The Winter Activities Fair was held yesterday in the Newcomb Hall Ballroom, but if you didn’t know that, you’re not alone. The event
    was sparsely attended, no doubt because of a limited advertising campaign. Attendance at the winter event is always lower than at the Fall Activities Fair because of the large number of first-year students looking to find activities when they first arrive on Grounds. Students, however, are still looking for new activities after they have adjusted to University life. It is a shame so few students were aware of the opportunity to connect with new organizations.

The winter fair already faces some challenges getting noticed. For one, the event is inside, rather than in the Amphitheater. Students might happen across the outdoor event in the fall while exploring Grounds and decide to find out what the commotion is about — the Winter Activities Fair cannot rely on people chancing by. The Fall Activities Fair also can rely on resident advisors in first-year dormitories to let their residents know about the event; many of them likely use the fair to fulfill their “programming” requirement.

In the winter, more deliberate advertising is needed. This semester, the event did not even appear in the Connections@UVa e-mail newsletter, probably the easiest form of advertising available. Only students advertising their own organization at the fair were likely to know about it. An announcement appeared on the University’s Web site, but the description of the event left something to be desired: “This event is for all the CIO’s [sic] to recruit first years in their organization.” More details — including the fact that everyone is invited — would have made the event more welcoming for the few people who bothered to read the description.

If the Fall Activities Fair relies primarily on the curiosity of passersby, it makes sense for the winter fair’s organizers to advertise in a similar manner. Students may not often wander through the third floor of Newcomb Hall, but the second and first floors are always filled with students. Perhaps some signs or students encouraging dining hall patrons to attend the fair would have made the event more successful.

Many factors influence voters in student elections held every spring, but the placement of the candidates’ names on the ballot should not be one of them. Recognizing that the names at the top would receive more votes from lazy voters and that an alphabetical ordering of names would give an unfair advantage to anyone named Aaron, the University Board of Elections and the Information Technology and Communication staff that runs its Web site shuffle the names on the ballot, presenting them in random order to each voter.

They do not do the same, however, for each referendum. It may seem trivial, but even when the choice is between “yes” and “no,” the option on the top might also have the upper hand — especially if voters are reluctant to read the referendum. Presenting the choices in random order is a quick fix to a problem that may be distorting students’ views.

THIS MONDAY was a day off from classes in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. This federal holiday always falls on the third Monday in January, meant to be around King’s birthday, which is Jan. 15. Jan. 19 was also the celebration of an actual birthday — the bicentennial of Edgar Allan Poe’s. I am sure this is a surprise to many, since the University has so studiously ignored the occasion. While Edgar Allan Poe cannot be said to merit the same acknowledgement as King, the 200-year anniversary of his birth should have been commemorated by the University.

The absence of anything to mark the occasion in Charlottesville was picked up by The Hook in a column published last week. According to The Hook, “There are literally dozens of events scattered among Boston, Baltimore, New York, Philadelphia, and Richmond.” Among these events was a lecture at the University of Richmond, which is not among the colleges that Poe attended (in addition to the University, he also attended West Point). Why then, nothing in Charlottesville? Poe is certainly one of the University’s more distinguished students. His room on the West Range has been set aside and returned to the condition it was in while Poe was here, raven and all. Perhaps the University considered that a sufficient enough celebration of Poe for all the rest of its days. But in addition to the University’s oversight, no student groups chose to recognize the event.

13 West Range is preserved by the Raven Society, which also failed to recognize the bicentennial on the actual day. The group’s very name, according to its Web site, “honor[s] the most famous poem of the University’s most famous poet.” Obviously Poe cannot be said to be the University’s most famous writer. As the University was founded by Thomas Jefferson, perhaps it is difficult to get excited about a mere literary figure, no matter how important. Jefferson was the very definition of a Renaissance man and Poe only a writer and a drunk. According to the University, “Poe is generally recognized as the father of the genre of the detective story as well as a major influence on the literature of terror and horror,” and yet that still isn’t enough to grant him some recognition on his birthday. While the Jefferson Society is proud to claim Poe as a former member, it also did nothing to publicly celebrate the bicentennial. According to its Web site, it occasionally does readings of Poe’s works in keeping with its literary origins, and yet did nothing on Poe’s bicentennial.

