Photo courtesy of phandroid.com.

Rather than making a case for which team is superior, this prediction is based on which quarterback will have the better game. In the end, Tom Brady will eclipse a great performance from Eli Manning by not only winning another Super Bowl but also by earning game MVP honors.

Some might worry about the play of Brady in the Patriots previous game in which they narrowly escaped defeat to the Baltimore Ravens. Though Brady completed 60 percent of his passes, he only threw for 239 yards, had two interceptions and zero touchdowns. Those stats only mustered Brady a quarterback rating of 57.5 percent.

Though his numbers were highly uncharacteristic, especially for a playoff game, don’t count on Brady having a back-to-back performance of this caliber.

The more you try to find ways to deny Brady’s greatness, the more you have to give it to him. If New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees hadn’t had the single best season an NFL quarterback has ever had, we could be saying the exact same thing about Brady.

There have only been four quarterbacks in NFL history to surpass the 5,000 yard mark. Both Brees and Brady passed for more yards than the previous record held by Dan Marino who passed for 5,084 yards in 1984.

Brees narrowly edged out Brady for the record, passing for 241 more total yards.

As for Manning, he ended up falling only 67 yards short of the 5,000 yard club himself. Many sports analysts have debated that Eli is not at the elite level of quarterback that his brother Peyton and Brady are. This year has been the toughest for his skeptics to argue against, not just for his stats, but also because he has lead his team to another Super Bowl showdown.

For as great of a quarterback that Peyton Manning is, he was only able to lead two of his Colts teams to the Super Bowl and only came away with one victory.

Eli has now matched his brother by leading two of his Giants teams to the title game, with the first one being a victory. Though Manning has become a great quarterback, the same fate awaits him as did Peyton in his second Super Bowl appearance.

Expect Manning to throw for two interceptions and two touchdowns in this game, and expect Brady to throw for three touchdowns and one interception.

The game will be high scoring so look for both quarterbacks to throw for over 300 yards. Brady reaching 400 yards would not be surprising.

While the game will be close, the battle of quarterbacks will be decisive. Not only will Brady pass for more yards, throw for more touchdowns and throw fewer interceptions, he will more importantly come away with a victory and his third Super Bowl MVP award, putting him in a tie with Joe Montana for the most all-time.

Photo courtesy of hollywoodreporter.com.

The director’s last film, “Shutter Island.” was a psychological thriller also based off of a novel. “Hugo” on the other hand is a film that families can enjoy together. Enjoyable is the perfect word to describe the experience of this film.

The story follows an orphaned boy living in Paris during the 1930s, but contains a more artistic subplot which outlines a love for the cinema industry.

Speaking from a purely aesthetic standpoint, “Hugo” is absolutely wonderful. The cinematography takes the audience through breath taking views of the cities featured in the film, and the set actually conveys a feeling that the film is in old Paris despite the refined quality. The movie actually looks like a Tim Burton film that was taken over by Scorsese’s unique style.

As far as casting, the film impresses with a nice list of names. Ben Kingsley, Sacha Baron Cohen and Jude Law are among the better known cast members, but the stars of the film are two relatively unknown child actors. Chloe Grace Moretz plays the female lead and Asa Butterfield plays the movie’s male lead.

Moretz and Butterfield, despite not being as experienced as the actors that Scorsese typically works with, did a very good job for the role they were cast in. The two acted in a more believable way for children to react rather than the ways many films try to depict younger children. 

What truly sets “Hugo” apart from other movies in its genre is how it utilizes 3D technology.

The film incorporates the 3D technology into the actual story. Like James Cameron’s “Avatar,” the 3D isn’t gimmicky, but shows the depth and intensity of the film and gives the audience a sense that they’re being pulled into Paris.

Overall “Hugo” is a pleasant film that families can enjoy together. It’s a fantasy adventure for kids that have an understanding of the magic that transforms a movie into a classic tale for the ages.

Joe Paterno, head football coach for Penn State, was fired from his postion mid-season, in November. This season was reportedly the last of his career. Photo courtesy of espn.go.com.

