"I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a ‘more convenient season.' Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Dr. Martin Luther King, from a Birmingham jail

The Columbia chapter of Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity recently sent out an invitation on Facebook for what promises to be quite a party. In celebration of Cinco de Mayo AEPi members invited Columbia students to "La Casa," and for one memorable night to go "below the border" to the "hottest, wettest, and spiciest venue in the world." Don't forget the "ponchos, sombreros, bandanas, or ...your best cholo/a." Fortunately for AEPi, someone watches the news, and the invitation was soon modified to a less offensive tone, soon followed by a mea culpa.

Cinco de Mayo is a celebration among Mexicans and Mexican-Americans commemorating the nineteenth-century Mexican victory over French imperialist incursions against overwhelming odds. AEPi is in the process of making amends for their mistake, and good for them. Conflating Latinos and crime is of course racist, and it is similar to assumptions underlying the anti-immigrant legislation recently passed by the state of Arizona. The question that I find interesting is how this quiet little controversy at Columbia relates to the recent events in Arizona.

The story begins with Paulson & Co., a New York-based hedge fund that manages billions of dollars, approaching Goldman about the possibility of Goldman creating a CDO portfolio with which Paulson could short- a investment strategy in which Paulson would profit from if the portfolio underperformed or defaulted.

As both a Muslim and a South Park fan, I found the reaction over South Park's 201st episode silly. Anybody who has ever watched South Park knows that its writers spare no one and nothing from the show's relentless satire. What's more, the two episodes in which Muhammad was featured were not in the same hateful vein of the Danish cartoon that aroused Muslim anger around the world a few years back. The shows used Muhammad to poke fun at censorship and celebrity anger over South Park's satire, but they didn't make fun of Muhammad. Considering that the same episodes in which Muhammad appeared featured Buddha snorting coke, the depiction of Muhammad was tame.

So, Revolution Muslim, the group threatened South Park's writers with death over the episodes (and was founded by a guy who used to be a Jewish settler in Israel ... weird), looks pretty dumb for reacting so vehemently. In addition, those on the internet who are now howling over the savage ways of Islam and painting America as the victim of Islamic intimidation look short-sighted and biased. They have forgotten that radical Muslims like those at Revolution Muslim are not the only - or even the worst - transgressors of free speech in America. As usual, America can learn a thing or two by watching South Park. There are two lessons to take away from this fracas.

Last week, the New York Times released the first poll to measure the make up of the Tea Party movement. The results were surprising to say the least. Granted, we all knew that the Tea Party was majority white, old, and middle American. We also knew that they were ... let's say racially insensitive, which could be ascertained by observing their protests signs ("go back to Kenya"? Nice).

Who would have thought that, on the whole, the Teabaggers were wealthier than the general public? Or better educated? Or that they have weathered the financial crisis better than most Americans? The poll has essentially revealed that the Tea Party isn't bunch of unemployed rednecks angry at Wall Street elites taking money from average Americans. Rather, they're a bunch of retired, wealthy, well educated white Americans whose biggest concern is that Obama is doing too much to help poor people.

This new profile sheds light on the Tea Party's vision of America. They have been revealed as a regressive, backwards thinking group whose vision of America is not compatible with the diverse America of the future.

To all the GOPers out there crying foul at President Obama’s recess appointments of 15 officials to influential posts, I have two words for you: John Bolton.

Although it is true that Bolton’s confirmation as Ambassador to the United Nations was blocked by a Democratic filibuster while Becker’s appointment was flat out rejected by the Senate, the underlying principle behind both actions remains the same - partisanship. Partisanship, which has risen over the past few years, has reached the point where any cooperation with the other party can easily be labeled traitorous behavior akin to Benedict Arnold turning over the plans of West Point to the British.

With the passage of the new Healthcare and Jobs Bills, Afghanistan is surely the next most pressing issue on President Barack Obama's agenda. What are our goals in Afghanistan? How do we ‘win'? Is there anything to ‘win'? Lately I've been finding myself wondering what the hell is Obama going to do with this quagmire. And it is truly a quagmire: Afghanistan, superficially, is a war-hardened nation with an infant democracy (in the shallowest sense of the word) built upon labyrinthine patron-client networks. And although Obama has just initiated a surge of 30,000 American into Taliban strongholds, his plan to ‘win the hearts and minds of the people' is frightfully naive.

