Due to mysterious IT issues, voting in the ASMSU elections was delayed until this morning, March 31, and extended to April 6. Our guess is that Russian bots finally realized how important this election is to the balance of power in this country. No doubt that many of you read our election guide yesterday and were confused why you couldn’t vote. Well, we were too.
The good news is that during the delay, two more fantastic candidates saw our article and contacted us. We’re proud to include Aaron Iturralde (Education) and Jordan Kovach (James Madison) in our first-ever group of endorsements.
Iturralde is running on a broad platform that includes making himself available to his constituents through phone and email, holding office hours, advocating to make fifth-year internships in the College of Education more affordable, increasing teacher wages, greater transparency, increased diversity in the College of Education, and much more.
Kovach’s platform includes greater accountability for racial bias incidents on campus, advocating for MSU to divest from fossil fuels, putting feminine hygiene products in all campus bathrooms, increasing sustainability in dining halls, and greater support for immigrant students, regardless of documentation. She has also served as the secretary for the ASMSU Freshman Class Council this year.
We hope to see both of these students in the General Assembly next year, and we hope that those of you reading this vote.
It’s that time of year again, folks — the flowers are in bloom, short sleeves are acceptable outside clothing, and the 5% of students who pay attention to this stuff choose who ascends to the hallowed halls of the Associated Students of Michigan State University, our student government. Those committed 5% (which hopefully includes you, reader) vote for their college’s representative in the ASMSU General Assembly from today, March 30, to April 5.
Last year, our publication was most concerned with the antics of Agriculture and Natural Resources representative Sergei Kelley, editor-in-chief of The Morning Watch, and the General Assembly’s attempt to boot him from the body. After Kelley’s defeat at the hands of his fellow students last spring, we turn our attention to the body as a whole.
The COVID-19 pandemic has turned East Lansing into a ghost town. The Grand River strip is dotted with restaurants that no longer have bustling dining areas. People have retreated indoors to self-quarantine, shutting down most club activities. Even MSU’s museum has closed, depriving students of hours of fun on mandatory class field trips. What is left in a college town with no college?
Unfortunately, much like the coronavirus, our friends at The Morning Watchhave proven highly resilient. They have chosen to continue to chase new lows for horrific campus takes. Their latest, “A Symptom of Coronavirus: Less Leftist Bias,” may be the worst one yet.
Penned by the big boss himself, Sergei Kelley, the article finds him in a unique situation. One of The Morning Watch’s goals is to “expose leftist bias” on campus, a questionable endeavor already but near-impossible when the RA boards are unused and campus events are shut down. Now that there is no leftist bias to expose on campus, where do they go from here? It’s not easy to sneak into the Zoom lectures for a sociology class in the hopes that you might record a prof suggesting that privilege is a real phenomenon.
The answer — the coronavirus is actually good.
Kelley hedges this claim at the start of this article by saying, “This is not to trivialize our situation, but a blunt description of a consequence.” I have no idea why he would do this if he wants to work in conservative media, where the default response to claims of offensiveness is to claim victory on the basis of hurting your opponent’s feelings. But make no mistake — Kelley has deep respect for the coronavirus. It has done what he and his publication never could: stop left-wing events on campus.
One of the only things that hasn’t been straight up cancelled is a BLEXIT event with Candace Owens sponsored by MSU’s Turning Point USA chapter. This was merely postponed from April 7 to April 30, which seems inadequate as projections of the pandemic’s course suggest that normal life may not resume until June or July. However, given that Turning Point can’t get 50 people to an event, the event will definitely be CDC-compliant, so maybe they felt they could risk it. (Update: shortly after publication, MSU Turning Point canceled the event.)
There is no way to read this and not think it is trivializing the issue. This article absolutely salivates over the possibility that a deadly pandemic will stop Michigan State from putting up posters about not wearing blackface for Halloween. Your loved ones dying of severe, painful flu will be worth it if we don’t have to take a bias workshop so the university can pretend it tried to stop racist incidents on campus!
This could be excusable as an awful joke if this was simply placed in The Morning Watch’s satire section. But after our B. Bunny ethered their satire section back in January, their satire writer has disappeared. Perhaps they are too scared to place this trash opinion in the “just a joke” section and instead are forced to acknowledge that their honest-to-God opinion is that the coronavirus is good.