Paterno was fired in wake of the recent sexual abuse allegations involving his former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky, who allegedly engaged in inappropriate conduct with three boys from the years 1994 to 1997. Sandusky met the boys separately through the Second Mile program, the name of his charity that helps troubled youths.

At the time of the abuse, the boys were 7 or 8, another was 10 and the third was 12 or 13. The now-adult men said Sandusky engaged in inappropriate conduct, from touching to outright sexual encounters, according to a grand jury report. Several incidents took place during the nights before home games when the team, staff and boys Sandusky had allegedly invited were staying at a hotel.

Sandusky retired in 1999, but on March 2, 2002, Mike McQueary, a graduate assistant, allegedly told Paterno he saw Sandusky in the locker room shower the night before with a young boy he estimated to be 10 years old, according to the report. The next day, Paterno told Athletic Director Tim Curley what he was told by his graduate assistant.

Curley and Senior Vice President for Finance and Business Gary Schultz decided to meet with McQueary, and after the meeting Curley had the impression the conduct amounted to innocent “horsing around,” he said. Sandusky’s locker-room keys were confiscated and he was told not to bring Second Mile participants to campus.

The incident was reported to Sandusky’s charity, but no law enforcement investigation was launched, according to the report.

Curley later told the charity, “the information had been internally reviewed and that there was no finding of wrongdoing.”

The entire scandal surrounding Paterno, not the university, is based on the alleged conversation between Paterno and McQueary, who is currently the wide receivers coach for Penn State. In recent days, McQueary has recently been in the news for adding slight modifications to what he allegedly said and did on that day in March 2002. The context of that conversation is still unknown to the public.

In light of all the facts that are now public, society has learned these horrible alleged actions have been going on since 1994, long before anyone at Penn State knew anything. Next, we have learned how Paterno was informed about the allegations and third, we learned that the grand jury report is up for interpretation. Such as, did McQueary tell them everything he saw?

Regardless of how people feel about the situation, whether they think the school handled it correctly or not, the treatment of Paterno by the university was disrespectful. He was not even granted the opportunity to plead his case to the Board of Directors, who instead listened to the media over the words of one of their own.

The public has been told by various media sources Mcqueary told Paterno he saw Sandusky performing anal sex on a young boy. This is the alleged statement of Mcqueary, according to the grand jury report. However, Paterno and Mcqueary have never testified in front of a grand jury.

Paterno, who has the most wins in Division I college history, a 62 year history at Penn State, over $20 million donated to the school and who has the university library named after him, only got a phone call that day to tell him he was relieved from his duties as head football coach.

He deserved the opportunity to retire at the end of the year like he had planned. To jump to conclusions and fire a coach who virtually built that university from the ground up is an injustice and should be treated as such. Paterno was the icon of Penn State, a legend even, and he was unfortunately not even granted due process.

If at the end of the day we find out he was told explicitly what happened and still decided to sweep it under the rug after due process, then yes, he should have been fired and even prosecuted. However, to move on this quickly and not even grant him the respect to find out if the allegations were true is unfair treatment to a living legend.

Photo courtesy of dailypolitical.com.

Gov. Rick Perry, R-Texas, is the commanding preference for the GOP nomination; along with former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., in second place. However, the top contenders are definitely not the best choices for our nation.

Perry and Romney are in the lead simply because they have been able to avoid severe scrutiny from the media thus far, not because they would necessarily be better leaders than our current president and make the changes we’re really looking for.

Perry is too radical in a one-on-one showdown between Obama. While he may get many die-hard conservative votes, Romney would have a higher chance of receiving more middle-ground votes.  

This leaves Republicans looking to Romney, which is as equally grim of an outcome. Romney’s handling of Massachusetts’s health care reform is too reminiscent of Obama’s reform, a reform that many Republicans are adamantly opposed to.

Romney lacks the characteristics of a strong leader because he is too fickle with his policies. He changed his stance from pro-choice to pro-life in an attempt to please voters. Who knows what other stances he’ll change, especially if he can’t even stand by his true beliefs?

U.S. citizens don’t need a people-pleaser running their country, and Romney is too willing to change his position to what his “market” is looking for. Politicians like this are too quick to make hefty claims and they never follow through.

