Since his inauguration on Jan. 20, President Donald J. Trump has signed nearly two dozen executive orders and Presidential memoranda — tackling everything from “minimizing the economic burden” of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to restricting immigration from seven nations with predominantly Muslim populations. His most recent order, issued on Feb. 3, took aim at financial regulations and committee establishment imposed by the Obama administration under the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

While many have expressed outrage regarding the President’s early actions, with millions engaging in protests both in-person and on social media, some are optimistic about the course the new administration has charted.

This optimism isn’t localized to officials in the White House. Among some of the campus’ loudest dissenters are students who are excited to see what changes a new administration may bring after eight years of political frustration.

“At the start of every presidential administration, many executive orders are made that people may not necessarily agree with. It is great to see the President start the process of repealing and finding a suitable replacement for the Affordable Care Act,” Andrew Mahaleris, Director of Communications for the UMaine College Republicans, said on the organization’s behalf. “The UMaine College Republicans are a diverse group of students who come from all different walks of life, but are all connected by the same core principles of freedom, equality, inclusiveness and liberty.”

But for others, President Trump’s first two weeks have been turbulent and terrifying. Particularly for students caught in the White House’s controversial immigration order.

“I personally think it’s unconstitutional and disgusting that he has barred so many people from entering this country even legally. The complete overreach being done is terrifying,” fourth-year Women’s and Gender Studies (WGS) student Kirsten Daley said. Daley is involved in a myriad of groups on campus, from the Student Women’s Association (SWA) to the Student Alliance for Sexual Health (SASH). She is also the current president of the Black Student Union (BSU).
“…we can no longer fight in the ways we are used to, we are now fighting someone who not only does not know anything about how to govern but does not care about how to do so. We have to learn how to fight all over again and I’m terrified that the learning curve will allow him to really hurt a lot of people,” Daley continued.

For Democrats, who suffered defeat in both houses of Congress as well as the White House in the 2016 election cycle, the frustration is already mounting.

For President of the Maine College Democrats Brody Haverly-Johndro, Trump’s alleged overreach is only part of the problem.

Haverly-Johndro, also president of the Class of 2019, also takes issue with Trump’s exclusionary political messaging.

“President Trump’s Executive Order on immigration is wrong and unconstitutional. He has barred Syrian refugees from entering our country, suspended all refugee admissions for 120 days, and blocked citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. Not only does this Executive Order [sic] go against all that our nation stands for, it threatens the very foundation of our democracy and of our country,” he said in an e-mail.

Haverly-Johndro is further concerned about the rhetoric painting the United States as anything less than what he already sees it as — “the greatest country on Earth.”

“The United States of America is the symbol of hope, promise, and the pursuit of happiness known around the world,” Haverly-Johndro said. “Mr [sic] Trump’s actions in this Executive Order and others that he has issued in the last week do not reflect the principles that the majority of Americans stand for. We are in [sic] inclusive, diverse, welcoming country and I refuse to let President Trump tear the lives of so many apart. We will not build walls or ban groups of people based on their religion.”

On Friday, Nov. 13, eight extremists in three teams carried out attacks on six sites in France. Just over 130 are confirmed dead, with more than 300 reported injured in the French capital of Paris. ISIS, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), has since claimed responsibility for the attacks, and promised additional action against a number of the world’s most bustling cities in the coming weeks.

These strikes were preceded by bombings in Lebanon’s capital city of Beirut. ISIS has also claimed responsibility for these assaults. In two attacks by suicide bombers the day prior to the carnage in Paris, more than 40 were killed and almost 200 injured in Beirut.

The first attack was a series of explosions just outside of the Stade de France, an 81,000-seat soccer stadium that houses Paris Saint-Germain, the country’s best soccer team. The first explosion, according to the Wall Street Journal, came shortly after security stopped a man wearing an explosive belt from entering a soccer match between France and Germany. The bomber then stepped back and detonated the explosives, killing himself and one other bystander. Two other bombs were detonated, one at another entrance to the stadium, and one at a nearby fast-food restaurant.

The most casualties came at the Bataclan theater, where a concert put on by the band Eagles of Death Metal was taking place. At least 89 have been confirmed dead, with nearly 100 others critically injured. The onslaught began when three men, dressed in black, began shooting into the crowd and then systematically executing the wounded.

An additional attack occurred when one man opened fire on a restaurant in Little Cambodia, killing 15 and injuring another 15. Another bar and restaurant were attacked with no reported casualties.