If you want a more serious response to coronavirus from the Watch, you have to go all the way to their Twitter page. In an attempt to look like an actual news site, they put out a press release on Twitter stating that they will be cancelling in-person meetings and telling readers to wash their hands and practice social distancing. The release also said they would be “focusing on exposing other avenues of leftist bias.” I suspect that will mean watching MSNBC on repeat and getting mad all the time instead of being cool and watching classic college basketball reruns on ESPN2.
Actually though, what other avenues are there to expose? The Morning Watch is a campus site. It’s not built to talk about national issues. At The Evening Look we pride ourselves on being able to talk about that sort of thing when campus events are slow, but they rarely talk about anything more consequential than ASMSU votes.
There is one avenue left for leftist bias left in the Watch’s purview: us. If the RA boards, bias workshops, and non-threatening liberal speakers are all taken away, the only thing this virus can’t kill on campus is our website. We will be stepping up our game in these last couple months of spring semester to fill the void of leftist bias left behind by the pandemic. Expect ASMSU endorsements, analysis of this ghost town, and more responses to whatever trash comes out of The Morning Watch’s keyboards.
We look forward to being your source for MSU’s leftist bias in these dark days.
Until the Democratic debate in Nevada, I did not know much about Michael Bloomberg. I knew he was the billionaire ex-mayor of New York City who once tried to ban the sale of sugary drinks above the size of 16 oz. Alas, Mike has reemerged in the form of an underwhelming and potently uncomfortable candidate for the presidency. Bloomberg, apparently unaware of how many skeletons are in his diamond-encrusted closet, has dragged his mayoral record back into our faces just to launch a doomed presidential bid.
Mike markets himself as the only candidate who can beat Donald Trump. But at this point, I have more questions than answers about his campaign. First of all, what on earth is Bloomberg doing? He’s one of the richest people on the planet and he chooses to spend his time getting his shit rocked by Elizabeth Warren? I don’t get it. Secondly, who exactly is his base? I figured that by November 2019 the battle lines would have been firmly drawn and there would be no space left for any other qualified candidates, let alone Michael Bloomberg.
One night as I lay tossing and turning, unable to come up with a satisfactory resolution to this question, I decided to launch a formal inquiry into just who these #Mike2020 supporters are. After extensive investigation, I’m ready to release my findings. The different types of Bloomberg supporters roughly fit into the following categories:
I thought that the Democrats had already drawn the battle lines before Bloomberg announced his run. But what I forgot to account for was the portion of the Democratic electorate that had yet to be claimed — Republicans. Bloomberg has by all accounts been successful in this arena, recently securing the critical endorsement of Clint Eastwood. You might remember Clint Eastwood from his speech at the 2012 Republican National Convention where he spent ten minutes talking to a wooden chair. Eastwood welcomes Mike as a more stable alternative to Trump, hilariously passing up Trump’s primary opponent, Bill Weld. Additionally, I can’t think of a candidate better equipped to represent the “#MeToo has gone too far” and the “what about the poor billionaires” wings of the Democratic party than a billionaire with a small but real history of sexual harassment.
People who think #SocialismSucks
At the Democratic debate in Nevada, Mikey showed us what happens when the gloves come off. His best zinger was directed toward Bernie Sanders: “The best known socialist in the country happens to be a millionaire with three houses. What did I miss here?” Nice one there, Mayor. Way to own the libs. All joking aside, Bloomberg may be playing his cards just right. On top of Sanders’ own inability to explain his past appraisal of authoritarian communist countries, the center-left media is having a field day with the Democratic frontrunner. It also seems that the “vote blue no matter who” crowd from the 2016 election is starting to go back on that sentiment, exposing that some are more scared of the word ‘socialist’ than four more years of Trump.
People who like their steak done medium rare
As part of Bloomberg’s massive advertising campaign, residents of Phoenix and Las Vegas were treated to a few interesting billboards. One read “Donald Trump eats burnt steak. Mike Bloomberg likes his medium rare.” Another read “Donald Trump cheats at golf. Mike Bloomberg doesn’t.” This development signals to me that the Bloomberg campaign has resorted to boomer-tier, “orange man bad” CNN comment section memes. This campaign will nonetheless influence the large segment of voters who have thought about their primary vote for as long as it takes to prepare an undercooked steak.
