEXT
UCLA
(20-7, 9-5 Pac-10)
2/26 Maples Pavilion
7:30 P.M.
COVERAGE:
TV FSN
RADIO KZSU 90.1 FM
(kzsu.stanford.edu)
GAME NOTES: Stanford dropped its third
consecutive Pac-10 loss on Saturday, falling
to 4-10 in the conference, and giving the
Ducks their first Pac-10 win. Stanford looks
for the ultimate rebound against No. 20
UCLA, but struggled last time against the
Bruins, losing 97-63 on Jan. 31.
Please see MBBALL, page 8
GAME NOTES: The lady Card notched its ninth
consecutive win against Oregon on Satur-
day. This time out, though, scoring came
from unusual suspects, with a 25-point first-
half spurt coming largely at the hands of
freshmen Nnemkadi Ogwumike and Sarah
Boothe. The Cardinal next faces UCLA on
Friday in Los Angeles.
Please see WBBALL, page 7
BASEBALL
2/21 vs. Vanderbilt W 6-5
UP NEXT
CAL STATE FULLERTON
(1-2)
2/27 Fullerton, Calif.
7 P.M.
GAME NOTES: Stanford opened the season by taking two
of three games in its weekend series against Vanderbilt.
In all three outings, the Cardinal offense rallied to score
late in the game, twice securing victories. Next, Stanford
makes its first road trip to Cal State-Fullerton to take on
the Titans Feb. 27-March 1.
Please see BASEBALL, page 8
The Stanford Daily Monday, February 23, 2009 N7
INTERNSHIPS
SUMMER LEADERSHIP
TRAINING & OFFICER
OPPORTUNITIES
Enroll in the Army ROTC Leader's
Training Course. Sophomores &
Grad Students Welcome! Develop
your team-building & decision-
making Skills. Take the first
step toward becoming an Officer
in the U.S. Army. Start Strong.
Compete for a Scholarship!
Qualify for a $5k sign-on bonus.
Call CPT Kerkow, 408-554-4034,
email:akerkow@scu.edu
ARMY ROTC. START STRONG.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Office space avail in downtown
Menlo Park. 650-218-3669
CHILDCARE
Sitter needed, weekday aft to pick
up daughter fr sch & transfer to
aft sch activities. Car preferred
Will consider 1-2 individuals to
fill M-F. 650-856-7568;
jtruncer@stanford.edu
DONORS WANTED
$$ SPERM DONOR NEEDED $$
Earn up to $100/donation. Healthy
MEN, wanted for California
Cryobank’s sperm donor
program. APPLY ONLINE:
www.spermbank.com
CAUCASIAN EGG DONOR WANTED
We are seeking a Caucasian donor,
non-smoking women between the
ages of 21-29, 5'6" and above,
athletic and physically fit, fair
complexion, high academic achiever
with an educated and accomplished
family $20,000 plus all expenses.
If you have a desire to help an infertile
family please contact us.
Email: darlene@aperfectmatch.com
1-800-264-8828
www.aperfectmatch.com
Perfectly matching donors with
families since 1998
HELP WANTED
IT Consultant or Administrator
Tech Savvy & Great Communication
Skills a Must
For a Silicon Valley Startup
From $35 per hour
E-mail Staff Aces: jobs@staffaces.com
SOFTWARE PROGRAMMERS WANT-
ED! HTML, PHP, Java, Flash or Perl for
dynamic fast growing Silicon Valley
startup. From $45 per hour contractual
or for permanent placement. Email your
resume to jobs@staffaces.com
ATHLETES WANTED for photos. $50/hr
No exp nec. Email if interested.
ryan@ryanterribilini.com
Mac guru wanted near Stanford.
650-207-9439;claudia.wa@sbcglobal.net
Wanted: 2.5 Month P/T Promotional
Beverage/Sampling College
Ambassador. Interested students
email resume to
college@actionpartners.com.
