Iggy Pop, in his satirical song, “I’m a Conservative,” jokingly sang, “Conservatism ain’t no easy job.” And, on college campuses, he’s right. Being a conservative ain’t easy. Clearly, in my four years here at Marquette I’ve been out of the closet as a conservative. But, this “alternative lifestyle” I chose to engage in remains a mystery to some. So here’s a list of the basic reasons why I’m a conservative and you should be, too, even if it’s unpopular in academia’s culture of intolerance.

Freedom. As human beings, we are not entitled to things granted to us by a benevolent government. Instead, we are endowed by God with certain rights that the government cannot usurp. A liberal believes he can force something he deems to be good on people, but that necessitates stealing other’s freedom. As Barry Goldwater said, “A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.” So when you hear politicians promising things — from “free” health care to “free” college education — be skeptical. Most likely they are trying to buy votes with other people’s money to gain power and limit freedom.

Government isn’t good at “fixing” problems. I think Americans are largely a capable and caring people, sufficiently able to respond to the dire needs of the poor without involuntary compulsion. When government acts to “help” people, there are most often negative side effects. It’s a fact that we conservatives donate more money to charity than liberals. Conservatives see a societal ill and strive to fix it in the manner we see fit. Liberals may have the same endgoal in mind, but go about it through the government – that is, with others’ money.

The free market. I believe that each person is different, possessing unique strengths. The free market respects this diversity. Trying to pigeonhole a person is an assault on human dignity. This respect for diversity is best seen in the free market.

Fiscal Responsibility. Taxes are not good and should be low. When someone earns a dollar, it’s his. There needs to be a compelling reason to take a portion of it. High taxes are an assault on human dignity. They lower the value of hard work. Government can take a certain percentage of a person’s income. But, in order to be fair, it must be the same rate for all. Raising taxes on the “rich” will always score political points—no one sees himself as rich. But when politicians raise taxes disproportionately on the rich through the guise of the “common good,” it is no different than masked horsemen stealing from who they deem to be “too rich.”

Respect for the Second Amendment…Enjoying guns is one thing we can all understand. Something that liberals rarely understand is the role of firearms against tyrannical government. Firearms serve as our last defense against tyrannical governments. Without this basic understanding, there would be no United States. Raising arms against the British ensured the freedoms we now enjoy. This option must always be on the table. Goldwater, again: “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.”

Free trade. Since the world is extremely diverse and good lies everywhere on the globe, liberalizing markets is key in providing a plethora of goods and services to all people of the world. It lowers prices, increases choice and creates wealth, which subsequently begets more wealth.

Popularity: 13% [?]

As you may know, Marquette has two papers that serve the community. I make it a point to read both. In last week’s Thursday issue of the other paper, columnist Brandon Stokes wrote about his desire to “socialize higher education.” Many liberal professors and administrators here at Marquette may agree with Stokes, but take it from Mark Twain who said not to “let your schooling get in the way of your education.” So, I’ll venture to do what many of your professors are afraid to do: give you an alternative opinion. Think of it as an “alternative lifestyle” if that turns you on to it. Stokes says that “Students are being priced out of good universities and they are forced to look at less qualified schools for the sake of affordability” and that if you go to a more expensive college and take out loans you’ll have huge debt. Well no kidding Mr. Stokes. So what? You mean to tell me that the laws of supply and demand apply to college, too? That’s like saying if you don’t want to spend money on a keg of Rolling Rock, you may want to buy a cheaper one of Milwaukee’s Best. That’s called a cost-benefit analysis, we do them everyday. Faced with a choice, you look at the options and decide whether the benefits you’ll get from a transaction outweigh the cost. It’s kind of like deciding to go on a first date; on the one hand you may miss a night out drinking with your buddies, but on the other hand, you may be meeting your future wife.

Mr. Stokes then asks how any student could “feel good” about themselves upon graduation “because of loans.” Maybe this person decided that the Catholic education at Marquette was worth it. Or maybe it was the connections they were able to make here that they couldn’t at, say, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Or maybe it was the fact that they will now make $60,000 a year because they went to a place like Marquette.

Next Mr. Stokes says there is a bleak outlook for college graduates who leave college to face “a job market that has been weakening for years…” Unless he’s talking about the job market for Brewers playoff t-shirts, he lost me there. The unemployment rate has dropped to 4.6 percent, a hugely significant drop since 1983 when it was above 10 percent.

Stokes then contends that it’s “the duty of our government to provide [higher education]” and that “the government should model itself after some European countries and socialize [it].” What he doesn’t tell us is why it’s the government’s duty to pay for everyone to go to college. Is it because it’s good for people? Well so is tuna and the government doesn’t provide tuna for us. Ask yourself, if the government has a duty to pay for you to go to college, what doesn’t it have a duty to do? Government is not bound to do things that are good for its citizens.

