Halloween ’07: the night of the drunken bumblebee fight. No, there was no bitch-slapping and we didn’t end up making out. I just didn’t think she was qualified to tell me to shut up. On Halloween ’08, my friend – the Greek goddess – prevented me from macking on a freshman dressed as Santa Claus who probably had DC swipes. She then danced with Obama, resulting in brown body paint on her white dress. Only Halloween allows you to use sentences like that.

I don’t like being scared. I’m surprisingly unskilled at trespassing onto the property of strangers and asking for candy. I do enjoy, however, partaking in the slutification of an otherwise appropriate costume and then mooching from other people’s cheap plastic witch cauldrons, so I’m excited for Halloween. And alien vomit Jell-o shots.

Halloween gives everyone a chance to be someone else for a day, which is nice, because some things sound like they’d only be cool to be for a day. Like Superman. Being Superman sounds awesome, but then you have to factor in that he can only get laid when he loses his powers. So that’s a real tradeoff. Rogue from X-Men and the Hulk are similar in that they can’t get it on without doing some serious damage.

The biggest downfall of Halloween is being placed in the midst of a season of chilliness, illness, midtermness, and idleness. Before you throw on that skeleton suit and blonde wig and go around introducing yourself as Paris Hilton, here are some tips that might increase your chances of having a good night.

Make sure people can actually tell what you are.

Nothing sucks more than being asked repeatedly, “What are you supposed to be?”

However, if you know the questioner happens to be exceptionally fatuitous, reduce your level of indignation by the number of IQ points by which they are intellectually inferior to you. It’s called tolerance.

I had a science teacher in the seventh grade. To protect what dignity he may have, I’ll call him Mr. White. Everyone asked Mr. White why he wasn’t wearing a Halloween costume. It turned out he was. He had decided to dress as a nerd by tucking in his shirt and wearing glasses. The only problem was no one could tell the difference because he always looked like that. Don’t end up like this poor sad man.

Don’t be lazy.

Putting your hair in a messy sideways ponytail and wearing spandex is hardly discernable from what a lot of chicks wear everyday on campus. The same goes for wearing nothing but a pumpkin t-shirt or a witch hat. Come on, girl. Put your back into it.

Even if the economy has caused you to alternate between Hot Pockets and Top Ramen for survival, frugality does not have to result in a crappy costume, especially if you’re a creative soul. You can, however, even pull together a decent one if you detest creativity. For example, take any given outfit and put blood all over it. Instant dead prom queen/cheerleader/Cholo. Dead is the boy version of slutty.

Play nice with the other floozies.

Look, it’s inevitable that the generic, mass-produced-in-a-Vietnamese sweatshop outfit you overpaid for will probably be seen on someone else. The best thing you can do is hope you look better in it and proceed with your fun, joyful night.

If self-reassurance isn’t your cup of tea, going batshit crazy, seizing your baseball hoe friend’s (Player No. 69, of course) plastic bat, and streamlining across the party in a shrieking rage telling her to step off might convince her to leave the party. But be prepared to do this repeatedly throughout the night.

No other night but this coming Saturday can you have the Village People hold you up for a kegstand, walk to the celebration with Snow White and Dorothy Gale, then hit up a cozy romantic midnight snack with a sexy cop. Just make sure it’s not a real cop.

MICHELLE RICK honestly prefers creative costumes to skanky ones, so show her what you’ve got. She can be reached at marick@ucdavis.edu.

I had it all worked out. I’d be sitting around in class earning some knowledge and I’d spot a beautiful girl reading my column, laughing out loud despite herself. She can’t help it; I’m funny.

Then the following exchange ensues:

Me: “Sup, girl? Like the column?”

Girl: “Oh my god. It’s Will Long!”

We’d talk for a while, she would be enthralled by the staggering combination of my wit and good looks, and then:

Girl: “So, what would Ol’ Dirty Bastard do now?” (Referring to the title of my last column.)

Me: “He’d ask if you wanted to get a drink later. So do you?”

Boom. What a line. Naturally, she would agree, and we’d ride downtown in my Aston Martin, or atop my tamed Tyrannosaurus (as long as we’re dealing in fantasy).

Unfortunately, my game doesn’t extend beyond this written page. Knowing my luck, tomorrow I’ll have this exchange:

Girl: “Hey, I liked your column, how about that drink?”

Me: “Ghhuh, I’m not hungry – I mean, thirsty.”