People who think he is the only one who can beat Trump
While this claim is just as evidenced as the existence of the so-called Holmes Hall, most of his backers take this as a cosmic truth. Not only do the majority of the candidates beat Trump in polls at any given time, but Bloomberg also doesn’t even win by the biggest margin. Now, you would be forgiven for believing that there is no one better to defeat Donald Trump than an equally disgusting New York businessman. However, you are not forgiven for thinking that the man who could not effectively battle a single Democratic candidate in Nevada could battle The Donald’s cult of personality.
Evening Look Readers
The final and most important voter bloc for Bloomberg is the readers of this very publication. Likely due to Bloomberg’s placement in our candidate ranking earlier this year, our readers are far and away the most enthusiastic Bloomberg supporters on campus and in the East Lansing community. Perhaps our readers were thrilled when they found the meatball that looked like Mike, or perhaps they couldn’t pass up a president who can fit 11 D batteries in his mouth at the same time. Either way, these voters have decided to put the country into Bloomberg’s hands, and for that, we at The Evening Look applaud them.
Despite mounting pressure in the Democratic primary at large, we can all rest easy now that we better understand Bloomberg and his base. Like Klobuchar and Buttigieg before him, he is likely to drop out in hopes of consolidating the moderate Democrats behind Joe Biden. We can expect Warren to do the same for Bernie, so prepare yourself for the clash of the second-choice titans. No matter what, you can expect a Democratic National Convention that’ll be just as fun to watch as our Spartans narrowly missing another Final Four win.
As I lay, half-baked and alone on the couch, watching Call Me by Your Name for the 6.9th time, I couldn’t help but think to myself:
“I’m pretty sure I’m straight, but damn if I wouldn’t fuck Armie Hammer rightnow.”
I want to make it crystal clear that I would be more than willing to enter into a heated romantic relationship with Armie Hammer if it meant living in Italy, sipping on San Pellegrino Aranciata all day, and finger fucking peaches all night. I also have a deep desire to marry both Winklevoss twins at the same time.
Daydreams of riding bicycles in way-too-short shorts aside, I would like to believe that I am a mostly straight man. However, this does not mean that I haven’t been around the queer community my whole life. I have two uncles who are gay, and I was baptized by a gay priest who was my uncle’s partner. So, don’t ever talk to me about “praying the gay away” . . .
. . . unless you’re Armie Hammer, in which case I will gladly discuss “praying the straight away” as quickly as possible.
On top of my fabulous baptism, I am friends with many individuals who lie at various points along the spectrums of sexual attraction and gender identity, and they have always appreciated my openness and fairness in discussing their perspectives and experiences. These conversations have even opened my eyes to the possibility of my own sexual fluidity, given the amount of times I have been called out for my flaming bisexual tendencies.
Therefore, as a (mostly) straight ally, I want to talk about supporting the cultural development of sharing with others the pronouns with which you identify.
I wish to address pronoun politics today in part because I believe they are valid, a little bit because it acts as a proxy for gender politics as a whole, but mostly because this will undoubtedly piss off our conservative readers who managed to keep reading past my fanboy-ish attempt at erotica earlier in this article.
Asking for someone’s pronouns is in the same league as asking for someone’s name. Pronouns are a part of how people identify and should therefore be respected the same as someone’s name, gender, or sexuality.
Think about it: Only insane people walk up to strangers and say “Hey, I know you said your name is Sergei, but you look like an Abby so imma call you that from now on.” That person is clearly incapable of functioning in a civil society. They should go back to finishing school to re-learn basic etiquette, as well as the answer to the eternal question: on which side of the plate does the soup spoon belong?
…Seriously, I want to know. I really need to impress Armie when we go on our soup date later.
Again, I digress. I’m sorry, Daddy.
In response to the socially conservative hatred of pronoun preferences, I would like to propose the following deal:
*Whispering in my sexiest bedroom voice* “Call me by your pronouns, and I’ll call you by mine.”
If people on the right are so insistent on neglecting the basic dignity of their fellow beings by refusing to call them by their self-identified words, then I would like to call them by whatever I choose.
I imagine the interaction would go something like this:
Thomas: “Hi, my name is Thomas. I am a man with a penis who attempts to date women, but I don’t feel comfortable calling myself a feminist since that’s kinda gay.”