The crisis within the GOP is that there is too much irrelevant information circulating and this is skewing perceptions of the candidates. This makes it hard for citizens to get an accurate feel for what they want to stand for. Perry and Romney are only the front runners of the GOP race because they have mostly been able to avoid this.

Candidates like Sarah Palin and Rick Santorum on the other hand, have been devastated by a stream of personal attacks that have nothing to do with their leadership capabilities.

Palin’s “celebrity” status eclipses any of her political remarks. Santorum’s reputation has been so damaged by liberal journalists that any attempt to look into his policies are met with media generated vulgarity rather than actual information. These journalists even launched a campaign to change the meaning of his name to something obscene so that he is known not for who he is as a person, but rather as an obscenity.

Several candidates hold ideas that could lower national debt faster by cutting national spending, as opposed to Obama’s most recent plan, which looks at increasing taxation on wealthy Americans.

Many of these candidates offer the changes the GOP are looking for, changes they aren’t finding in Obama, but none of these candidates have a chance as of right now. Republican voters aren’t looking for a different type of president, but they are willing to settle for a different type of Obama.

Voters need to stop backing career politicians and actually look into matters themselves. Find those who are actually fiscally and socially sound, with the intent to carry out what they say.

Photo courtesy of censorship309.wordpress.com.

I don’t remember how many times I was asked in America if people could access Facebook in China. You can’t, and just to make it clear, you can’t access Facebook, YouTube or Twitter either, and sometimes even Wikipedia will go blank if people try to search something “sensitive,” like Dalai Lama.

China is well known for its strong censorship of media, and the overall brutal suppression of freedom of speech. By blocking global social networking sites, China stops information and alternative voices from flowing in so that people can firmly believe what the government tells them.

It is a strategy many emperors have practiced throughout China’s thousands of years of history. It is to fool the people and keep them in the dark on controversial issues that would arouse actions to dictate them, all in the name of maintaining stability of its nation and keeping its people together.

One hundred years after China overthrew its last monarch, Chinese leaders today are still not changing their minds about suppressing free flow of information.

They planted this slogan-like obligation of “maintaining stability of the nation and keeping people together” deeply in people’s minds and it has become a legitimate reason to punish those who don’t obey it and label them “evil separatists.” But the subtext is to really maintain stability of the communist party and keep people under its control.

However, this is an era of information explosion, globally. People are thirsty for knowledge no matter if it is in the U.S., China or elsewhere. This is also an era of the Internet. Blocking only some English websites won’t make Chinese people stop wanting to know and speak the language.

Sina Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, has reached 140 million registered users since it was launched in 2009. The power of Weibo is massive and it’s considered a place where people can express their thoughts freely, particularly criticisms of the government.

Recently, however, the Chinese government asked Weibo to suspend users’ accounts who are accused of spreading rumors. Weibo even established a “rumor refuting” page to correct the misleading information on particular issues.

Unfortunately, a lot of people in China don’t seem capable of differentiating between the truth and rumors. They believe whatever they see on these social networking sites and will pass the information down.

One general reason this applies everywhere is because people nowadays don’t bother to verify their information. What’s different in China is that people are disappointed with authorities and the state-controlled media, but at the same time desperate for knowledge. Now they would rather believe anything against the government.

But can these be reasons for the government to take away a person’s right to know or speak?

I hope that can never be, because it’s not the peoples’ fault for not knowing how to differentiate between truth and rumors. They were never educated to ask if their rights were sacrificed for something else.

The people of China are not in a society that allows different perspectives, so where can they gain the ability if they don’t have the information to make judgments on?

But now, through this chaotic information explosion era, it is our time to learn.

China, please hear our voice. Don’t say that your people are vulnerable, because it is you that doesn’t make them strong.

Before the fall semester began, the students of CSU-Pueblo were made well aware that their tuition would again increase; a trend that while unpopular, was announced and accepted by those students who continue seeking their education from the university. However, the current proposed extension of CSU-Pueblo’s calendar year from 15 to 16 week semesters has many students caught off guard.