The exhibition “From Out That Shadow: The Life and Legacy of Edgar Allan Poe” will run from March to August in the Harrison Institute and is “the most comprehensive exhibition ever devoted to Poe,” according to the University Library’s press release. The reason for the March opening has to do with dates the gallery would be open and when items could be loaned out, according to University Library Exhibits Coordinator Mercy Quintos Procaccini. The exhibition will include not only original manuscripts but also records of Poe’s time at the University and many other rare pieces of Poe history that make it well worth the wait.

Despite the commendable efforts of the University Library in putting on this exhibition, which is to coincide with the bicentennial year, it is still shocking nothing was planned for Jan. 19, especially considering that The Edgar A. Poe Bicentennial Symposium (1809 – 2009) is to be held at the Harrison Institute in April. Procaccini noted that there is no umbrella planning organization for the Poe bicentennial, which is likely the cause of this egregious oversight. “The library has its piece of it, and anything else was left up to others in the University system,” said Procaccini.

With all the free time students had Monday, some of them — myself included — would have enjoyed attending a reading of “The Raven” or a screening of one of the many movies based on Poe’s short stories. Perhaps the University did not want to detract attention from the celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. Yet I think both occasions could have been celebrated without detracting from each other. This moment for celebration has slipped by, and while the exhibition and events planned for later this year will certainly commemorate the bicentennial, the University has missed an opportunity to celebrate such a distinguished former student.

Annette Robertson is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at a.robertson@cavalierdaily.com.

On Wednesday, on opposite sides of the South Lawn, pro-Palestine and pro-Israel students demonstrated their fidelity to their respective causes. On display, however, was more than a demonstration of the wide gulf that exists between these conflicting perspectives. On display was a clash of conflicting methods. On one side students in support of Gaza constructed a graveyard, complete with cardboard gravestones, in remembrance of those Gazans killed during the recent conflict between Israel and Hamas. On the other side of the South Lawn, students, myself included, held Israeli flags, handed out leaflets and sang songs about peace.

The contrasting methods of these two demonstrations proved not only to be striking but ironic as well. As the reader may know, the recent conflict between Gaza and Israel began in earnest last month when Israel took military action in response to Hamas rocket attacks against Ashdod, Sderot and other Israeli cities. Throughout most of the three-week conflict, Hamas continued to fire rockets on Israeli cities, though the number diminished as Israel’s offensive began to take effect. The primary results have been on one hand the substantial reduction in Hamas rockets falling on Israeli cities, and on the other hand the horrific losses suffered by the Palestinian people, both in terms of infrastructure and human life.  

Some see this as a categorical defeat for Hamas, not merely in militaristic terms but in political terms as well. In the past Hamas has played a dangerous game of chicken with its bigger and far more powerful neighbor. This time it pushed Israel too far, causing the largest retaliation since the 2006 Israel-Lebanon war. Knowing that it had no military hope, Hamas still continued firing Qassam rockets on Israeli cities, while Israel brought Gaza to its knees in order to stop Hamas. Hamas showed not only an appalling degree of malice toward the lives of innocent Israelis but also wanton disregard for the consequences that its actions had for its own citizens. Yet Hamas did not stop until its rocket supply dwindled, and now it has no more havens left from which to shoot them. Because of its anger or hate or pain, Hamas simply could not give up until it had nothing left to give.

After being broken so thoroughly, one would expect Gazans to be suing for peace, whatever the price. Divvying up blame in this dizzyingly complex situation should be, at this point, wholly beside the point. Gazans should understand better than anyone how violence only begets more violence — pain only more pain. On the other side, the Israeli victors had the strength to take the current peaceful respite by force. It would be only natural for them to go to great lengths in justifying such force, citing the protection of their civilians and enumerating an endless litany of war crimes perpetrated by Hamas.

Yet, in a display of irony, both of these roles were flipped on their heads yesterday on the South Lawn. Representing Israel on one side were students making no overt justifications for the righteousness of their cause, no matter how vindicated they surely must have felt. Instead, they sang of peace and passively showed support for Israel in her time of trouble. In contrast, supporters of Gaza tallied the death toll on flyers and posters, concluding, “The world stands with Gaza.” This dubious conclusion, and the logic used to reach it, seemed dedicated to condemning Israel while advocating Hamas resistance, justified through an exhibition of the tragedy Gaza endured. The victors passively advocated peace and the defeated justified their self-righteousness.

In a still deeper and darker ironic twist, the “graveyard” exhibit presented a sad insight into how this tragedy got so far in the first place. By creating a scene of death, students in support of Gaza ostensibly sought to justify their cause and curry public favor by showcasing the suffering of the Palestinian people and glossing over Israel’s distress. In the current cycle of violence, however, this sort of advocacy is precisely the problem. The history of legitimate complaints goes back decades in a confusing tangle that, predictably, both sides claim to unravel in their favor. The cyclical nature of the violence is caused by the tendency of each side to consider its own pain more terrible then the pain of its opponents. So, each side inflicts more pain on its opponents and the cycle seems to never end. Through passion and the absence of reason Hamas keeps feeding into this dark and deadly tragedy.

These students, by using the Palestinian death toll as their justification, only fuel the cycle of death with blinding passion. At the University we should be above that. We should not be part of this cyclical problem; we should be finding ways to break out of it. A graveyard was not the answer. A graveyard only plays into the twisted game of unthinking passion Hamas is playing in its never-ending quest to avenge itself on Israel, no matter the cost. A graveyard politicizes the tragedy, cheapening the loss through a popular stunt — touting pain as if it represents the side with the only legitimate claims to suffering. No matter how bad we feel, no matter how much we suffer, we justify ourselves through our actions, not our pain.

Yakov S. Medinets is a third-year student in the College of Arts & Sciences.

OOPS, HE did it again. Staring down at over a million frigid spectators at the Capitol, Barack Obama didn’t deliver a speech for the ages.
The usually ebullient president-elect was grim, his face drooping under the weight of the Herculean task that lay ahead. His speech had few applause lines (and little applause) and no memorable one-liners. On a day when everyone expected Lincoln’s flowery poetry or Kennedy’s uplifting rhetoric, he painted a somber picture of “raging storms,” imploring us to “set aside childish things” and face up to a generational challenge as our forefathers had done — a “new era of responsibility.” And so the most anticipated inauguration address in modern U.S. history was quickly written off by some as “fluff” and “uninspiring.”

But that’s probably what Obama was going for. Grandiloquence in his predecessor’s second inaugural brought him nothing but charges of hypocrisy and insanity (how exactly would we “end tyranny?”). And soothing words would only set stratospheric expectations for the American people that would plunge with the dreary stock market numbers.

So Obama decided to just tell it like it is in his inauguration speech. To tell Americans where they came from, where they are now and where he is taking them. Yes, there was some vivid imagery, but those who praised the address did so for its plainness, honesty and directness. As he said himself in a recent interview, “If you play it straight with them … then I have enormous confidence that the American people will rise to the challenge.”

Playing it straight was not an inauguration innovation for Barack Obama; it is his defining oratory quality. Remember his Democratic nomination speech at Invesco Stadium? When a feverish crowd of 80,000 expected another “I Have A Dream” speech, Obama deftly used the occasion to address criticisms about the vagueness of his policies. He laid out “what exactly change would mean,” issue by issue, in programmatic style. It wasn’t a speech for the ages but it was an honest speech for the time.

And remember his race speech? Instead of sweeping the race issue under the rug by disowning Reverend Jeremiah Wright, he grabbed the issue by the horns and wrestled with it, talking bluntly about a racial “stalemate” in our yet to be perfected Union. It was the most candid assessment of race relations in decades.

Obama can afford to play it straight because, in his case, the man is the moment. Think back to Obama’s key speeches — the Democratic nomination speech, the Berlin speech, the election victory speech, the race speech or even the inaugural.
                           
 I bet you can’t recall many era-defining lines from them the way you can with speeches by Kennedy, FDR, Reagan, and Lincoln (no, “yes we can” doesn’t count). All you can remember is his clear, resolute voice, his articulate nature, his coolness under pressure and his presidential stature. All you remember is Obama himself.

That’s because Obama is the moment. He doesn’t have to sermonize about diversity when he is the son of a poor Kenyan immigrant and the nation’s first black president. He doesn’t need to lecture about hope when we know his story is impossible without the American dream. He doesn’t need to ramble on poetically about equality when we understand his array of experiences that span from Chicago’s South Side to Harvard. The man makes the speech.

Obama has probably figured this out. That’s why his speeches are so similar, but the moments themselves seem so unique. Biographer David Mendell writes that Obama’s message has remained remarkably consistent, linking Americans through a common bond of humanity and collective salvation through equality, change, unity and hope, and peppered with references to the Bible, Dr. King and the founding fathers.

What changes is the moment that Obama places himself in – the setting, the time, the tableau. It’s not a coincidence that Obama chooses symbolic locations for his addresses – announcing his candidacy where Lincoln gave his famous “House Divided Speech” or accepting the nomination at Invesco Stadium. Or that he spends so much time in his speeches placing his audience in a particular time – be it his sweeping review of race relations or his generational overview in the inaugural.

So if you’re expecting a poetic Lincoln or a florid Kennedy in Obama, forget it. Since he is the embodiment of his message in a way no president has ever been, Obama knows he’s got the moment down. So, while there are some poetic lines in his speeches, this special quality gives him an unprecedented latitude to play it straight – to tell Americans where they are in history, to grapple with uncomfortable issues like race or to unveil grim realities like our wasteful ways. Obama simply captures moments; he doesn’t need to create them.

And that’s what he did in his inaugural. He spoke plainly and honestly about the crisis America was in, how Americans had dealt with such situations in the past, and what they needed to do now. It wasn’t a speech for the ages, but it was perfect for the time. It wasn’t the poetry experts yearned for, but the straight talk we needed. It wasn’t ground-breaking, but it hit all the right notes.

And it’s exactly what we should expect from a president who plays it straight.

Prashanth Parameswaran’s column usually appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at p.parameswaran@cavalierdaily.com. 

Anonymous sources are a problem.

Some stories could never be told without them. Some whistle-blowers would be much less inclined to pucker up if they couldn’t do it in the dark. On the other hand, granting anonymity to someone with a gripe provides a shield for people to attack, mislead and outright lie with impunity. And it makes some people question the integrity of the media that grants anonymity. How do readers know those anonymous sources are real people? And, since we don’t know who they are, we can’t know much about their motivation or their veracity.

The media’s challenge is balancing the interests of the attacked, the attacker and the public the media is supposed to serve. In a recent editorial, The Cavalier Daily explained how it decides whether to let someone speak anonymously: “The Cavalier Daily Book of Policies and Procedures states, ‘Sources who make legitimate requests that their names not be used and offer important information will be cited anonymously.’”

The editor-in-chief makes the final call.

The question, of course, is how you define “legitimate.”

All this comes up, of course, because of a Jan. 13 article in which an ex-University student accused the honor system – and several individuals, including jury members, a trial chair and the council for the community – of unfairly convicting her of plagiarism and unreasonably denying her request for appeal. Along the way, the unnamed ex-student also called into question the judgment and fairness of a professor.

The professor was named in the story. So were two students who apparently served as councils for the community.

Letters to the editor came in, including one from someone who claimed to be the unnamed ex-University student’s mother, which seems to me to compromise that ex-student’s anonymity.

But that’s beside the point of this column.

I commend the Cavalier Daily for explaining itself to its readers. In the editorial quoted above, the paper explained the standards it used to decide the anonymity question. It identified the position, if not the person, ultimately responsible for the decision. And it suggested a policy change that might improve the situation: “Perhaps if the Honor Committee allowed students who wish to have their trial discussed publicly to waive their privacy rights voluntarily, the Committee could provide more detailed information about those trials.”

Indeed. But would an ex-University student willing to speak only if her name were withheld take advantage of such a policy? Waiving privacy rights would seem to mean waiving anonymity.

Certainly The Cavalier Daily was within its rights to grant this ex-University student anonymity. Whether that was a wise decision is another question.

“In this case, the reason the source requested anonymity was obvious enough,” the editorial explained. “Making her expulsion public knowledge threatened her prospects for the future.”

That is a reason to request anonymity. It is not a reason to grant anonymity.

Nearly every edition of nearly every newspaper in the United States contains the name of someone who would rather not see his or her name there. That’s part of what newspapers do. They find out things people would like to keep secret and they make them public.

Sometimes that’s something big – say an illegal wiretapping program. Sometimes it’s something relatively small – someone whose momentary inattention led him or her to park a car against a light pole, perhaps.

In this case, it was an ex-University student who did something a professor and a jury of her peers judged to be serious enough to expel her from what’s famously called the community of trust. And what was gained by granting her anonymity? In my opinion, not much.

Though the editorial explanation called the article balanced, I didn’t find it to be so. It contained allegations from the ex-University student, attacks on the Honor System from the president of Hoos Against Single Sanction and very general responses from a defender of the system. I learned that someone convicted by the system and someone opposed to the single sanction don’t like the system. And I learned that someone very much invested in the system thinks the system works well.

I don’t find that particularly enlightening. It’s certainly not worth granting anonymity to someone who clearly has an ax of her own to grind.

Tim Thornton is The Cavalier Daily’s ombudsman. He can be reached at ombud@cavalierdaily.com.

The Virginia men’s basketball team is learning that life is not easy in the ACC as it prepares to face its fourth consecutive ACC opponent that has a realistic shot at making the NCAA Tournament. Though Florida State is coming off a 75-69 loss to Miami on the road, the Seminoles are 15-4 on the season and possess a deep roster with nine players who have played an average of more than 14 minutes per game.

Virginia coach Dave Leitao said he believes the Seminoles’ success starts in the backcourt.

“They’ve got good guards,” Leitao said. “They’ve always had good guards and they’ve got good defenders.”

One player who has stepped up his game recently is senior guard Toney Douglas, an Auburn transfer who is leading the team in scoring and averaging 19.5 points per game. Virginia junior guard Solomon Tat noted that the Cavalier defense must play better than it did against Maryland Tuesday in order for Virginia to shut down Douglas and the rest of his team.

“I was a little bit upset,” Tat said about the Cavaliers’ defensive effort against the Terrapins. “I think all my teammates were upset with all the easy buckets that we gave them.”

Though Douglas is the only Florida State team member averaging double figures, that does not mean the Seminoles are to be taken lightly. Freshman forward Chris Singleton is the team’s second leading scorer ­— averaging 9.1 points per game — as well as the team’s leading rebounder. Joining Singleton in the paint is fellow freshman center Solomon Alabi, who was forced to redshirt last year because of injuries. Alabi ranks second on the team in rebounds, leads the team in blocked shots and has yet to foul out this season. Virginia sophomore forward Mike Scott acknowledged that Virginia’s big men must deal with a Florida State team with several inside weapons.

The Cavaliers need to come up with a strategy to get off to a strong start in tomorrow’s game; their valiant efforts to fight back from poor starts against both Maryland and Virginia Tech were not enough to claim victory.

“I don’t really have an answer right now,” Scott said. “If I did, we definitely would be doing it. I don’t know why we just wait until we’re down to play harder.”

The Cavaliers might be able to get ahead against Florida State if, from the start of the game, they use some of the techniques employed late in the Maryland and Virginia Tech matchups.

“When you do defend and rebound, it gives you a chance to get some early offense,” Leitao said. “I thought we were able to do that [in the second half against Maryland] and drive the ball early in possessions and get good things out of it.”

As with any young team, there are plenty of lessons to be learned. For Virginia to be effective tomorrow, the freshmen backcourt duo of Sylven Landesberg and Sammy Zeglinski must adjust to the extra attention ACC coaches are starting to give them as well as to the heightened level of play featured in one of the nation’s toughest conferences. If the underclassmen pair can find a way to adjust to ACC basketball, Virginia will have a chance to come out of tomorrow’s game with a victory.

“Other people who weren’t playing well have to step up, and a couple of them have,” Leitao said, noting that Landesburg, Zeglinski and the rest of the Cavaliers must adjust “to a higher level of coaching, a higher level of preparation and a higher level of execution by our opponents.”

Gov. Timothy Kaine officially became chairman of the Democratic National Committee Wednesday, replacing former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, whose “50 state strategy” is often credited with helping President Barack Obama win the presidency.

Kaine will continue to perform his duties as governor until next January when he will leave office, Kaine spokesperson Gordon Hickey said, adding that the two positions’ responsibilities will allow Kaine to do both jobs effectively until the end of his gubernatorial term.
“A lot of the DNC work will be electronic and he’ll be doing [DNC business] long-distance,” Hickey said.

Long distance or not, Republican leaders are doubting whether Kaine will be able to successfully manage both jobs. Gerry Scimeca, spokesperson for the Republican Party of Virginia, questioned whether Kaine would be able to give his full attention to his gubernatorial responsibilities.

“It’s going to be a distraction,” Scimeca said, adding that Kaine’s new position is “especially inappropriate considering the state’s dire financial situation.”

Virginia Democrats, however, said they are confident in Kaine’s ability to fill both roles. Jared Leopold, spokesperson for the Democratic Party of Virginia, said the governor “has been clear that he will focus on being governor first,” noting that he expects Kaine to be able to both guide the Democratic Party and the commonwealth in a time of economic crisis.

Leopold said Kaine’s appointment also reflects Virginia’s quality of leadership during the past several years.

“I think you’ll continue to see that effective style of leadership on the national stage,” Leopold said.

How Kaine performs in his new position could impact not only Virginia or the Democratic Party, Politics Prof. Larry Sabato said, but also Kaine’s personal considerations regarding other political offices in the future.

“Kaine’s reputation will be riding on [the upcoming Virginia gubernatorial election],” Sabato said, also noting that Kaine will be able to steer DNC funds to other Democratic politicians from Virginia who may stand to benefit during the upcoming race in the commonwealth. He added, however, that Kaine’s appointment will not have as significant an impact for Democrats on the national level.

“A party committee is less important when a president of the same party is in the White House,” Sabato said, explaining that most political affairs are run by the president instead of the committee chairman.

“We will restore science to its rightful place … We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.”

In these and other excerpts from his inauguration speech Tuesday, President Barack Obama outlined one of the philosophies of his new administration that could lead to an increasing governmental emphasis on “maintaining the pipeline of innovation that exists at universities,” including but not limited to developments in the core sciences, University Vice President for Research Tom Skalak said. This increased emphasis on — and funding for — various research and academic efforts, Skalak said, could benefit several University projects.

Skalak noted that though the new administration has just taken office, detailed descriptions on federal Web sites explain the areas the new administration may focus on, specifically concerning Obama’s proposed economic stimulus package.

Among those foci are higher education and the “fundamental, discovery-oriented research” core sciences, Skalak said.

Skalak added that the new administration’s goals, particularly in regards to the proposed economic stimulus, may aid some of the University’s capital construction projects, including the renovation of Garrett Hall to house the Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy and the installation of new heating and air conditioning systems for the Medical School’s Jordan Hall facility, which Skalak said is the University’s largest medical research building.

“That’s an immediate project that would be necessary to keep state-of-the-art research moving forward,” Skalak said. He noted that funds could also go toward improving the Chemistry Building’s teaching laboratories, which would allow cutting-edge teaching experiments to occur in the chemistry program.