Me: “Hello Thomas. You look like an average uneducated white guy, as is statistically likely for conservatives, but I am deciding to call you Lady Bird. You are in fact an 18-year-old raging feminist from Sacramento with mommy issues.”
Lady Bird: “Stop, sir, you are making me very uncomfortable. I don’t like girly movies like Lady Bird. It propagates foolish ideals such as female independence and is set in Sacramento, which is where the unabashedly progressive dictator of California, Gavin Newsom, lives.”
Me: “Lady Bird is a fantastic piece of cinema that speaks to all demographics and should be respected. Also, Gavin Newsom is not only a paragon of modern liberalism, he is also insanely hot and therefore should be worshipped like the queen he is. I therefore choose to instead address you as Baby Nut until you appreciate the art of theatre, you pussy.”
Baby Nut: “I do in fact love the art of cinema! Predator is my favorite movie because it is unabashedly masculine. It’s not some gay shit like La La Land.”
Me: “Would you like to see a movie about hypermasculinity that is objectively better than La La Land by having won an Oscar?”
Baby Nut: “Sounds great, what movie?”
Do you see how the outside imposition of an inherently internal attribute such as identity leads to a sense of helplessness and incongruity from within the individual? Do you see how this lack of civility leads to a social death-spiral?
An externally created self is an inherent enigma.
The basic right to one’s identity and autonomy is a fundamental part of what it means to both be human and to live in a society. If we deny people the right to self-identify, then why even allow people to legally change their names? Or have names at all?
If anything, your given name is the most un-American part of your identity since it was tyrannically imposed upon you without your consent, often by the literal patriarchy. Therefore, the social construct of given names is inherently fascistic, and we should embrace the concept of complete self-identification like the good postmodernists we say we are.
But I digress.
In conclusion, despite the amazing wordplay, I would sincerely ask that everyone reading this call me by MY pronouns, and I will call you by YOURS.
Longtime readers may remember that back in September, flyers for this blog went up around campus. Our flyer team noticed a Morning Watch poster folded on itself and placed our own flyer over it. This caused Morning Watch editor-in-chief Sergei Kelley to send a four-part DM to a loyal reader, under the impression that they worked for us. We thought that this would surely be the funniest interaction we ever had in the DMs, but we’re proud to announce that we were mistaken.
A few days ago, we checked the Evening Look Facebook page to find this:
Though a shorter DM, this incident demands a full breakdown.
First off, note the time this was sent – Sunday the 20th at 6:20 PM. Sergei is a proud Catholic, as he is happy to point out. What is he doing beefing with a Facebook page on the Sabbath? It’s just after suppertime on the Lord’s day! This man went to Mass in the morning to learn about God’s infinite love and goodness and then sent supervillain shit in the DM to an account with 10 likes. This does not sound like the behavior of someone pursuing Jesus, but as heathens we are not qualified to evaluate that.
It was also the day before Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a holiday when we get together and ponder tolerance, civil rights, and whether MLK would have agreed with our particular political persuasion. After all, what use is he if he doesn’t align perfectly with our beliefs? This DM certainly falls short of the spirit of Rev. King. But it was not his day yet, so let’s give Sergei a pass here.
We must also explore the trigger for this verbal assault on our journalistic integrity. Given that most of the DM is dedicated to talking about the Holmes Hall RA, we can assume that Sergei has discovered our long-running series on finding this mythical man who serves as a vital source for Morning Watch pieces.
Sergei asserts that the Holmes Hall RA is real. But The Evening Look has published threeseparatepieces from our field reporter O. Justice dedicated to the fact that we cannot figure out where Holmes Hall is, much less discover the man of infinite Ohio-born wisdom who lives there. Sergei’s DM has failed to give us any more information on the location of Holmes Hall, whose alien geometries have eluded us despite multi-week drug benders and potato-based ritual sacrifices. How can he so confidently assert that Holmes Hall is not only real but houses one of his most dependable contacts? The mystery will continue until someone can give us directions there.
Sergei also made sure to call us “fake news” for some reason. Despite his obsession with our small WordPress blog, he clearly has not engaged with the pieces. We have never posted news. We don’t do journalism. We do shitposting criticism. We have facts in most of our articles, but The Evening Look has never purported to possess a scrap of journalistic ability. We literally cannot be “fake news”. We’re just a bunch of idiots with a platform. This is a lazy, Z-tier Trump tweet level of intimidation.