According to BBC News, one of the attackers has been identified as 29-year-old Frenchmen Ismail Mostefai. Mostefai has a criminal record, but has never been jailed. He was, however, flagged as a possible extremist.

CIA officials say that there is no immediate threat to the United States, though they are closely monitoring the events unfolding overseas.

Just outside of the Memorial Union, carved neatly into the dark asphalt leading to the main entrance, “Out of Silence 1 in 3 campaign, Minsky Hall, Nov. 5 & 6 7:00 p.m.” is outlined in blue and orange chalk.

The message was part of several week-long campaign put on by the Student Women’s Association (SWA) to raise awareness about the stigma of receiving an abortion in the United States. The effort culminated in two performances of Out of Silence, a short play depicting the experiences of women who underwent the procedure and hope to give others the same opportunity they had.

The push is timely, coinciding with the beginning of a Congressional investigation into allegations made about the illegal sale of fetal tissue by Planned Parenthood, an organization dedicated to delivering “vital reproductive health care, sex education, and information to millions of women, men, and young people worldwide.” This same committee has recently drawn controversy, its six Democratic members purportedly taking $81,000 in Political Action Committee (PAC) money associated with Planned Parenthood and its affiliates.

All the while, debate has raged between those concerned about both the availability of Planned Parenthood’s health services, particularly to low income women, and those looking to protect the rights of the unborn. Allegations of dubious practices by a Planned Parenthood clinic in Texas have brought the issue of federal funding to the forefront after years of backburner status, earning a particularly passionate mention from presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina at the Republican Presidential Debate in September.

Concerns about Planned Parenthood’s accountability flared when the Center for Medical Progress posted videos appearing to show Planned Parenthood’s employees abusing the public’s trust with a series of implicatory statements in the summer of this year.

But some aren’t buying the hype.

“Most of the people I know were very frustrated with the way people [were] acting to the allegations, especially since they had been proven to be false.” Kirsten Daley, a student at the University of Maine and member of the Student Women’s association, said. “It is even more frustrating to know that all the good that Planned Parenthood does was being devalued in the face of allegations that had been already proven false but still used as reason to deny people services.”

Still, opponents of Planned Parenthood’s nearly $530 million in federal funding remain concerned about how their tax dollars are being spent, even if those dollars cannot be legally spent on abortive procedures.

“Because Planned Parenthood is a taxpayer funded organization, its actions should be held to high standards. Its figures should be checked; its procedures should be checked,” Abigail Bennett, also a student at UMaine, said. “None of the $500 million in federal funding the organization receives goes directly to abortion procedures, but many feel as though their tax dollars shouldn’t be given to an organization which conducts abortions. Abortion is a moral question, and so is the question of forcing a citizen who is morally against abortions to fund an organization which conducts them.”

This isn’t the first time Planned Parenthood has faced national political opposition. As recently as 2011, Planned Parenthood played a major role in the budgetary crisis that very nearly caused a government shutdown and led to weeks of financial uncertainty. The so-called ‘debt-ceiling crisis of 2011’ was fueled, in part, by dissatisfaction within the Republican party about governmental funding of the group.

Supporters maintain that these attacks are born not of genuine concern about institutional accountability, but of ideological differences about a woman’s right to choose. Regardless of their origin, the challenges have far from stagnated.

While the debate continues to develop, only one thing is certain: neither side will be relenting anytime soon.

“I think everyone should have a personal issue regarding the way we treat Planned Parenthood and the women who seek treatment there,” Daley said. “It is personal because I don’t know that I won’t need them someday, and frankly I’d like them to be there if I do. These things are important, it should be everyone’s problem.”

Caitlyn Burman

When did unhealthy sleep habits become the new ‘it’ thing?

It’s a phenomenon that one would be remiss not to notice, particularly here on campus: students readily bragging about their long study hours and short sleep schedules. Dark circles are the new marker of academic success, and extra large cups of coffee are more of an aesthetic statement for undergraduate students than just a morning beverage.

But perhaps this one-upmanship is indicative of a bigger problem — a problem more troublesome, and more pervasive, than just overworked American college students.

Has not only campus culture, but broader American society itself, become too obsessed with working?

Domestic policy would certainly suggest it. The United States remains one of the only highly-developed nations in the world to reject paid maternity leave for working mothers — offering even less in the way of working fathers. Working culture further supports the idea -— salaried positions push laborers past the boundaries of acceptable time spent behind a desk, and interns are left unpaid and exhausted for the sake of supposed networking and experience.