Students have already seen a steady increase in tuition costs over the past few years, so if the semester does extend to 16 weeks, will they also be responsible for the extra costs to run the university longer? In a perfect world, it would be covered by the university; in the real world, students will be fitting the bill.

It’s hard to imagine such a huge change to the university calendar going unnoticed. However, when more and more facts started being explained as to why the change was brought forth in the first place, it became clear that this idea was not well thought out or organized.

Rumor has it that a survey was taken by former Associated Students’ Government President Steve Titus, which asked students their opinion on whether or not they would like to have their semesters extended to 16 weeks. Apparently, the results of that survey were presented to CSU-Pueblo’s interim administration and it was found that the majority of students were in favor of an extended semester. 

Here’s where it starts to get tricky.

There were two open forums to discuss the calendar extension. The first of these two forums was conducted by a committee of faculty members formed by CSU-Pueblo Interim President Julio Leon. The point of this forum was to get a grasp of what students thought of the possible week extension.

What the committee heard from students that day was a resounding opposition to that idea. What seemed to irk the students in attendance even further was the fact that the results and proof of the survey given by Titus was nowhere to be found.

None of the students present had ever received such a survey. It seemed to be was another forced, yet unwanted change.

To gain a better grasp of student opinion, the committee posted a link in students’ university emails to a survey that would allow students to give their insight on the semester extension. A problem with the survey was the lack of detail used to explain how the costs of running the university longer will be paid for, and by whom.

How much more will students have to pay? That hasn’t been figured out yet. So what interim administrators are asking students to do is make a decision without having all of the facts presented to them.

It’s hard to imagine that any student would agree to it because of this fact.

Though the interim staff will only remain with CSU-Pueblo for a short time, the effect a change like the one being proposed could lead to the end of CSU-Pueblo being considered an affordable place to receive an education.

If feelings of negativity and deceit are the lasting effects that the interim administration wishes to leave as their stamp for their time here, then they better make sure this extension happens. But hey, it would be what we asked for, right?

The fact that it seems like interim administrators want it to discretely pass is an idea that would not please the CSU-Pueblo community.  A major change should not be a decision that an interim administration is capable of making.

Students really do need to consider if that’s what they want or not, and if not, we must strongly voice our opinions against this idea because the process behind it has been disturbing.

Photo courtesy of theoaklandjournal.com.

The protests were aimed at the Bay Area Rapid Transit system. BART serves the San Francisco Bay and surrounding areas, and according to the American Public Transportation Association it is the fifth busiest heavy rail rapid transit system in the U.S.

BART has recently come under fire after transit officers fatally shot a man named Charles Hill, who was allegedly carrying a knife, July 3. In 2009, BART officers faced a similar situation after the shooting of an unarmed man named Oscar Grant III, in which BART officer Johannes Mehserle was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Both peaceful and violent protests took place after the initial shooting in 2009, and BART officials feared the same response to the 2011 shooting of Hill after threats of a digitally organized protest appeared on a website.

BART shut down the electricity to several cell phone towers, which interrupted service for three hours, at four transit stations. Thousands in the Bay Area went without service and an unknown number of demonstrators were denied their right to peaceably assemble. No protest ever formed that day.

The backlash against the BART officials’ decision has been great. Many articles have made comparisons to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s tactics to block social networking sites to stop protests earlier this year.

Hacker groups, such as one called Anonymous, have launched both internet attacks and physical protests against BART since the communications shutdown. However, legal experts are claiming that BART was within its rights since it privately owns the communications infrastructure that was shutdown.

While BART may have been within its legal property rights, there is a real question here of whether this was a direct violation of the First Amendment. While some say this was an unprecedented move by a government agency, this type of censorship is reminiscent of many others throughout history and should not be tolerated.

Authoritative governments have always attempted to control the medium that communications are delivered through, whether through book burnings or government controlled propaganda radio stations, and being able to control the channels through which we communicate has always been an effective way of oppressing people.

In the U.S., the First Amendment gives people the right to peaceably assemble, and while authorities can take appropriate measures to ensure that demonstrations remain peaceable, stopping a protest simply because it has the potential to propose risk or illegal behavior is clearly a form of censorship.