That about sums up three years of romance for me here in Davis. I’ve been living here for a while now, so it’s important for me to get out of this town every now and then before it drives me nuts.

This past weekend, I went on a trip into the beautiful Armstrong Redwoods State Park to celebrate a buddy’s 23rd birthday. I was traveling with many known rapscallions. You can find a few of them on the FBI’s top 10 most mischievous list. Minor devilry aside, it was a trip dedicated to just having a good time and relaxing in the shade of the redwood giants.

Did my computer come along? Nope. Cell phone? Off. Homework? Fuck that shit. All we really had was beer, firewood, some musical instruments and good company.

I learned something while I was up in those mountains. It wasn’t some spiritual truth, and I made no contact with my raccoon spirit companion. The stars did not align themselves before me and open my third eye.

No, what I learned was that some park rangers are absolutely insane. Like, Gary Busey insane. I had always assumed park rangers were a lot cooler than regular police – even after our ordeal, I still think most of them are.

Not this one. Not Ranger Toni. The first time we spoke to her, she was cool.

“Oh, it’s your birthday?” she asked. “Great, have a good time.”

Sweet. We drove into the nearby Guerneville to hang out and stock up on supplies. When we came back, Toni had changed.

“I know what you kids do, I was in the 60s,” Toni ranted. “I know how to smoke grass. I marched. I protested. Twenty-third birthday? When I was 23, I was a widow with two kids. The state of Tennessee -”

She actually trailed off, leaving us looking at one another in a state of disbelief. What was with this woman?

Oh, but it got worse.

“You know you kids are marked right? We’ve been watching you. You’re already on the radar,” she said. “I want to be on your team, but Lord, I know what you kids get into. All that sex and pot, running around naked in the woods. Hippies.

“Quiet hours start at 10 p.m. If you so much as whisper after that, the rangers will kick you out. They’re watching you.”

It turns out our group in particular wasn’t marked for Smokey the Bear’s brutal justice, but all people – everyone – between the ages of 18 and 25 were. What a trip. We finally escaped after about 20 minutes of her checking everyone’s IDs and trying to put pieces of tape on our parking permits.

But, not all of us were so lucky.

Another car full of our friends came later. God help them, but Toni was still on duty and worse for wear. Our friends explained they were with us, and they were glad to have found the right place. They told Toni they were going to hit up Safeway before heading up to meet us.

“No, no,” Toni said. “You have to go meet them. Now. Besides, what do you need at Safeway?”

Our friends said something along the lines of hotdogs and guacamole.

“No, no, no,” Toni insisted. “I know what you kids get at the supermarket. All you kids ever buy is booze. And drugs!”

Luckily, that was the last we heard of Toni. I don’t know where she shops, but drugs at Safeway? Yeah, you can pick up 2 percent milk, eggs and some methamphetamines all in aisle six. Peyote? Oh, aisle 14, left of the bread. Toni must have been tripping out in that rangers’ booth a few years too long.

Aside from our run in with lunacy incarnate, it was a great trip. I encourage everyone to get out of here now and again. As great as Davis is, this place can inspire cabin fever just like anywhere else. So go camping. Tell the books to take a breather.

WILL LONG’s Facebook tells him he needs to get involved with organized crime and get a Christian girlfriend. Tell him what the Internet thinks of you at wclong@ucdavis.edu.

Dear Editor,

I often plan to write to you about the content in The Aggie but until today have not followed through. After shaking my head for a few seconds, I continue on with my day, usually by 5 p.m. forgetting what piqued my interest earlier in the day. It is 10:30 p.m. now and two hours after seeing the front page of today’s newspaper, I am compelled to sit down and write.

Two articles appeared above the fold on Tuesday relating to alcohol. “Governor signs DUI legislation” was an interesting and informative article outlining steps that the state is taking to protect the public from drivers previously convicted of DUIs. It was placed directly adjacent is your article entitled “Recipe for a party,” outlining how to maximize alcohol consumption on a budget. Putting these articles next to each other is tasteless and contradictory, but I can forgive that error in judgment. What compelled me to write to you today are the internal inconsistencies of the latter article.

You include an obligatory disclaimer to avoid potential litigation. Better safe than sorry! While necessary from a legal perspective, its inclusion comes off as disingenuous, especially since the remainder of the article advocates irresponsible drinking.