HOUSING
Attractive PA condo 1br/1ba +
den. Pvt patio, w/d, garage/
storage, $1950/mo. 650-269-7345
Life on the coast-fantastic ocean-
view. Fully-furnished, 3bd/3ba
home for rent in Half Moon Bay
area, 30min drive to Stanford, SF.
Avail 8/01/09-1/03/10, perfect for
sabbaticals! $3800/mo. inc.
utilities & gardener. 650-284-5588
SERVICES
Write Strongly! Good humored,
patient Marshall Scholar, Ph.D.
can help with writing projects
great and small. Stanford discount,
free 30-min consultation. Contact
650-380-2466,
deathlessprose@mac.com
SUBJECTS WANTED
PLAQUEPSORIASISPATIENTSWANTED
If you are 18 years of age or older
and have moderate to severe plaque
psoriasis, you may qualify for a
research study of an investigational
medication at Stanford University's
Dept. of Dermatology. Clinic visits
and study medication are provided
to you at no cost. Participants will
be compensated for time and travel.
Contact our research staff at
650-724-0964 or 650-724-3617 oremail
stanfordskinstudies@gmail.com.
PaidPsychStudies
VarioustopicsinPsychologyDept.
Paysupto$30/hr
psych.stanford.edu/participate
TUTORING
Tutors wanted: all academics,
Flex p/t $25-35/hr, nr Stanford
Day:941-4350;Eve/wkend:493-5512.
PABioAPtutorwanted6509964624
Seeking math tutor for HS senior
2x/wk, $25/hr. Help w homework.
Call Irena: 650-723-3563
CLASSIFIEDS
BY PHONE
Call 650-723-2555 Ext. 1
BY FAX
Call 650-725-1329
Please include Credit Card # and Exp. Date
E-MAIL
classies@daily.stanford.edu
ON THE WEB
Click on “Buy Classified Ads” at
http://www.stanforddaily.com
HOW TO PLACE AN AD
Call (650) 723-2555 Ext. 1
for display and contract rates
*Please allow for 3 business days from the
when you purchased your ad to when it
appears in the paper
successful athletic programs. Both of
those were on display this weekend
as the Cardinal pulled no punches in
opening its season against one of the
SEC’s best.
Vanderbilt has produced top
MLB Draft picks David Price (a
southpaw drafted first overall by the
Tampa Bay Rays in 2007) and Pedro
Alvarez (a third baseman drafted
second overall by the Pittsburgh Pi-
rates in 2008) in recent years, and
from the looks of its freshman class,
elite talent is still flocking to
Nashville,Tenn. On Friday, the Com-
modores had one of the nation’s top
pitching prospects on the mound in
lefty Mike Minor. In short, overcom-
ing the kind of talent Vandy was able
to throw on the field was no small
feat, even for the No. 5 Cardinal.
“We want to see where we are,
and you can only do that by playing
against the best teams in the country,
and Vanderbilt is certainly one of
those teams,” said junior starter Jeff
Inman.
There was certainly a buzz in the
air as Stanford opened its season,
and only part of that was for the cal-
iber of opponent it faced. The Cardi-
nal finished last year in Omaha, Neb.
at the College World Series, tied for
third in the nation behind only Geor-
gia and eventual champion Fresno
State.
But the buzz wasn’t to see the
Cardinal team that was, either. At
least not entirely. Many of the stars
who drove the Cardinal deep into
the postseason, like catcher Jason
Castro, centerfielder Sean Ratliff,
second baseman Cord Phelps, first
baseman and designated hitter
Randy Molina and starter Erik
Davis, had moved on to the profes-
sional leagues.
No, the real reason the weekend
series was a must-see was to size up
the Cardinal’s chances at defending
its status as one of the country’s pre-
mier programs this year.
And the verdict? Quite positive.
While last year the Cardinal was
propelled by power up and down the
lineup, the game plan will need to be
different this year. Perhaps the heart
of the team’s offense is its outfield,
where seniors Joey August and Jeff
Whitlow manned the corners, and
junior Toby Gerhart has shifted to
center and looked quite capable to
start the season. It’s a speedy trio
that should be able to cover a lot of
ground and to help make the Cardi-
nal pitching staff look good.