Finally, Sergei asked us to stop being “cowards” and put our “real names” on our pieces. I don’t know if it has to do with Sergei’s deeply religious upbringing in Northern Michigan, but we DO use our real names! Why would we list our names if not to let our loyal readers know who we are? O. Justice is 100% a real name. Perhaps Sergei takes offense at us not providing our true names received at Confirmation. If so, he will see that our floundering rap careers provide little need for a name change.
To quote NASA legend and personal role model Buzz Lightyear, Sergei is acting like a “sad, strange little man”. Does he not know that we are eternally ‘taking the piss’, as our friends across the pond who have nationalized health insurance say? I honestly become elated anytime he drops into our DMs because it will always serve to remind me that he still doesn’t know how to deal with critics and gives me hope that this deficiency will stunt his professional political growth in the future. Sergei is simply not fit to survive in the postmodern arena of the internet. The only grand narrative being written right now is the tragedy of Sergei’s DMs that paint the picture of a boomer trapped in a zoomer’s body.
We’d like to thank Sergei for once again proving himself to be an absolute weirdo. That DM is the devil, and it seems no amount of rosaries can save him from the temptation. If you will excuse us, we need to celebrate the Sabbath the right way this weekend: by watching large men run into each other in the pursuit of Rocky Lombardi’s trophy.
Sometimes, in the course of making these little criticisms, I come across an article that has such poor writing its premise falls apart under the weakest examination. One such article was “The Superiority Complex of the Left”, published on (where else?) The Morning Watch and attributed to Jack Carlson. I say “attributed” because I have no idea why anyone would put their real name on this.
Carlson’s point is that the campus left is unique in its hypocrisy towards its stated values. They believe in freedom of expression, but have all these big bad institutions like bias workshops and advisory signs in the dorms.
The problem is that Carlson’s life experience, per his article, doesn’t track with his opinion. After saying that he wishes that he could engage respectfully with people he disagrees with politically, the next line reveals he has lots of friends that he disagrees with. He says that the predominant trait of campus leftism is “a sense of moral superiority” but also says most of the leftist students he has met are “intelligent, decent, and reasonable people”. So he’s met a lot of students who are leftists, or at the very least further left than him, and they’ve been nice to him and have had good conversations with him where they respect each other. Yet he continues to insist that campus leftism is none of those things.
Here at The Evening Look, our job is to provide the sense of moral superiority Carlson can’t find in regular campus leftism. We are proud to state that we believe we are morally great and better than The Morning Watch. Has he considered being better, like us?
But this is not an article about campus leftism. This is an article about getting Owned Online. Carlson is mad, red, and nude, as they say on Twitter. Why is he that way? People didn’t like an article he wrote about a James Madison College #ClimateStrike panel. Words such as “inaccurate” and “slanderous” were thrown around (of course, there are no receipts provided for these insults). If random users on Twitter calling an article “inaccurate” cause you to write a whole article about how your ideology is actually good, you may have the thin skin you claim to see in others.
This leads to the biggest howler of the article: “Conservatism in its nature, does not appear to be an ideology that causes students to strike out at their peers and hold a tone of superiority towards others.” What is The Morning Watch if not conservatives striking out at their non-conservative peers by “exposing leftist bias”? Is “Objectivity, Not Subjectivity” not holding a tone of superiority by implicitly implying that this opinion article is objective fact rather than, well, an opinion? I’m baffled by this sentence.
Maybe I shouldn’t be. Carlson has published four opinion articles in under a month and a half, which represents nearly two-thirds of the entire article output of the site. Perhaps he’s simply working on a deadline for that sweet, sweet #content. Who hasn’t just thrown a bunch of stuff together last minute to turn in? I know I have. If we had deadlines to meet, we’d be pulling all nighters and drinking dangerous amounts of Red Bull while we cranked out pieces about the tyranny of conservative PTCD professors.
The Morning Watch should reconsider its content strategy if it’s forcing a single writer to crank out as many opinions as possible to keep its name out there. The piece isn’t ready for prime time, and I hope Carlson frees himself of the content mill he finds himself in.