WRFH/Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM - Collegian Week in Review: November 21, 2024

Episode Date: December 10, 2024

This week on the Collegian Week In Review, hosts Moira Gleason, Thomas McKenna, and Caroline Kurt are joined by Isabella Doer and Luke Miller. 

Welcome to The Collegian Week in Review on Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM. Here are your hosts, Moor Gleason, Thomas McKenna, and Caroline Kurt. Welcome to Collegian Week in Review, where we give you an inside look into Michigan's oldest college newspaper. We're your hosts, Caroline Kurt, Thomas McKenna, and Mora Gleason. Today we'll be interviewing sophomore Luke Miller about his opinion on Trump's cabinet picks and senior reporter Isabella Dewar about the future of a homeless shelter in thrift store. in Hillsdale. But first, we'll start with some of our top stories. On A1 this week, football finishes with a winning record after beating the Ohio Dominican University Panthers 28 to 6 on Saturday.

They finished their season 6 and 5 after starting the season 1 and 5. So overcame a big losing streak there to finish with a winning season. Also on the front page, the college is named a new vice president of marketing, Jonathan Hall, who will start working. at the college next semester. And our lead story this week came from Thomas, who wrote about the new acting city mayor of Hillsdale. Thomas, do you want to fill us in on that story? Sure. So Hillsdale will have a new mayor in two weeks. The current mayor, Adam Stockverd, is stepping down after he bought a house outside of the city limits. And so the question for the past few weeks, since he made that announcement at a recent city council meeting was, who's the next mayor going to be? And after Monday

night's meeting, we learned it's Ward 4 Councilman Joshua Palladino who attended Hillsdale College from 2014 to 2024, getting bachelor's, masters, and doctorate degrees. So a Hillsdale grad is the new mayor of the city of Hillsdale. This happened on Monday night at the city council meeting where the expected mayor pro tem, which is the second in command position, was Will Morrissey, who has been, he was a former professor of politics at the college, and he had been mayor pro tem. He had been mayor pro tem for six years. And so it was expected for a while that he would be the one who would replace Stockford when Stockford stepped down because there's two years left in his term. And who serves out the two years once the mayor steps down is the second in command.

But Joshua Palladino goes to some of his colleagues on the city council and says, hey, we would rather not have Councilman Morrissey be the mayor. And since nobody else wanted to do it, this is what Palladino told me. Paladino stepped up. and he got the votes to be the next mayor of Hillsdale. So he's just the acting mayor. That's his official title. But over the next few years, unless the city holds a special election to replace him,

on day one, he wants to remove the fluoride that the city's currently putting in the water supply here. And then he also wants to tackle issues of crime, homelessness, drugs, and an overcrowded county jail. See what the city can do to help with that. He also wants to deal with fixing the roads, Currently, the city has a system in place that requires large fees from anybody on a road that isn't normally trafficked, but that is going to get fixed.

And he wants to change that policy where you basically put high fees on somebody on a neighborhood road to get their road fixed. He instead wants to find some other way to do that. So Hillsdale's got a new mayor. He's got new ideas. And he's got probably two years until he'll have to face an election. So that's the big news in the city this week. I should mention I wasn't the only person on this story. I also wrote it with one of my assistant editors, Alessia Sandela,

and collegial reporter Sky Graham, who attended that city council meeting on Monday night. Now, moving over to Caroline on opinions, she's going to tell us about her page. Yeah, you know, we'll speak in just a few minutes to Isabella Dewar, who wrote a great well-research opinion about organ donation, and then Luke Miller, who wrote about Trump's cast. cabinet pits, but some other notable pieces on the page this week were Dr. Christopher Martin, who teaches economics here, wrote a wonderful letter to the editor on, we lend politicians our votes.

We don't owe them our minds, so just talking about themes of party loyalty. Adriana Azarian wrote a piece on the benefits of weightlifting for women and why women should strongly consider making that a part of their lifestyle. And then I wrote my column this week about kind of the pattern of people getting into new relationships and leaving friendships, specifically same-sex friendships in the dust and why that is detrimental not only to your friendships, but doesn't help your relationship either. And so why we should instead invest more and not less in same-sex friendships, whether or not you're in a relationship. So that was a fun piece to tackle. And then Thomas, you wrote a great piece for culture this week on the practice of Manning Street fishing. I had no idea this happened before I heard about your piece.