Environmental impacts: Juxtaposing the deleterious environmental impact of red cups with a tip on where they can be purchased in bulk as inexpensively as possible pays lip service to the problem. Had you compared prices on where to purchase the biodegradable, recyclable cups that you suggested as an alternative to red cups, you would have at least been consistent in your message.

Binge drinking: A 2001 Harvard study of drinking patterns of college students found that 43 percent of all people surveyed were binge drinkers. That percentage is not among those who drink at parties – among all students. Your quote as to the number of students who drink at parties at UC Davis is a gross misrepresentation of the results, which states “43 percent of UC Davis students reported not drinking in the past 30 days.”

You then go on to suggest a few drinking games that can be played as an alternative to beer pong. First, the sole purpose of a drinking game is to promote speedy alcohol consumption. Second, to suggest Seven, Eleven or Doubles as a drinking game in the same article where you warn against binge drinking is ludicrous. Seven, Eleven or Doubles has one purpose: to get drunk as fast as possible. The probability of rolling a seven, 11, or doubles is 37.5 percent on each roll. After six rolls, there is a 94 percent chance that seven, 11, or doubles will have been rolled. Rolling two dice six times is fast compared to drinking a pint/cup of beer. Again, the sole purpose of this game is to promote binge drinking.

Half-hearted disclaimer. Faux environmentalism. Two-faced discussion of binge drinking including erroneous reporting of statistics. Besides appearing on the same page as articles on DUI prevention and healthy lifestyles, the author and you, the editor, continue to promote binge drinking out of one side of your mouth while extolling the virtues of moderation out of other. I have no problem with social alcohol consumption, but by including this type of article in the paper, it is no wonder binge drinking is still such a problem on so many college campuses.

GREG HIRSON

Graduate student

Agricultural and Environmental Chemistry

In her convocation speech, Chancellor Katehi – once an international student herself – alluded to the important role international students and scholars play on our campus, saying of UC Davis: “We are leading in diversity and internationalization.” However, if we want to “offer a culturally richer and more vibrant learning environment than most other universities,” as Katehi suggests, we must ensure we are cultivating a supportive environment in which these voices can grow.

Some of the problems inherent in being an international student include a new language, lifestyle differences and a new culture. If an international student has problems with adjustment, the experience of being here often “emerges as a story of unfulfilled potential and missed opportunity,” wrote Zach Han, an international student and former California Aggie columnist.

Yet, in the current economic environment, an on-campus program that gives international graduate students (and Education Abroad students) an academic voice is in peril: the Graduate ESL Program.

For 42 years, UC Davis has been offering English language support to international students, and is considered the flagship program in the UC system. Without question, running this program costs money. It is also an easy target for budget cuts because outsourcing it to University Extension or Sacramento City College appears feasible as these institutions, too, teach ESL. Moreover, with lecturers and graduate students teaching in it, no tenure-track faculty positions are at risk.

International students may present adequate scores on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) exam, but this test is only an indicator of general proficiency. It cannot predict if a graduate student will need supplemental work on academic English skills – particularly honing writing and speaking skills – to function at the extremely high level required for master’s and Ph.D. studies. In many cases, these graduate students have had limited opportunities to use English communicatively in their home countries; their English study has predominantly involved reading and studying grammar for their university placement exams or preparing for the TOEFL. Unable to practice these skills in an academic environment, they need to fill in this gap to work to their full potential.

Our program has been carefully tailored to meet the specific needs of UC Davis international graduate students and EAP students. In our courses, students work on the English language and rhetorical skills (including organization and style) necessary for writing abstracts and grant proposals, organizing research reports, summarizing and critiquing research articles, and preparing to become teaching assistants. All work is field-specific as students do the above tasks while writing and speaking about their own fields of study.

Now we are unsure whether this program will endure. In the Budget Subcommittee’s Report (July 2009), our program was deemed one that could be outsourced. In September, the lecturers in the ESL Program received layoff notices effective June 30, 2010.

At a time when UC Davis is endeavoring to globalize and honor diversity, outsourcing ESL would have the negative impact of marginalizing international students. It would give the message that ESL support is below the level of, and outside the realm of, UC Davis work. Off-campus entities, while willing to take on the job, do not have faculty and staff experienced in working with students at this specific level and, furthermore, do not know their needs.

With offices on campus, networks in place, and hooked to the campus Internet, we meet international students’ needs 24/7. Hence, it is far better to leave ESL in the hands of those who are highly experienced and familiar with the terminology and style of field-specific work and who thoroughly understand students’ needs. This also would ensure that the rigorous standards that UC Davis prides itself upon are upheld.