Gerhart and senior Brent
Milleville will be relied upon to pro-
vide the power for the Cardinal. A
pair of sophomores, meanwhile, will
need to take the next step in order
for Stanford’s offense to truly thrive.
Shortstop Jake Schlander, who saw
plenty of playing time largely for his
defense last season, could become
even more of an asset if he develops
offensively, becoming more of a
complete player. Meanwhile, third
baseman and backup catcher Zach
Jones has moved to the leadoff spot,
taking over for Phelps.
In terms of pitching, the Cardinal
looks to have a solid rotation on
paper, but it is in the bullpen where it
could truly shine. Sophomore closer
Drew Storen has already established
himself as one of the Pac-10’s most
talented arms, and if Friday’s three
innings from Jason Pries are any in-
dication, there are more young arms
backing him up.
So as the 2009 season opens, it’s
time to greet the new Cardinal, not
quite the same as, but possibly just as
good as, the old Cardinal. Just in a
different way. The only question is
why you’re not paying attention.
Denis Griffin is a certified baseball
junkie. Contact him at djgriff@stan-
ford.edu.
GRIFFIN
Continued from page 6
and notching two steals and three as-
sists. She went on to lead both teams
in assists with seven.
After fighting back from its slow
start with this eclectic group of con-
tributors,the Cardinal headed into the
locker room leading 36-16. The half-
time cushion proved more than suffi-
cient as Stanford coasted to victory.
“They just went to work,”Oregon
head coach Bev Smith said of Stan-
ford’s mid-period turnaround. “They
really brought the energy and the
depth, and that’s something that will
help them into the season and deep
into the tournament as well.”
Smith’s Ducks came out with en-
ergy after the intermission, ultimate-
ly outscoring the Cardinal 33-32 in
the half. Junior guard Taylor Lilley
led both teams in the half with nine
points. Lilley, currently second on her
team in points per game with 10.4,
embodied Oregon’s resilient spirit.
“We won the second half, but
there are no moral victories,” Smith
said. “I think it was credit to our
young team, though, [which] bounces
back from a lot of adversity and
wants to finish the season strong and
get better every time out.”
The win —which improved Stan-
ford’s record against Oregon to 39-8
all-time —was an important one for
the Cardinal, as the team stayed even
in its neck-and-neck race with Cal for
the conference championship with
only four games remaining. Eager to
secure her sixth Pac-10 title in seven
years, however, VanDerveer was re-
luctant to savor the thrill of victory.
“This game really points to some-
thing: You have to realize that you’re
not going to get a second chance in
the [NCAA or Pac-10] Tourna-
ments,” she said. “Against some
teams, we’re just not going to go on a
25-0 run. I hope it’s an opportunity
for our team to learn a lesson without
it costing us anything.”
Stanford embarks on its final road
trip of the season next weekend,
heading to Los Angeles for matchups
with USC and UCLA.
Contact Nate Adams at nbadams@
stanford.edu.
WBBALL
Continued from page 6
A series victory...is a
result the Cardinal
will gladly accept.
And so should fans.
ing up ground on Vandy, scoring one
unearned run in the fourth when sen-
ior first baseman Brent Milleville sin-
gled to lead off the inning and ad-
vanced home on two consecutive
two-out fielding errors by the Com-
modores.
In the sixth, Stanford closed the
rest of the gap on three hits and three
walks. Sophomore third baseman
Zach Jones and senior left-fielder
Joey August each singled in a pair of
runs with two outs to tie the game at
5-5.
In the eighth inning, freshman
Jason Pries got his first dose of colle-
giate action as he came on in relief of
Inman. The right-hander from
Alameda impressed in his debut, col-
lecting his first strikeout in the eighth
inning and held the Commodores
scoreless through three innings.
“I had no idea what to expect,”
Pries said. “I was just trying to go out
there, throw strikes, pitch by pitch —
just do what I’ve done all my life, all
my career.”