Perhaps most dubiously, Stokes claims that within his version of socialization of higher education, “people would be able to study things that interest them without the burden of worrying about finances.” No doubt, he’s right. What Stokes doesn’t question is whether or not taxpayers should be forced to essentially pay for me or you to learn about whatever we want to. A secret dream I have is to be a country music singer. Should other taxpayers pay for me to study country music? Absolutely not. I’d venture to say that if people were entitled to study whatever they want, we here at Marquette would have a lot of Green Bay Packer majors with an emphasis on Brett Favre studies. Studying to become a doctor, lawyer or accountant are not things usually interesting to a person, many do it out of motivation for long-term payback. Mercifully, Stokes’ article finally ends with a claim that “We do not revolve around money, but money revolves around us.” It seems like that contradicts his earlier claim that no one could feel good about him or herself with college debt. Central to the idea of socialized higher education is money it requires the taking of money from one group of people and giving it to another. It’s plain to see, Stokes’ whole article revolves around money. And on that he’s right, when it comes to socializing things; it’s all about the Benajmins.

Popularity: 8% [?]

With the college football season about 75 percent over, it is that magical time of year once again: bowl season. Who will be playing where? Who will be the BCS’s blunder be this year? All will be answered in due time. For now we can do nothing but speculate, and to be honest, that is probably one of the more entertaining parts of the process.Something new for 2006 is a national championship game to be played at University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Ariz. Obviously with an added game comes two extra teams to the BCS bowl picture, broadening the field from eight teams to 10. This championship game certainly is an improvement from the BCS bowl format of previous years. Not only is a distinguished national champion crowned, but two more schools will receive major bowl game revenue shares and fans of successful NCAA football programs stand a smaller chance of being snubbed by the demon that is the BCS.

Now for what we have all been waiting for: the projections for the 2006 Bowl Championship Series.

Rose Bowl
Pasadena, Calif.
Ohio State over Cal
Ohio State will drop a late season game against Michigan but will run all over Cal in Pasadena.

Fiesta Bowl
Glendale, Ariz.
Notre Dame over Texas

Notre Dame will be a rare two-loss (USC, Michigan) BCS competitor but will play a tight game against a talented Texas team.

Orange Bowl
Miami, Fla.
Auburn over West Virginia

Auburn will make it out of the SEC on top and will have their way with a weaker West Virginia squad.

Sugar Bowl
New Orleans, La.
USC over Florida

The Trojans will recover well from a heart breaking and championship destroying loss to Oregon State and take the Sugar Bowl for the Pac-10.

BCS Championship
Glendale, Ariz.
Michigan over Louisville

Two underdog teams meet up in an unlikely championship bout in the desert. Although Louisville has played some impressive football, the Wolverines will be too much in the end. Expect the Sears Trophy in Ann Arbor this year.

Popularity: 13% [?]

Paul, Paul, Paul, my poor misguided comrade. We share so much: a love of sports, a devotion to Marquette, a passion to write and a soft spot for fruit snacks. It hurts me to see your mind polluted with bad taste and poor reasoning. I think you’ve watched one too many ESPN All-Access packages about how unbeatable that team from Columbus is. Are they a very good team? Absolutely. Are they a great team? Not yet. In order to become that great team, Ohio State needs a victory over the most successful program in the history of college football. In order to win a Big Ten title, it must vanquish a program that has won 42 Big Ten titles.

If the history lesson doesn’t do much for you, then let’s learn how the Michigan Wolverines will be the end of the “unstoppable” Buckeyes.

To beat Michigan, one thing must be done: stop the run. They’ve been doing it well for over 100 years, so it’s no secret. Yes, they have game breaking wide receivers like Steve Breaston and Mario Manningham, but this offense is carried by its running backs. First Team All-Big Ten running back Mike Hart and his five-yards-per-carry will wreak havoc on the Buckeye defense. Wasn’t OSU rolled up by the likes of 5’5” Garret Wolfe for 171 yards? Now, I take nothing away from Wolfe; he’s proven himself as a heck of a runner. But don’t tell me the Buckeye front seven were overmatched by the “powerful” NIU offensive line. C’mon, Paul.

If you want to play the fluke card on this, I’ll take you back to the Texas game. This time a “worthy opponent” put up 172 yards of rushing. And what about the 150-plus the Fighting Paternos put up? Concerned yet? Hart and Kevin Grady provide one of the best one-two punches in the nation. Michigan’s offensive line is arguably the best in the country, with All-Big Ten and All-American candidates at every position. Ohio State’s defense, despite eleven weeks to mesh, is still young and has not seen a group as experienced and as talented as this.

Looking at intangibles, Coach Carr has the karma flowing. Yes, I know his record against “Coach Vest” is nothing to brag about, and Troy Smith has diced Michigan the last two years. But teams that beat Michigan last year have not had the same results this season. Notre Dame, Wisconsin and Minnesota were all beaten by two touchdowns or more (in ND’s case, a lot more). The Buckeyes can yell and scream about how fast Ted Ginn is and how they can run the ball, but they will quickly learn that Michigan has added some speed across their defense as well. Smith will still do his thing, but he will be prevented from taking over the game like he has the last two years.

It’ll be a nail-biter, but the Maize and Blue will put the exclamation point on their season on the foot of Garrett Rivas: Michigan 24 Ohio State 21.

Popularity: 10% [?]