Mind-boggingly, last week Barnard President Debora Spar herself wrote, “Of course, companies should strive to create generous maternity leaves,” and “…keep fighting the proverbial fights—better day care, better family leaves, more flex time at work and co-parenting at home. These are important goals.” Yet she is in charge of demanding huge cuts to maternity leave and flex time.

Under the rotunda of Low, four of the biggest names in the fight against HIV/AIDS all voiced the opinion that the tide has turned in the struggle against the disease.

But being an elite is expensive. Fortunately, Spar and her Wall St. affiliated Barnard board members realized the best way to keep Barnard solvent would be to slash the health, pension, and tuition benefits of the lowest paid employees at the college-the clerical workers. And in order to empower women, Spar decided to drastically cut from the most basic female employment victories — maternity leave and flex time.

Even in the face of an overwhelming wave of evidence that soundly contradicts their claim, they remain resolute in their conviction, undeterred by any well-grounded facts or presented documentation. They do so because their belief in this claim is based not on rational argument but rather on a deep hatred of the associated presidential candidate and what he stands for.

Within the story of the MEK lies the greater story of the ways in which the ideology and activity of a given entity can change, sometimes for worse and sometimes for better.

The future lies in “two vital principles,” which he delineated as good governance and the allowance of political freedoms ingrained in established rules of human rights. This, warned Ihsanoglu, “is no easy undertaking,” especially in a world with such a diverse scale of polities and ideological landscapes. Some Muslim regimes have the “strictest possible” interpretation of Islam, while others deny its role, and others seek a middle way.

As a citizen voting in her first presidential election, I am disappointed with the flavor of the current discourse and the lack of concrete ideas. Politics always has had mudslinging and distracting sound bites, but in this election we are faced with two competing visions for the American government to bring the country out of its economic recession.

Since her release from house arrest and her election to parliament, Suu Kyi is no longer just a symbol of hope but also a political figure. As a political figure, Suu Kyi has to navigate the treacherous waters of Burma's polity, and that means steering away from the tough questions.

Let’s remember, though, what September 18th is the anniversary of. The Mukden Incident was a contrived pretext for expanding Japan’s empire into what had until then been Chinese territory. What we are seeing now are the first rumblings of a rising China looking to throw its newfound wealth and power around.

The event was particularly germane and received special attention in lieu of the contentious reform measures announced by the Congress-led government over the past week, including a decision to raise the limit on foreign investment into Indian retail. The backdrop of faltering economic growth in India and stalled economic reform mandate lent an air of urgency.

On Wednesday, The New School hosted a panel featuring academics well-versed on different facets of Egyptian society. The topic of the discussion was Egypt after the presidential elections.