While the Supreme Court has granted local authorities the right to limit demonstrations before, such as in cases of “clear and present danger” or “imminent incitement of lawlessness,” the Supreme Court has never before blocked the fundamental right to peaceably assemble simply because there was a possibility of danger. The reaction of BART officials was to give no alternative. In addition, thousands of uninvolved individuals’ rights were stripped because of the fruitless threats of a few.

At best, BART’s tactics were heavy-handed. At worst, it was an indication of the authoritative response governments have been taking against the power of digital communication and social networking. The government has typically used fear as a motivational tool to strip citizens of their rights, and with fear comes complacency and the willingness to accept and obey without question.

Every day, citizens across the globe are becoming increasingly dependent on digital technology to create, store and communicate information. It is vital that these services are protected just as strongly as any other form of communication.

Unfortunately, the government is sadly behind in developing legislation to address the many issues that technology has presented and if not addressed, incidents such as BART’s officials abusing power will continue. The people have the right to speak, even when that speech is in the form of a text message.

Floyd Mayweather knocks out Victor Oritiz with a controversial punch to the face during their highly anticipated bout, Sept. 17. Photo courtesy of theurbandaily.com.

After apologizing again, for delivering a deliberate head butt to Mayweather, Ortiz was caught off guard by a left hook, which was followed by a stiff right that put him down and gave Mayweather the knockout victory.

The question being raised by many is whether or not Mayweather’s winning combination was a cheap shot. Some say that Ortiz wasn’t ready and that Mayweather took advantage of his kind gesture. Others feel that Ortiz was too worried about apologizing that he forgot about the most important rule in all combat sports: never leave yourself open.

While both of these are viable arguments, they don’t touch on the fact that Ortiz threw the unnecessary head butt in the first place.

Had Ortiz’s head butt been more casual or unintentional, it would have been cheap of Mayweather to punch him while he wasn’t ready. However, the motion and force behind Ortiz’s head butt were grounds to throw respect out of the window.

Mayweather had won all previous three rounds before the fourth-round knockout occurred, according to expert scorecards. This must have meant that Ortiz was frustrated to the point of head butting his opponent. Although Ortiz had connected on Mayweather with a couple of blows, he felt the need to drive his head in to his opponent, resulting in a brief stop to the fight and a point deduction for Ortiz.

There’s a certain unspoken rule of conduct that boxers have for each other. Sportsmanship is usually maintained as long as they both fight clean. Ortiz’s head butt clearly threw sportsmanship out of the window for Mayweather. Known for his arrogance, Mayweather seemed unmoved by Ortiz’s attempts at apologizing, and quickly showed him how he felt by knocking him out while his hands were down.

Also, Ortiz was already giving his third apology to Mayweather before he got knocked out. He put himself in a vulnerable position and paid for it. The two apologies before should have been enough for both Ortiz and Mayweather. The third came after the referee had backed both fighters in to their respective corners and had called for a return to action.

Ortiz was probably trying to save face, but it was a huge mistake on his part to apologize for a third time once action was returned. It was ultimately his actions that did him in. Even though Ortiz was losing the fight up to that point, he had been highly touted to be the strongest puncher that Mayweather ever faced.

What the head butt and subsequent knockout did was shorten the inevitability of Mayweather winning another fight. Though his victory’s prominence was jaded by controversy, the theme of Mayweather dominating his opponents seemed to be playing out once more prior to it.

Ortiz can’t blame the outcome on anyone but himself. Though it wasn’t exactly biting another opponent’s ear off, it was an act that doesn’t belong in boxing and one that deserves a knockout.

Boxing fans can now hope for the super fight that never was: Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao. This fight should have happened already, but was cancelled due to controversy between both fighters’ camps. What would a Mayweather fight be without controversy?

First responders raise American flag at Ground Zero, Sept. 11, 2001. Photo courtesy of the Associated Press.

They were New York City’s first responders, an elite group of common superheroes doing their every day jobs.

Ten years ago, when the World Trade Center towers stood burning, they were running toward the smoke and flames while everyone around them was running away.  3,000 of these brave men and women responded with no hesitation to do what they had been trained to do, and when the dust settled after the most horrific day in this nation’s history, 411 of them perished. Their lives were lost in the attempt to let others live. 