No other UC campus is currently moving to outsource graduate ESL courses. In fact, all UC campuses that offer graduate ESL (Irvine, Santa Barbara, Berkeley and Los Angeles,) do so through an academic department or through Graduate Studies.

If the language needs of our international students are not addressed, and part of their motivation to be here is to become competent and competitive in English, then the experience of being here “emerges as a story of unfulfilled potential and missed opportunity,” to quote Han again.

Let’s keep the ESL Program where it belongs: on campus where we are equipped to carry out UC Davis’ global vision. Otherwise, we face a disconnect between what we want to be and what we are able to achieve. Let’s not cloud that vision by diminishing the opportunities for our international students to make their voices heard here and around the world.

The current debate over net neutrality and further governmental regulations over Internet Service Providers (ISPs) is about as vague as it is broad, and certain groups and members of Congress are taking it too far.

Net neutrality is the policy of free and unrestricted broadband internet service for any user, regardless of their ISP. These ISPs – such as Comcast, AT&T or Verizon – differ in name but provide the same product, and under net neutrality that service would be the same under every service plan.

On Oct. 22, the Federal Communications Commission proposed a first draft of some new rules that, if passed into law, would further enforce net neutrality. Under the rules, ISPs would act solely as their name suggests – mere providers of Internet service, with no abilities to discriminate against access to certain websites and increased transparency to the public and government.

To put it simply, we think this sounds great. So do websites such as Facebook and Twitter, search engines like Google and the Internet’s hailed creator, Al Gore himself.

The real opposition comes from multiple representatives in Congress and ISPs themselves. Representatives like Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) and the infamous Joe “You Lie” Wilson (R-S.C.) oppose the new proposed rules to net neutrality for fear of inflated government control. Glenn Beck thinks it’s a communist plot.

First, the FCC rules are not the looming Orwellian threat these representatives would have you believe. The rules – which will be officially proposed 60 days from Oct. 22 – simply give consumers the right to access Internet content and web applications of their choice, as well as the ability to choose ISPs in a competitive environment. There’s nothing in there about restrictive government oversight, and this isn’t a challenge to our freedom.

Second, many of the ISP arguments are fundamentally flawed. Verizon employee and communications chairman Ivan Sidenberg said the proposed rules will cause the government to favor one set of competitors over another, since the proposed FCC rules target ISPs and not Internet companies like Google. The government regulates the auto industry differently than it does drivers, and we don’t see Ford and Chrysler complaining. Different sets of competitors are regulated differently.

The opposition also stated increased channeling power to the ISPs could help prevent the passage of malware and spam. While this is surely technically possible, users already have a plethora of virus protection software and general know-how to make this a non-issue. This isn’t an excuse to turn the Internet into a controlled environment that varies from ISP to ISP.

Moreover, Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) recently proposed a direct challenge to net neutrality itself with a bill that would grant ISPs the ability to slow down access to the Internet and web applications. This ironically titled “Internet Freedom Act of 2009” is a dangerous and overarching measure that essentially promotes what the new FCC rules are trying to prevent.

There shouldn’t be differences in website accessibility from one ISP to the next. Users shouldn’t have to change plans or subscribe to multiple ISPs to access their favorite websites.

If this goes to Congress, urge our California first district representative Mike Thompson to not listen to the arguments of companies like Verizon and AT&T.

Because after all, the Internet is not a big truck nor is it a series of tubes.

Originally, I wanted to use this week’s column to better clarify my personal politics. As a feminist who discovered herself on the Internet, I don’t think the mainstream media (read: print media) represents feminist issues accurately, or as often as they should. My plan was to cap off last week’s column with something a little closer to home, to give a better idea of how I see the world.

Like I said, that was my plan. Then I got distracted watching Rachel Maddow calmly prove that Fox News does not qualify as “news.” Whose eyes wouldn’t glaze over listening to this woman talk? Really, it’s not as if it’s uncommon for people to crush on TV’s talking heads and personalities.

Putting political affiliation aside, who’s never lusted after Anderson Cooper’s beautiful profile, or Glenn Beck’s baby blues? You understand then, why I have to gush about Rachel Maddow – who is not only crush-worthy, but also the kind of feminist I would love to be.

Maddow’s rise to fame is as overwhelming as she is herself. After earning her degree in public policy from Stanford University, she traveled to the University of Oxford as the first openly gay Rhodes Scholar; her thesis was about health care reform in prisons.