President Obama's current Afghanistan strategy is an awkward variation of ‘shock and awe': a surge of 30,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan within the next six months, and then be withdrawn within a year after the initial surge. The point of this strategy is to overwhelm Taliban insurgents with the awesome strength of the most powerful military in the world. So much so, that they will be unable to recover and allow Afghan forces to finish them off. Further, in rooting out and defeating the Taliban, American soldiers are tasked with creating relationships through trust with local Afghans. If this plan seems simple to you, this is because it is, and I believe naively so.

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was elected and formed a far right government in 2009, anybody with a brain could see that this spelled bad news for the "peace process". Even I could not have foreseen things getting this bad, however. Under Netanyahu, Israel has effectively managed to kill the two-state solution by making a contiguous Palestinian state impossible. With renewed settlement building in East Jerusalem as well as the West Bank, Israel is striving to create facts on the ground before any peace negotiations can take place. Despite Netanyahu's insistence that his government is simply building on land that everybody knows will be Israeli when negotiations are over, Israel is actually building on occupied (not "disputed") land to strengthen its claims before negotiating with the Palestinians. In other areas, Netanyahu's government is hoping to capture more land. As Lara Friedman over at the Middle East Channel points out, it is a policy of "What's mine is mine, and what you think will be yours will be mine, too".

Predictably, this policy has aroused much anger in the Occupied Territories. Palestinians can do nothing but watch as Israelis gobble up their land. Instead of sitting on their hands and being victimized, they have taken to the streets in Gandhi-esque non-violent demonstrations in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. In villages such as Bilin and Nabi Saleh, Palestinians have refused to let their voices be silenced, only to be intimidated, arrested, and even attacked by Israeli soldiers and settlers.

What does this all mean for Israel?

Cub Pub is still on spring break, but in case you miss us, we present to you a collection of our most popular posts from this semester as determined by comments and views. Enjoy, and you can look forward to our return next week.

Bailey's Original examined the implications of the word "terrorist" in America, intensely angering at least one reader, in his post "Apparently, You're Only a Terrorist if You're a Muslim".

That Purple Drank drew comparisons between the hit show "Jersey Shore" and politics.

Bailey's Original chastised the Supreme Court for striking down a ban on corporate political spending.

And Black Russian revealed another side to the tragedy in Haiti, drawing the ire of a Marine.

As we creep towards the seventh anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us, the question of why we are still there has yet to be answered. Most likely it never will, unless you follow the no-bid contracts and oil company profits being reaped there. These were the only true winners in the war, at least on the American side. The losers undoubtedly were the American people, specifically tax-paying citizens and the troops.

We all know our national debt has steadily grown over recent years, and now we face the prospects of higher taxes and reduced social services. The hidden cause of this is the American war machine, which receives more national government spending every year than China and Europe combined. Some of the more "enlightened" readers may be thinking "but military spending only takes up 20% of the national budget, about as much as Social Security or Medicaid and Medicare." At best this is misleading, and at worst it is a lie.

President Obama's bipartisan healthcare summit was an opportunity for the Democrats and Republicans to come together in front of the American people and show us that they can put politics aside in favor of practical compromise. After spending over six months in the Senate negotiating with Republicans like Chuck Grassley, you would think that the Democrats would be in a good position to peel off some Republican support. The current Senate healthcare bill has been so diluted by compromise that very little actually separates Democrats and Republicans when it comes to reform. The Democrats worked to bridge the negligible gap by offering moderate (read: lackluster) ideas based on Republican ideas and complaints.

On the other hand, all we got from Republicans was political posturing and flat-out lying. Many members of the Republican delegation came with a prop - the entire healthcare reform bill. They forgot to bring their dignity, though. The summit has taught us three things about the Republican approach to the reform fight, and Republican politics in general.