Small ball won the game for the
Cardinal in the 10th inning, as sopho-
more shortstop Jake Schlander drew
a leadoff walk and sophomore second
baseman Colin Walsh bunted him
over to second and Jones’ fly-out to
center got him to third. Junior Toby
Gerhart then came through with the
game-winning RBI, lining a two-out
single to right center field for Stan-
ford’s first win of the season.
The Cardinal’s second game of the
season did not go quite so smoothly,
as sophomore starting pitcher Dan
Sandbrink gave up three runs
through the first 3.1 innings. The
Commodores ran their way to a pair
of runs in the third, turning a pair of
singles, a walk and three stolen bases
into a 2-0 lead. Sandbrink got out of
the inning without allowing any more
runs, but was pulled after giving up a
one-out double in the fourth.
But this time around, Stanford’s
bullpen was able to offer the team no
relief from the Vandy onslaught.
Freshman lefty Scott Snodgrass gave
up a double for an RBI, a single, hit a
batter, and then another fielder’s
choice RBI put the Commodores on
top 4-0. The fifth inning proved even
worse for Snodgrass, as the freshman
gave up a grand slam without getting
a single out in the inning. Vanderbilt
would go on to take a 12-1 lead by the
middle of the seventh, and even a fu-
rious, seven-run eighth inning from
the Cardinal bats was not enough for
a Stanford comeback as the Com-
modores won, 12-9.
The second game of Saturday’s
double-header, though, proved more
to Stanford’s liking. Sophomore clos-
er Drew Storen got the win in his first
appearance of the season, throwing
the final 2.2 innings for the Cardinal.
Offensively, a three-run rally in the
eighth pushed the Cardinal over the
top as Walsh doubled to collect two
RBI and the Cardinal’s third run
scored on an error by the Vanderbilt
centerfielder on the play. After a per-
fect ninth in which Storen struck out
two, Stanford had its second 6-5 win
of the series.
Next up for the Cardinal is a road
series at Cal State-Fullerton starting
this Friday. Stanford will then return
home to take on St. Mary’s on
March 3.
Contact Denis Griffin at djgriff@stan-
ford.edu.
BASEBALL
Continued from page 6
flurry of four missed Stanford shots
in the final 45 seconds of the half.
At the start of the second period,
it was the Ducks’ turn to pull away,
gaining a 37-30 advantage just under
three minutes into the second half.
But the Cardinal clawed its way
back, thanks to a Johnson three-
pointer and buckets from Fields and
Hill. From then, the game stayed
close until the one-minute mark.
Oregon’s Kamyron Brown sunk a
three-pointer with 1:07 remaining to
but the Ducks up 62-58.
Goods answered back with a pair
of made free throws for the Cardi-
nal’s final points of the night, but the
Ducks were equally solid in free-
throw attempts, hitting four of five in
the final minute of play. A turnover
by freshman guard Jeremy Green
and a subsequent layup by Oregon’s
Matthew Humphrey added insult to
injury and iced the game for the
Ducks, 68-60. Oregon students
rushed onto the court after the game
to celebrate the team’s first Pac-10
win of 2009.
Next up for Stanford is a Thurs-
day night home game against
UCLA. Tip-off is scheduled for 7:30
p.m. at Maples Pavilion.
Contact Denis Griffin at djgriff@stan-
ford.edu.
MBBALL
Continued from page 6
8 NMonday, February 23, 2009 The Stanford Daily
SIXTH MAN Continued from front page
Men’s Basketball Office. Further, the
condition at that time for selling these
seats rested on filling the section for the
Cal game, which occurred.”
The athletic department claimed
that Link and the Sixth Man leader-
ship were informed in January that
such a move was in the works. On Fri-
day,Associate Athletic Director Chris
Hutchins responded to Link’s com-
ments.
“Her email that went out saying
there has been no communication is
inaccurate,” said Hutchins, who is in
charge of the athletic department’s
External Relations.“I am disappoint-
ed, because that is not the case. Alex-
is Link has been involved in those dis-
cussions.”
