“I’m just terrified that there is something in there from my misspent youth that is going to come up,” he said. “I don’t know what’s in there. I collected everything.”
I hope something interesting is in there. Following the rules is boring.
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2014/05/16/3451537/uscs-new-pat-conroy-collection.html?sp=/99/205/&ihp=1#storylink=cpy
In 2012, USC received a record $238 million in external research
funding, more than 60 percent from federal sources. Every $1 of research
funding generates an estimated $2.21 in local economic growth, making
the impact of USC research more than half a billion dollars.
First of all, we're not even talking about losing a half billion dollars of money from the economy even if you assume for the sake of argument that the multiplier effect of this money is correct as Keynesian economic theory would have you believe. Let's assume that his economic assumption is totally right. I'm not going to address economic theory and the multiplier effect today.
Let's just talk about this guy's little research program. (By the way, this guy ain't an economics professor.) I'm not a scientist, but it looks like he's into research smoking pot as it relates to cancer. If someone can decipher what the heck he's actually researching, let me know. But I digress.
Ok, so last year alone, USC got $238,000,000.00 in funding for research. I don't care who you are, that's a lot of money. Ok, so 60% of that came from federal sources, which is $142,800,000.00. With me so far?
Ok, so now the big, scary sequester is here. For those of you who don't remember, the sequester is cutting 2.23% from the federal budget. So 2.23% of $142,800,000.00 is $3,184,440.00.
To recap, in 2012 USC received $238 Million dollars. For that year alone.For just research. Now, USC faces the possibility that it's only going to receive $234.8 Million in 2013? We're talking about a little over $3 million dollar cut. That's not that big of a difference.
However, this professor says that "sequestration could cost USC up to $12 million in competitive federal grants." Ok, fine. Even using his numbers, that means USC research has to subsist on $226 Million each year.We're talking about a 1.74% funding decrease here, pal. You can still buy a lot of pot and Cheetos for $226 Million.
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/04/03/2704915/nagarkatti-sequestration-will.html#storylink=cpy
Oh nooes! Only $226 million (each year) to research and study things! What will become of us?
Here's the part that really galls me:
While we understand the difficult budget situation our country faces,
and recognize that shared sacrifice is the only path to recovery, our
research universities are significant contributors of growth and
prosperity.
Shared sacrifice? This professor is saying that USC and Columbia are going to really suffer if the extra $12 Million of Uncle Sugar's money don't come to his little research programs. What part is he sacrificing? He can't even sacrifice a little bit of his research program in our shared sacrifice. And he's not just talking to his pals about this over coffee. He's running an op-ed in The State to try and convince everyone that he can't do without his precious little 1.74% of a funding cut, and saying that we need to engage in "shared sacrifice" so he can keep researching stuff with no decrease in funding.
Maybe he should get some people to research the word "shared".
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/04/03/2704915/nagarkatti-sequestration-will.html#storylink=cpy
Cry me a river.
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/04/03/2704915/nagarkatti-sequestration-will.html#storylink=cpy
Every Thursday night during
football season, Steve Spurrier has a radio-call in show that gives
him a forum to talk about the week’s upcoming football game, talk about how the football team is
doing, and generally answer questions from fans. It’s not usually very
newsworthy, as the usual comments about how the football team is doing aren’t exactly
“news”.
Spurrier changed that last night.
During the show, Coach Spurrier
went off on a little soliloquy about winners and losers. He specifically
mentioned that there was a certain journalist in Columbia that was a “loser” and an “enemy”. Coach
Spurrier never mentioned the journalist by name, but everyone knows that he was
referring to Ron Morris of The State newspaper. At one point, Coach Spurrier
quoted Attila the Hun. Here's what Coach Spurrier said that I want to get into:
"If Mike McGee (former USC athletics director), when he hired me,
he would have said 'Steve, we're gonna give you a chance to run the football
program at South Carolina, you hire your coaches, do your thing, but there's
one thing you gotta put up with, the local media will try to trash you, they'll
try to ruin your reputation, they'll try to portray you as a mean, evil,
self-serving person.' And, I would have said, 'well you give that job to
somebody else, I'll wait for the North
Carolina job to open.' which was opening the next
year. But, I'm glad it worked out."
"That is not part of being the head coach at any university, is to be
the target of the newspaper to give a guy who obviously has an ax to grind. I'm
not that mad at the guy. The guy is who he is, we all know who he is."
"Butwe need to make some changes and I really believe between President
Pastides and the guy that runs the newspaper, that some good changes are coming
forth and I encourage the people that canceled their subscriptions last year,
when some of this crap started last year, to give the newspaper and our
university a chance. I believe that our city is going to be better off."
Mr. Morris and Coach Spurrier have
been in a feud of sorts ever since Mr. Morris wrote a column stating that Coach Spurrier “poached” Bruce Ellington from the basketball team and convinced him
to play football. Coach Spurrier took exception to that characterization, and feels that he has been accused of dishonest conduct. Given the connotation of the word "poaching", I can't say that I blame him.
I thought the feud had reached the high point last season when Coach Spurrier
actually refused
to continue with a press conference while Mr. Morris was still in the room.
Last night may have marked the beginning of the end of the feud. I'm all for having a strong, vibrant newspaper - but that's not what we have right now.
I don’t know what this all means
exactly, but it sounds like the University is backing up Coach Spurrier on this
issue. I know that Mr. Morris is in the business of writing controversial
columns that generate page-views and circulation, but there’s a difference
between writing an opinion and misstating facts that impugn someone’s
character. Also, simply trolling the football program to get internet traffic
isn’t exactly a great business model, and it should be beneath the dignity of
our newspaper. It’s bush-league.
It’s fine for the newspaper to
criticize the coach when he deserves it, give him praise when he deserves it,
and offer insight into the sports program. I would welcome that. But that’s not
what we have. Our local newspaper seems to perpetually criticize the football
program, and doesn’t offer any great insight.
Heck, I don’t even go to The State
for sports coverage anymore. It’s just not that good. In any event, there
should be some sort of shake-up with either how USC Football is covered by The
State. Maybe the end result could be some good
journalism.
Handguns are not on the list of things you bring with you to college. You're a freshman at USC. You move into your dorm room, and you're going to want to have all sorts of cool stuff. You bring your laptop, your clothes, some cool posters, and you're all set. Maybe a mini-fridge and your books. But that's pretty much it.
What you don't do is bring five handguns with you when you move into your dorm room. FIVE! What in the world was he thinking?
Look, I'm a gun guy. I like to go shooting more than almost anyone I know. I'm pro-gun. But I'm also a big fan of following rules and using the common sense God gave ya. What could this kid have possibly been thinking?
It's debatable whether the University should allow guns on campus, but it's the rule. You don't get to break a rule just because you disagree with it. And if you want to get all Ghandi on me, just remember, Ghandi was fine with accepting the punishment he was handed. He didn't expect to get off scott-free. Follow the rules or suffer the consequences. It's that simple.
I don't want to hear any lame excuses about him fearing for his safety or some variation on "guns are just an ordinary thing for him" so no big deal. Rules are rules. I would refer you to Viper for more explanation.
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2012/08/23/2409045/usc-student-arrested-expelled.html#storylink=omni_popular#storylink=cpy
He's been arrested and suspended, as he should be.
As athletes we have the opportunity to define the legacy we leave behind.This doesn’t just end with our performance on the field but our performance off of it.I’m not asking you to be perfect.We are going to screw up but life is about learning from those mistakes.