Vacation time is accrued and left unused, and those who work the longest are idealized by media and fiction, despite the fact that their long hours often have devastating effects on both their families and their health. Eighty-hour workweeks are nearly required to get ahead, and industry leaders milk their interns for every ounce of manpower they’re capable of offering.

Conversely, those who work short hours, focusing primarily on family, personal health and happiness, are painted as lazy, unmotivated ‘hippies.’ They are rarely offered the opportunity to advance, even if they are fully competent in their positions, because they do not desire to make their job the primary focus of their lives. They refuse to work weekends or holidays, refuse to work overtime and refuse to submit to the idea that the be all end all to life is to devote oneself to the financial gain of another’s dream.

Working to the point of exhaustion, ignoring familial obligations and friendships, remains equally as selfish as refusing to work at all. This ‘do or die’ culture that has been cultivated since the early twentieth century is creating huge problems with mental health, family unity and individual well-being that can be seen in the record high usage of antidepressants and anti-anxiety drugs in American workers, and it needs to stop.

Perhaps it is time to end the blind idolization of those among us who refuse to stop. Are they admirable in their passion and endurance? Yes. Their self-discipline is astonishing, and their ability to persevere is impressive.

But are they the pinnacle of the American dream, offering a model after which all others should mold themselves? Perhaps not. Not everyone is meant to exist in this vacuum of work, class and limited sleep. Sometimes it’s okay to take a break.

It’s time to stop demonizing those who make the choice to focus on things other than work. Family, health, friendships and creative projects are just as important as monetarily measurable output. A person’s value does not derive from how long they work, but how happy they are, and how much happiness they bring the world and those in it.

And, yes, sleep is wonderful. Try it sometime.

Is tragedy ever funny?

The answer to that question may seem pretty obvious. In fact, a person’s reaction may even be visceral. “Of course not,” they may cry indignantly. “Suffering of any kind is never funny, no matter the circumstances.”

But is immediate denial an honest evaluation of society’s real relationship with entertainment or is it only wishful thinking?

Humankind has long had an affinity for joking about disaster. Comics have been pressing these buttons for centuries, individuals making use of satire as a tool to become the provocateurs that create a greater global consciousness for everything from the characteristics of “real art” to the plights of oppressed minorities.

No, joking at the expense of others is not new. People have always loved to laugh, even when they shouldn’t  — maybe even especially so. They laugh at the tragic things, the terrible things — the grotesque, insensitive and horrific things — because it’s the only way that ordinary citizens can fathom extraordinary misfortune.

Is this wrong?

Perhaps. The ethics of comedy are something to discuss another day, and are bogged down in a balancing act between being respectful and being provocative.

But on another level, engaging with this sort of content on a comedic plane is arguably better than not engaging with it at all — which seems to be the most likely alternative.

In an era where the average individual touts disenchantment with political discourse of any kind like a badge of honor, making someone laugh may be the only way in which they voluntarily interact with, and reflect upon, vital and contentious issues. Media like this may aim to entertain, but in the process it also does what’s really important — it informs.

Of course, no one’s arguing that comedy is the gold standard of responsible news. Certainly most comedic engagement isn’t up to par with serious, contemplative reflection, at least, not in terms of generating sensitive and thoughtful ideas and solutions to the serious problems that face this country and the world at large.

But then again, it rarely claims to be. The nature of jokes and those who tell them is to be self-depreciating; they know, and embrace, their brusque and evocative attitude towards the issues that make most people flinch. Comics and satirists typically accept that their material is often insensitive and may only offer superficial and skewed analysis — the way that a careful and considered news report, hopefully, does not. They are not offended that they are not the “pinnacle” of newscasting, nor do they seem to deny the truth in such an analysis.

But that doesn’t diminish the value of their work.

When a person laughs, a person also thinks — perhaps, the next time, in a more sympathetic and insightful manner. They are engaged, and educated, without feeling suffocated by the often overwhelming sense of sympathy and expectation that comes with traditional reporting. They can care without feeling like it’s exhausting to do so — and that’s important too.

Comedy is by no means a faultless medium of expression. But, particularly now, it is an increasingly important one.

So, perhaps tragedy isn’t funny, at least, not in our idealistic picture of how the world should be. But jokes are important, because without them, a population already disillusioned with an increasingly combative and negative state of affairs would know even less.

Perhaps tragedy is never truly funny. But it is important to joke about.