Maddow began her quick ascent to national relevance in 2004 as a mere local radio personality. By last year, she had worked up to her own eponymous show on MSCNBC, peaking at almost 2 million viewers per episode during the election. As if that weren’t impressive enough, Maddow also just happens to be a stunning intellect, ferociously compassionate, queer and proud, funny and – of course – super hot. If her appearance in Vogue and her sex symbol status aren’t enough to convince you that you need to watch her show, then you just can’t be helped.

To hear Maddow tell it, she’s nothing special. In a recent interview with Ariel Levy, she said, “I’m not very pretty. I am what I am. I look like a dude. I wear boring jackets. I have a big nose. I have short hair. No one is going to mix me up with a Fox business anchor.”

Awww. She’s humble, too. As a self-described “big dyke,” it’s a good thing she (mostly) rejected MSNBC’s efforts to make her look more traditionally “feminine.”

As you can probably guess, it’s easy to come up with positive things about Maddow. It’s even easier to just go on about how amazing and beautiful she is.

But the world is full of accomplished and beautiful people. It’s her modus operandi in a world of racist Rushes and overwrought Olbermanns that makes her special. In a medium where it’s the norm for political discussion to amount to screaming and personal insults, Maddow does not need to sacrifice her poise or logic to win an argument. Although the importance of behavior normally amounts to about nil on cable TV (as the immortal Bill O’ Reilly said, “Fuck it, we’ll do it live!”), Maddow is distinguished by her class. She is capable of engaging in debate without resorting to fallacious personal attacks or dishonesty, and people respond to that. More importantly, the political dialogue is the better for it.

From her political individuality (although definitely a liberal, she heavily criticized Obama for his failure to repeal ”Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”) to her rhetorical acumen (just ask Tom Ridge and Pat Buchanan), Maddow is one of a kind. But she is also an encouragement to people who want to improve the world.

This is why Maddow is such an excellent feminist role model. Her gender, appearance, and sexual orientation makes her a target in her profession. Her ability speaks for itself, though. The best her naysayers can come up with is, “What a dyke.” I say, “What a dyke!”

HALEY DAVIS wants to talk with you about Rachel Maddow. She can be reached at hrdavis@ucdavis.edu.

Davis residents will be asked to weigh in on only one question this Election Day: Should the Wildhorse Ranch housing development be approved?

Wildhorse Ranch is a 25.8-acre property on Mace Boulevard in East Davis, right next to the existing Wildhorse neighborhood. If voters approve Measure P, the land will be converted from a horse ranch and developers would be allowed to build between 174 and 191 houses, townhomes and apartments.

The California Aggie editorial board endorses a “Yes” vote on Measure P.

Many opponents of Measure P have argued that the project is sprawl and not smart growth.

While the homes may not be absolutely necessary, the fact is there is a set demand for housing in the Yolo County region. Growth will happen no matter what – the question is where and how. Measure P is our chance to decisively influence that question in a way that is sensitive to the environment.

The most notable feature of the project is its design, which would reduce the on-site greenhouse gas emissions to 90 percent below the city’s baseline level. This will be achieved primarily through solar power that will meet most of the project’s energy needs. The project will also include elements aimed at reducing water usage, such as native and drought-tolerant landscaping and water-saving fixtures.

If homes are not built in Davis, they will be built in Woodland or West Sacramento, where developers are not held to the same high environmental standards they are in Davis. The failure of Measure P would represent a missed opportunity to positively influence growth in an environmentally sustainable direction.

The claim that the project is sprawl completely ignores the fact that two enormous suburban housing developments (Wildhorse and Mace Ranch) sit adjacent to the relatively small Wildhorse Ranch property. The sprawl already happened. Wildhorse Ranch would be a model for future sustainable growth.

Measure P opponents have a point that the project is not as affordable as the developer claims it will be. The average price for the cheapest for-sale units is estimated at $451,000. That’s far beyond anything a low-wage worker could afford.

Nonetheless, this is not a good reason to oppose the project. From an economic standpoint, increasing the supply of housing will decrease the average cost of housing citywide. With more housing units available, landlords will have to keep their prices competitive to attract tenants.

Aside from the affordability issue, Wildhorse Ranch is a well-designed project that will meet some of Davis’ housing needs in a sustainable way. Davis voters should take advantage of the opportunity they have to make a positive impact on growth in the city by voting “Yes” on Measure P.