So give us the scoop on that. This is what we would call a cultural phenomenon here at Hillsdale. So there are these two seniors, Maria Ritchie and Stephen Bernston. They have both lived at Graceland either now or in the past. and one of their favorite practices is what they call Manning Fishing. So Graceland sits on top of this hill on Manning Street, which is a street that has a lot of off-campus houses on it. So students are walking back and forth there on a Friday or Saturday night.

And so Maria and Stephen will sit on the porch, and they'll shout down to whoever's down at the sidewalk walking by and say, hey, you, yeah, you, come up here, come hang out with us. And sometimes the person says yes, and they walk on up and they'll talk for five minutes or they'll stay for a few hours, or sometimes they'll just walk on by. But the thing that makes it fishing rather than just calling out to your friends is that because of where Graceland is at a high vantage point, because the sidewalk is so dark,

the people on the porch can't see who's walking by. So what you're doing is you're throwing out a line. You're saying, hey, you come up here and you don't know who's going to show up. So sometimes you catch another student you haven't met. Sometimes you catch a friend. Sometimes you catch a townie who's just walking by with his dog. as in one case that they talked about in the story. So that's the practice of manning fishing there at Graceland.

And you went to watch this happen this weekend as I understand. What was that experience like? I sure did. It was one of the best interviews I ever did because Maria and Stephen were so excited to talk about it. I didn't really have to ask many questions. And while I was there, they did fish somebody. They caught a friend of theirs, Jack Foley, who was celebrating his 21st birthday. So that's what you see when you hang out on a Saturday night at Graceland.

Have you ever been a subject of fishing? I've never been caught. I've never been one of the fish. But maybe someday I'll be walking by Graceland and they'll call out to me. I will mention that something that Stephen said about Manning Fishing is that he thinks it could really only happen at Hillsdale because it's such a high trust society. I mean, think about it. If you're calling out to somebody on the street, you don't know who that person is and you're basically inviting them up to your porch. And they might not know who you are.

And so the only reason that anyone would ever answer that call is because, because there's some mutual trust from the people who live in this community. And for Stephen, it's not just the community of Hillsdale, but the community of Manning Street that has all of these students living there. So that's just a little inside look into what it's like going to school at Hillsdale. Wonderful. Those are some of our top stories for this week. We'll be back in a minute with Luke Miller talking about his take on President Trump's recent cabinet picks. You're listening to The Collegian Week in Review on Radio Free Hillsdale 101.1.7 FM.

We'll be back in a moment. Radio Free Hillsdale's The Collegian Week in Review continues. All right, we are here with sophomore Luke Miller, who wrote an excellent piece this week in the opinions page about Trump's cabinet picks, as he's been selecting naming people to various cabinet positions. And Luke is arguing that Trump is going for the wrong kind of loyalty in these picks. So, Luke, tell us a little bit about your piece.

Hi guys. Thanks for having me on. So in the light of the recent announcement that Donald Trump made that he was not going to welcome back Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo into his new administration, not only did he just not welcome them back. He announced that they were not welcome back. We're really seeing that Donald Trump is showing that he wants people around him who are loyal to him to the end. That might not be the best person for the job. And Republicans criticize Democrats a lot forgoing merit for the sake of diversity. And I believe that. Republicans need to be careful and hold their same leaders to the same account that we can't forego merit for the sake of personal loyalty. Haley and Pompeo were good examples of that because they both kind of diverted from the Trump line, particularly surrounding January 6th. They were both critical of Donald Trump for that, and I think rightfully so. But with that, Donald Trump announced that they weren't welcome back. Now, the reason that that's important is that those two people, Nikki Haley as former United Nations ambassador and Mike Pompeo is former Secretary of state were two of the biggest leaders in Trump's first term foreign policy agenda. And that

foreign policy agenda was one of the main reasons that Donald Trump was reelected. People list big concerns of immigration and the war in Ukraine and the war in Gaza right now. People like Trump's first term foreign policy. And he was reelected for it. But the voters might not get what they want in that regard because Donald Trump prioritized people who were loyal to him and who were uncritical of him, as opposed to the people who might be best for the general. job. A Trump's pick for Secretary of State is Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio, who ran against him in 2016. And you point out that they seemed then to differ a lot on foreign policy. What do you make of that pick now? Yeah, I think that's an interesting pick. I generally tend to like Marco Rubio.

I do think that he was picked for the wrong reasons here, though. Secretary of State is the foremost officer of foreign policy in the United States. And back in 2016, when they were running in the in the republican primary they had these battles in the debates over foreign policy rubio and and trump were very hostile to each other particularly in the realm of foreign policy that was their biggest disagreement but since then rubio has been has been a trump loyalist to the end um he's been very uncritical of donald trump since then and he's trying to help get trump's agenda passed but the lesson that people are taking from that is rubio pledged his support to Trump and got picked, even though Rubio might not be the best person to forward Donald Trump's

foreign policy agenda. Now, you write in your piece that Trump in either, sorry, let me retake that. Now, you write in your piece that either Rubio flipped on his principles or he has sucked up to Trump in spite of their contradictory visions for American foreign policy, Rubio was rewarded for getting on board. Now, you kind of pose two competing scenarios there. Is there one that you think is more? likely either that Rubio flipped or that he's just sucked up to Trump enough but hasn't changed

his principles. Yeah, I think he kind of went with the whims of the Republican Party there. The current Republican Party is more of a populist movement that's opposed to things like Amnesty, which Rubio was for in 2016. So I don't think it's so much that Rubio sucked up to Trump and still believes this other stuff and is not going to do what Trump wants him to do in that spot, I think Rubio just kind of went with the way the Republican Party was going. I think he flipped from what he thought was the popular position back in 2016 to what he thinks is the popular position now in 2024. And he was rewarded for it. So the news just came out that Matt Gates, Trump's nominee for attorney general, stepped down from that, from consideration. Do you think that Gates,

did you have any hesitations about him? Or do you think that this example of someone who's nominated and then has to step down, indicates that Trump will have to take further consideration into his nominations or, like, what does this mean for the rest of the cabinet picks? Yeah, I think Donald Trump should take a re-look at this. I think Gates was a prime example of what I was talking about in this piece. I think Gates was primarily picked because of his loyalty to Trump, because of his pledging his support to Donald Trump. I don't think Gates was the best person for the attorney general job.

There are a lot of other people who are better at that job. Ted Cruz is one example that I saw a lot of people. supporting for the Attorney General Job, and I would support myself for the Attorney General Job. But Ted Cruz also had those battles with Donald Trump and didn't necessarily go back on his beliefs. He was principled about it, and he was not rewarded for it. Bates has had a record of shutting down the Republican agenda in the House of Representatives. For example, when he was leading the charge to oust Kevin McCarthy as Speaker, it was over a spending deal and delayed the deal for several months and then not only did he not get what he wanted after mike johnson

was placed a speaker they got less concessions from the democrats so gates has a record of that he's not for forwarding the republican agenda um he was for grandstanding and for pledging his support to this thing that he thought Donald trump wanted to happen um and he was rewarded for it Trump tried to nominate him to the the highest position um that any lawyer can have in the country and we're kind of seeing the blowback for it. He wasn't the best pick for the job. We're seeing all these things, these allegations come out against him. But I think we're really realizing that we need to, the people who get these roles matter. This really, really matters. These are the people who shape policy. And at the end of the day, the people who run the system, that's what matters in a presidential administration.

You can say whatever you want from the top, but the people who inhabit the administration who make up the cabinet or the people who really get policy stuff done. And Luke, Of Trump's current cabinet picks nominees, are there any that, you know, loyalty aside, you think are particularly great or even that buck the trend of maybe not being super loyal to Trump? There's not many that I see buck the trend. I really like Christy Noem as picked for Homeland Security. We saw her here on campus a little while back. We got to hear her speak. I think she'll do a great job in that role.

and I think that that forwards her national political career. So I think there was two parts in that pick. I think Doug Bergam was a great pick as well when we saw him run for president. The energy and environmental concerns were something that he pushed for in the Republican Party in a way that not a lot of people do. And I think he's going to do a great job in his role. But I still am not seeing a lot of instances where Donald Trump is bringing back these people who have been really opposed to him, particularly on the issue of January 6th in the 2020 election. Now, there are still some cabinet picks that have yet to be made. Is there anyone in particular you hope Trump will nominate for another position?

Well, yeah, now that this Attorney General slot is back open with Matt Gates withdrawing his name from it, I hope to see a guy like Ted Cruz get that, somebody who is a Harvard trained lawyer, who is proven that he has the record to do that job, and who really knows how to get stuff done and has shown that he has, the interests of the country first as opposed to the interests of pleasing the top of his political party. Do you think there's any legitimacy to the argument that loyalty should matter a lot to Trump? You know, if we look back to his first term, some of his early picks, they weren't loyal to him. They would back talk or they would talk behind his back.

They would badmouth him to the press, either anonymously or with their full name attached to it. What do you make of that argument? Yeah, I think a lot of, I think that's definitely a good argument to make. there were a lot of people that Trump chose in his first administration who kind of stabbed him in the back there and who are still doing that to this day. So I understand why Trump wants people who are loyal to him. And I think that a lot of these picks that he's making are good. I just think that we need to be careful because it can kind of get dangerous when you're choosing people not based off of their ability to do the job, but because of loyalty primarily. Now, loyalty certainly should be considered there.

But pledging your loyalty to Trump shouldn't be the only thing that gets you forwarded. It shouldn't be the primary thing that gets you forwarded into Republican national politics. It should be your ability to advance the Republican agenda. Wonderful, Luke. It's been great to have you on and thanks for writing. Thank you guys. You're listening to Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM. We'll be back momentarily. You're listening to the Collegian Week in Review. All right, we are back with senior reporter Isabella Dewar, who wrote two pieces this week. First, we're going to focus on her opinion on organ donation. She did a great piece involving recent news, medical ethics, and her decision to uncheck the organ donation box on her license. So,

Isabel, tell us where you're coming from with this piece. Okay. So I guess I didn't even, when I first listened, found out about the story in the news. I was just really shocked because I had never even thought twice about organ donation. It was like, okay. okay, if this is a good thing that I can do after I've passed, then of course I'm going to do it, not really thinking anything more than that. And then after heard this story, it's like, oh my goodness, I guess you have to be more cautious of just modern medicine in general. And I guess nowadays definitions do seem to be shifting and you can't take people at their word as much as you used to be able to necessarily.

So anyway, all that to be said, I was just after hearing about this man who was brain dead, but not actually dead and how it caused all this controversy in the surgical room because he was still showing signs of life and doctors wanting to proceed with the procedure, others being cautious and not wanting to, it just kind of freaked me out. I think I'll pass on organ donation if it's that murder. key and the definition is somewhat flexible. Yeah, and you were bringing up two specific incidents, one from an October National Public Radio story that was talking about a 2021 incident, right?

And then another from a congressional hearing recently. Tell us a little bit about that, the incident from the congressional hearing as well. Okay. So yeah, I read both of those on the same piece, the first one talked about. the incident in Kentucky with a guy who drug overdosed and then this led to his brain not functioning properly and then them considering him for organ donation. And then the other one was just the doctor who was going forward with the organ donation for this other man was just, I guess everything was seemingly fine until they went into surgery and then he was starting to just show signs of life again and I think he took an unassisted breath.

That was the first like caution sign for them. And thankfully with that case, it was seemed a much more cut and dry like, okay, we're not going forward, which I think with the first one, there was more, they had taken more steps and there was more controversy with doctors and nurses in the operating room than there was with the second case. But just I thought it was another good example of there just not being a clear definition of brain death and real death. and the differences between the two

that it's just worth thinking twice about, even if you do decide to check the box. So what is the accepted definition of brain dead at the moment? So as of right now, again, I just Wikipedia at this, but brain death at the moment is just referring to people whose brain is no longer functioning. There's no consciousness there. But that does still mean that the rest of their organs are functioning

and alive. So your body's working. The organs are alive, but the brain's not able to communicate with them. So by definition, you are still alive when they go through with some sort of organ retrieval process. So that's just where people need to be cautious. You've been listening to the Collegian Weeker Review on 101.7 FM. I'm Mauree Gleason. I'm Thomas McKenna. And I'm Caroline Kurt. You can find the Collegian Weekend Review online at cWIR.transistor.fm. You can find more news at Hillsdale Collegian.com. And our Instagram is at Hillsdale Collegian. See you next week.