“We did share with her that our
intent was to sell Section 13,”
Hutchins continued. “In January
when we met with [the Sixth Man or-
ganizers], we said ‘This is something
we are going to do,’ but they said
‘Give us a chance to sell [more tickets
in the Sixth Man section].’”
Stanford Athletics claimed that the
problem is low student attendance. In
the 2005-2006 men’s basketball sea-
son, nearly 2000 students signed up to
be part of the Sixth Man Club. Since
then, those numbers have steadily de-
clined. 1303 people signed up last year.
In 2008-2009, there are only 648 Sixth
Man members.
The actual attendance numbers for
this season are even worse.Attendance
has declined throughout the year —
only 324 Sixth Man members showed
up for the Cal game on Jan. 17.
According to the athletic depart-
ment, Sections 9-12 can accommo-
date all of the 648 Sixth Man mem-
bers and the Band —with room left
over for students who buy individual
game tickets.
Link said that selling seats in Sec-
tion 13 is “irresponsible,” noting that
“these two games [against UCLA and
USC] have historically been two of the
biggest, if not the biggest, home games
on our schedule for student atten-
dance.”
To Hutchins, that argument doesn’t
hold much water.Before the Cal game,
“that was the same statement they
made.”
“The numbers have spoken for
themselves,”Hutchins concluded.
Representatives from Stanford
Athletics said that financial motiva-
tions had little to do with the decision.
It was all about filling seats and sup-
porting the men’s basketball team.
“It is important for coach [Johnny]
Dawkins and the men’s basketball
program to have that area filled,”
Hutchins said.
“We want nothing more than Sec-
tions 9-13 to be absolutely filled with
students,”she added.“The passion that
comes out of those students —we
want them to be there.”
Earl Koberlein played basketball
for the Cardinal 1982-1986, returning
to the Farm in 1993 as an administra-
tive assistant to former coach Mike
Montgomery. Just a year earlier, the
men’s team had suffered through an
atrocious 7-23 season and finished 2-12
in the Pacific-10 Conference. Kober-
lein helped start the Sixth Man club in
1993 to win back student support.
“We said, ‘We’ve got to do some-
thing to get students back,’” he said.
“We were almost paying them to come
back. We were pretty much bribing
them to come.”
With active participation from the
coaching staff and players, the Sixth
Man steadily grew and became one of
the most intimidating cheering sections
in college basketball.
“It’s awesome when you hear some-
one like [ex-Arizona coach] Lute
Olson say Stanford is one of the tough-
est places to play in the Pac-10,” said
Koberlein, now the associate athletic
director for Intercollegiate Sports.
“We’ve got to get it back to that.”
It was suggested that the 2009
team’s disappointing performance has
led to the decline in attendance. Kober-
lein doesn’t think that is the case.
“I don’t think so,”he said.“Look at
the Cal game. At the time we were
[11-3].”
Yet, the Sixth Man section was less
than half full.
“It’s embarrassing how sparse it
was,”he lamented.
Koberlein doesn’t blame student ap-
athy alone for the decline in Sixth Man
attendance. He admitted that the ath-
letic department did not do a good job
promoting the team and rallying stu-
dent support.
“We had to do a better job of getting
the word out,”he said. “We didn’t do a
good enough job promoting Sixth Man
as we had in the past.”
The UCLA game begins at 7:30 p.m.
on Thursday, and the Cardinal tips-off
against USC at 5 p.m. on Saturday.
Contact Jacob Johnson at twoj@stan-
ford.edu.
“We made
plays we
haven’t been
making.”
— JOEVAN COTRAN,
Oregon forward
AGUSTIN RAMIREZ/The Stanford Daily
Senior Anthony Goods, along with Landry Fields and Lawrence Hill, reached double digits in scoring against Oregon. The three combined for all but seven of the Card’s 60 points.
CRIS BAUTISTA/The Stanford Daily

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful