The Cornell Daily Sun - Independent Since 1880

The Cornell Daily Sun (https://cornellsun.com/2005/03/01/mens-hockey-captures-top-ranking-in-usa-today-poll/)

March 1, 2005

Uncategorized

Men's Hockey Captures Top Ranking in USA Today Poll

By | March 1, 2005

The men’s hockey team is hitting its stride at exactly the right time.

After sweeping St. Lawrence and Clarkson over the weekend, the Red finds itself in a tie for the No. 1 spot in the USA Today/American Hockey Magazine poll with Colorado College, who was idle over the weekend.

The two teams are No. 1 and No. 2 in the USCHO.com/CSTV poll, with Colorado College edging the Red out of the top spot by just three points, despite the fact that the Red received 21 first-place votes to the Tigers’ 12. The No. 2 spot in this poll is not a jump for the Red, as Cornell was tied for that spot with Colorado College last week. However, the No. 1 spot changed after last-week’s leader, Denver, split a weekend series with Minnesota State.

Denver dropped in the USA Today/American Hockey Magazine spot as well, falling to No. 3. The Red has seen a steady rise up both polls recently as the squad is riding a 14-game unbeaten streak — the nation’s longest. Overall, Cornell is 22-4-3 and 18-2-2 in the ECACHL. Since a 0-2-2 road trip to Michigan State, Vermont and Dartmouth in November, the team has gone 18-2-1. Cornell’s last loss came Jan. 8 in a 1-0 loss at Harvard when the squad was No. 9/10. The Crimson remained in the No. 11 spot in both polls despite a weekend that saw an overtime loss to Dartmouth and a tie with Vermont. The loss to Dartmouth also allowed the Red to clinch its fourth consecutive Ivy League title.

Harvard and the Red are joined by Dartmouth to give the ECACHL three teams in the top-15 going into the start of the conference playoffs this weekend.

With the No. 1 seed in the league after its regular season championship, The Red will have a bye this weekend. The team will begin its playoff push March 11-13 at Lynah Rink against the lowest remaining seed in the tournament.

Archived article by

Related

The Presidential Desk

By March 2, 2005

Behind every American president there is a resolute, organized member of the cabinet who goes unheralded by the media. This influential position is crucial in a republic since its tasks include contributions to cabinet debate, diplomatic disputes, the execution of laws and the image of a stable, reliable federal government. Who is it? The Secretary of the Interior? The Secretary of Commerce? Let’s have The American Heritage Dictionary explain who I’m referring to: “a piece of furniture with a writing surface and usually drawers or other compartments.” There are only two figures in the Oval Office who fit this description: Vice President Cheney and a desk. The presidential desk may seem insignificant in the governmental administration of one of the world’s most prosperous and populous countries. But think what would happen if there wasn’t one. Indeed, until the presidency of James Monroe in 1817, no American president had the foresight to think of the utility of a desk. Imagine Thomas Jefferson signing bills on his crossed legs, trying not to smear ink! Imagine the immense fatigue that would accompany standing in the same spot for more than 12 hours every day for 4 years! Imagine the unbearable humiliation of being a world leader who’s too fucking stupid to own an item he clearly needs and that has existed for thousands of years! As the world gets more complex and diverse, the desk’s role has expanded as well. Some critics have even theorized that a literal block of wood must have authored many of the current administration’s foreign and domestic policies. Sadly, few desks have been promoted to higher positions in government despite their comparatively impressive qualifications. As frequent guests of my weekly sherry parties will know, I am in the market for a desk and, since I try to model my life on the examples of our leaders, I am currently endeavoring to purchase The History Company’s new to-scale replica of the Presidential H.M.S. Resolute Desk (available at historycompany.com). This will be a vast improvement over my current desk, which is less a desk and more of a cabernet. Certainly it would strengthen my stature on campus if I did my homework on one of the most historically and economically valuable desks in human history. (Of course, it would be much less expensive if I increased my popularity by buying vodka for high-schoolers, a tactic that Andrew Jackson used to win the hearts of soldiers during the Battle of New Orleans.) But those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Santayana was referring to human catastrophes, and what is furniture if not one of the most horrifying aspects of modern existence? In fact, the story of the H.M.S. Resolute is one of the great fables of American history. The History Company’s press release psychotically informs prospective desk-owners that “for more than a century, nearly every American President has used a splendid desk that, in another life, sailed the seas,” showing that, besides selling vintage desk replicas, The History Company (or THC) has been dabbling in the traffic of psychotropic drugs. If we are to believe the site, Admiral Sir Edward Belcher directed the H.M.S. through the Northwest Passage searching for lost explorers. By 1852, everyone had abandoned the ship when it was discovered by American sailors and sent to Queen Victoria as a gift. Then, in 1879, the ship was destroyed, made into a clerical tool by Victoria and given back to the United States — as a gift — just in time for Rutherford B. Hayes to not care at all. No wonder the desk is held in such high esteem! Its history is indeed a fitting allegory for the United States: a bunch of New Englanders take something that was never theirs, return it to the people they stole it from as a sign of friendship, then take it again even though it’s already destroyed, turning it into a place to do mundane paperwork. Then they sell replicas of a broken ship to millionaires. The only modification of the desk occurred when FDR installed a central panel with the Presidential seal. This might have been intended as an elegant and subtle representation of the nobility of the presidency. But it wasn’t. It was just so visiting dignitaries wouldn’t see his handicap, further cementing FDR’s status as the actual Wizard of Oz. A rousing aesthetic depiction of American grandeur was actually just a mask for physical deformity. That’s the lesson and value of the Presidential desk: Something that looks trivial and boring may in fact be the gateway to a trivial and boring story involving Rutherford B. Hayes. Of course, in recent years, this desk of kings is familiar to most Americans as either the playpen for JFK, Jr. or the house of a million blow jobs, turning a collector’s item into a controversial novelty gag. E Pluribus Unum.Archived article by Alex Linhardt Arts and Entertainment Associate Editor
Reconsidering Linhardt's"The Presidential Desk"

By March 2, 2005

Like everyone else on this campus, I was truly disappointed to read Alex Linhardt’s article on the H.M.S. Resolute entitled “The Presidential Desk,” published March 3, 2005. Actually, I was disappointed that The Sun would even allow an article to be written on the H.M.S. Resolute. Granted, it might be a little obnoxious and even against Sun policy to call out a writer by name and publicly eviscerate him. But 775 words about a freaking desk! Dammit, Alex, trees around the world are dying every day, and you waste that much space on a finite resource such as paper? What, do you think paper just grows on trees or something? Already limited in my space because of Linhardt’s bloated verbosity and his monotonous exegesis of the history of the H.M.S. Resolute, I’ll try, in the interests of brevity to compose my complaint in a concise and intelligent fashion: WHY WOULD YOU ACTUALLY TAKE THE FUCKING TIME TO WRITE A FUCKING ARTICLE ABOUT A FUCKING DESK!? I don’t care if it’s the desk that the president sits at — hell, I don’t even care if it’s a desk carved by God itself — do you really think that writing about a desk will interest anyone? To be honest, I feel bad about coming down so harshly upon one of my associates. But in my time at The Sun, I’d like to believe that I’ve always upheld the journalistic ideals of truth, objectivity and social relevance. As a writer, I know that the student population wants to read articles about something — articles that have greater, deeper meaning, articles that don’t read like the author forgot he had an assignment that day and scrawled out some incoherent, rambling, and overtly profane piece of trash journalism in 15 minutes. No, I always cherish the small plot of space that this fine paper provides me, and like my ancestors, I till it with pride. I only wish I could say the same about my fellow staff members. Without even considering the philosophical, ethical and moral issues surrounding a 775 word article about a desk, the article is devoid of any truth at all. Linhardt asserts that Dick Cheney has “drawers and other compartments.” Well, I Googled “Dick Cheney,” and it turns out that this is completely false. Even worse, this article appeared in the Arts section of the Sun. And as its nomenclature would denote to the perceptive individual, the articles in that section should be about arts and entertainment, right? Needless to say, as a long-time member of the Arts & Entertainment staff, I’m disappointed that Linhardt and my own editor allowed this article to run. A newspaper should be the watchdog of the public — an ideological hammer thrown into the propagandist machinery of the government. This world is in a state of crisis — important shit is going down — and it’s hardly appropriate to waste such precious ink on a desk. The Oscars just occurred! Brad and Angelina have something going on! Snoop Dogg is coming to campus! There are real stories out there, and for such an esteemed journalistic institution as The Sun’s Arts page to completely ignore them is appalling. In truth, I can scarcely articulate my disgust over The Arts section’s perverse journalistic practices, and am ashamed to be part of a section that so recklessly insults the reader’s intelligence. I can only hope that such a senseless, offensive, obtuse, angry and utterly moronic piece of writing never again appears on this page.Archived article by Zach Jones Arts and Entertainment Editor