“Right now the new administration just took over … so what we believe will happen is a series of discussions,” Skalak said, noting that these talks may include, among other participants, state and federal government officials and for-profit and not-for-profit institutions such as universities. Additional institutions and interest groups conducting and representing research efforts throughout the country could also participate, Skalak added.

This dialogue among groups, Skalak noted, would not be limited to the sciences and would have wide-ranging effects in various fields, including information technology, the arts, social sciences and the humanities.

Overall, some of the basic areas of interest expected to receive funding from the new administration are sustainability, health information technology, energy conservation and financial security and information assurance, Skalak said.

Explaining that innovations in those areas would connect to wide-ranging challenges such as the search for new energy, Skalak said such projects “drive job creation and they help drive the pursuit of happiness, as Thomas Jefferson would say.” He added that he believes Obama has “made a clear link between the basic values of society and the mechanism that we use to achieve that.”

University Assoc. History Prof. Brian Balogh, who is also chair of the Governing America in a Global Era program at the Miller Center of Public Affairs, said the politics of science has not been particularly controversial in many respects. He noted, however, that there have been debates about issues as wide-ranging as stem cell research, abortion and the occasional episodes of scandal within the scientific process.

“Probably where science comes closest to drawing public attention is in the [Food and Drug Administration] … as well as the [Environmental Protection Agency],” Balogh said, adding that one may find controversies there regarding agriculture and pollution.

While noting that Obama’s inauguration remarks may have been directed toward former President George W. Bush’s own decisions on topics such as stem cell research and climate change, Balogh said he foresees an emphasis primarily on using science to support economic sectors.

“We know what Obama has talked about — what his transition has talked [about],” Balogh said. “He has consistently talked about replacing faith or belief with the kind of analysis that’s more solidly grounded in science.”

The Virginia women’s basketball team will continue its up-and-down season tonight, taking on No. 22 Florida State in John Paul Jones Arena at 7. The Cavaliers are 2-2 against ranked opponents this season.

Thus far this season, Virginia’s only ACC loss was delivered by No. 2 North Carolina in a 103-74 embarrassment last week. The Cavaliers, however, managed to rebound from the defeat with a 6-point victory Wednesday against Virginia Tech.

Free throws played an important role in both the North Carolina and Virginia Tech contests and could continue to do so in future conference matchups. Against the Tar Heels, Virginia went 1-8 from the charity stripe in the first half and entered the break down by 9 points.

“This whole week we focused on free throws because obviously, in the last game against UNC, we went 1-8 to start the half,” senior forward Lyndra Littles said. “So Coach [Debbie] Ryan threw a few little schemes in there to hit free throws.”
Against the Hokies, the Cavaliers managed to reverse their fortunes from the line, as Littles made all eight of her final free throws to secure the team’s victory. Since returning to Virginia’s active lineup, Littles has averaged 20.2 points and 6.6 rebounds while picking up 15 steals in just four starts.

The matchup against Virginia Tech also saw excellent defensive play from sophomore forward Kelly Hartig, who racked up two blocks and four steals in the contest. A starter in all of the Cavaliers’ 18 games, the sophomore has tallied 11 blocks and nine steals on the season.

As Virginia gears up to face Florida State, however, it will need strong play from all positions and all aspects of the game if it wishes to combat the experience and all-around strength of the Seminoles, who return six upperclassmen from last year’s roster.

In its most recent home matchup against conference foe Georgia Tech, Florida State was impressive on the defensive end of the floor. Seminole junior forward Jacinta Monroe garnered ACC Player of the Week honors by blocking nine shots in the game, a school record. Florida State has been strong off the glass all year, out-rebounding its opponents an average of 42.8 to 34.2 a game, and against the Yellow Jackets, the Seminoles also managed to force 27 turnovers.

The team has put together a seven-game win streak and possesses an unblemished conference record of 4-0.
“I think Florida State’s an excellent basketball team,” Ryan said. “They’re very, very athletic, they have a lot of players back, and they have a great inside-outside combination. They’re going to be very tough.”