First responders received no invitation to the memorial service at Ground Zero. According to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, there wasn’t enough room.  Bloomberg’s spokesman told the press that the service was for the families of the victims, but that first responders would receive their own ceremony on a later date. 

Bloomberg, you must be out of your mind.  To say that the service was just for victims’ families, and to not invite first responders is ridiculous.  He should spend a shift in a New York City firehouse or take a ride-along with a police officer who defends the very city Bloomberg is in charge of. Maybe then he’d learn the true meaning of “family.”

A family is defined as, “1: a group of individuals living under one roof and usually under one head; 3: a group of people united by certain convictions or a common affiliation; 4: a group of things related by common characteristics,” according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary.

If Merriam-Webster is correct, first responders more than qualify as a family.  In many cases, firemen, police officers, paramedics and EMTs spend more time with their coworkers than with their actual families.  They celebrate Christmas and birthdays together.  They are often just outside the delivery room when a fellow first responder’s wife gives birth. 

These are the men and women who risked everything in the face of danger. They are the ones who were in the towers as they crumbled, the ones who still suffer from the effects of 9/11, and just as other victims’ families are, first responders are reminded of their losses every day.

New York City’s first responders had every right, if not more, to be at the Ground Zero memorial service.  Their loss was tremendous. Four hundred eleven brothers and sisters were lost. That’s 411 less birthdays, 411 less Christmas gifts each year and 411 less chances to make new memories.

The memorial service should have been used to honor all of those affected by the attacks on Sept. 11.  It should have honored those people who have to deal with the pain and suffering every day.  It should have honored New York City first responders, because even those who didn’t lose their life, they lost a part of themselves.

During your freshman year, try to get as many of your general education and 100-level classes out of the way. These classes are a little more lenient and full of freshman and sophomores. When you are upperclassmen and you actually want to learn in class, not socialize, you’re not going to want to be in class with students who don’t take it as seriously.

If mathematics is not your strong suit, don’t take a class with a professor who barely speaks English, because math itself is like another language. If you decide to stay in such a class you’ll end up becoming your own teacher and will most likely find yourself in the Math Learning Center every week. Just so you know, the MLC is located in the Physics and Mathematics Building, Room 132.

This brings us to our next piece of advice. If you can tell within the first week or two that you won’t be able to handle the work load, or get a professor you can’t understand—or don’t want to understand—drop the class before the drop period. Recognizing this before you earn the grade will be very beneficial to your self-esteem and your GPA.  A lot of the time, a good professor is all you need to do well.

Also, take advantage of the services offered at CSU-Pueblo. For those of you taking a foreign language class, the Language Center, located in the Psychology Building, Room 147, is a good place for extra help.  For help with your papers, and you will write a lot of them, the Writing Room is located in the Library and Academic Services Center, Room 251. The General Education Tutoring Center is in the same room.

Though these are not all the services CSU-Pueblo has to offer, they are some of the most helpful, especially for underclassmen. If you want more information regarding the university’s services, it’s website is a good place to start, but walking around campus is a close second.  Get out there everyone and explore the place, it’s going to be your second home for the next few years.

One of the biggest mistakes students make in college is not asking for help if they don’t understand the material. If all you take from this article is to ask questions, that’s fine, because it’s probably the most important piece of advice we can give you.  Question everything if you have to; just make sure you understand what’s going on. You are paying for this education, remember that.

Don’t let your timidity be an excuse to not ask questions. If you don’t like talking in front of people, take notes in class then schedule a private meeting with your professor. They are more than glad to help.  If you don’t like talking in front of people and wish to change that, consider taking the class Speaking and Listening—we recommend Dana Ihm.

Remember to also exchange numbers with at least one person in each class. When you’re absent or have questions on a homework assignment, it feels better to bother a classmate rather than your professor.

To end this seemingly incessant “advice column,” we would just like to say, get involved. Go to sporting events, go to the free concerts and comedy skits, and go to the speeches.  Join a club if you have to, just don’t waste this experience. College is what you make it to be.