Here’s one from the “Here We Go Again” files: a group of minority customers has brought suit against a Denny’s restaurant for racial discrimination. This time, as reported by CBS News, it was a group of seven Arab Americans who alleged that they were verbally abused and denied service at a Denny’s restaurant near Miami, FL. As the article describes,

The seven men say they went to Fernandez’s restaurant in Florida City, on the southern tip of the Florida peninsula, about 2 a.m. Jan. 11, 2004. They say they were seated, given menus and received their drink orders. But an hour later, their food hadn’t arrived. One of the men -- Ehab Albaradi -- approached Ascano and inquired about the group’s order, the lawsuit says.

Ascano allegedly said: “Bin Laden is the manager of the kitchen” and “Bin Laden is in charge.” Albaradi and a second man, Usama El-A-Baidy, decided to speak to Ascano again about their order. Angered, Ascano told the short order cooks in the kitchen to cancel the group’s order, the suit claims. El-A-Baidy then asked Ascano why he had used the name bin Laden.

“We don’t serve bin Ladens here! You guys, out!” Ascano allegedly said. A group of officers from the Miami-Dade County and Homestead police departments eating at the Denny’s also told the seven men to leave and threatened to arrest them if they didn’t, the lawsuit said. The officers have not been identified, Kauffman said. . .

The 1,600-restaurant chain, which has annual sales that exceed $2 billion, settled a 1994 lawsuit for $54.4 million that accused the chain of asking blacks to prepay for meals. Since then, it has faced at least six more discrimination lawsuits filed by African-Americans and Hispanics and has been investigated in at least two cases involving discrimination against people of Middle Eastern descent.

Do we see a pattern of discriminatory behavior here? Do we really need any more proof that for whatever reasons, Denny’s restaurants systematically discriminates against people of color? Absolutely unbelievable . . .

The Boston Herald reports that new research published in Psychology Today magazine points out that contrary to popular belief, the typical college campus is not a very good place to get a quality education. More specifically,

Binge drinking, the wolfing down of junk food and sleep deprivation caused by cramming for tests all lead to poor academic performance and subpar memory retention - and all are found in abundance on august campuses across the nation, the article asserts. . . Other studies show the impact of drinking, bad diets and poor sleep on brain functions, memory retention and other learning skills.

Ohhh, is that why so many of my students aren’t doing well?!? I see . . .

CNNSI.com has an article about the prospects of Tim Chang (senior quarterback at the University of Hawai’i) becoming the first Asian American quarterback in the National Football League. The article notes that although Chang has set numerous NCAA passing records, he has not received a lot of positive attention from scouts, and his ethnicity may have something to do with it:

[Don] Yee makes it clear he is not suggesting NFL personnel evaluators have practiced any overt or intentional form of discrimination in assessing Chang’s prospects. But as the league’s only Asian-American agent, he can draw on his experience and the well-meaning perceptions he sometimes ran up against in becoming a pioneer in his field.

“I do think [Chang’s] ethnicity to some degree plays a part,” Yee said. “But there’s no malice intended. It’s almost a subconscious perception problem. There is kind of a perception that people have of Asians. There are still stereotypes that well-intending people still buy into. When I got into this business, it took a couple years before I was able to not have to listen to any jokes any more about being Asian. It wasn’t malice. It was more ignorance.”

The article goes on to say that at least on the surface, most the suspicions against Chang center on him playing in a wide-open “run and shoot” offensive system that usually doesn’t translate well into a stricter, more balanced and controlled NFL system. In this past weekend’s NFL draft, Chang went undrafted, but he did sign a free agent offer with the Arizona Cardinals shortly thereafter.

If Chang ends up playing professional football somewhere (either in the NFL, the Canadian Football League, the NFL Europe, or Arena Football), Chang may find himself in the role of “trailblazer” -- forging the way and eventually getting trampled in the process, but hopefully clearing the path for others to follow after him. I wish him the very best of luck.

The New York Times reports that a new comprehensive study jointly conducted by the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found that contrary to what we’ve generally been taught, being a little overweight may actually be good for your health. The article notes that although those who are obese are still likely to be more at risk for illnesses, being slightly overweight seems to be associated with lower rates of mortality:

The study did not explain why overweight appeared best as far as mortality was concerned. But Dr. Williamson said the reason might be that most people die when they are over 70. Having a bit of extra fat in old age appears to be protective, he said, giving rise to more muscle and more bone. . .

Estimating deaths due to overweight or obesity is a statistical challenge, the study’s investigators said. The idea is to determine, for each person in the population, what would be the risk of dying if that person’s weight were normal. But what happens to the risk for people whose weight is above or below the normal range? The idea is to control for factors like age, smoking and gender, and ask what would happen if only the weight were changed. . .

“The take-home message from this study, it seems to me, is unambiguous,” Dr. Glassner said. “What is officially deemed overweight these days is actually the optimal weight.”

That finding is a little surprising. It would have been nice to hear about possible reasons why being slightly overweight may actually improve your mortality chances. Nonetheless, I take the results as a positive sign -- I guess there’s still hope for me yet.

April 30, 2005 will mark the 30th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, the end of the Viet Nam War, and the beginning of the Vietnamese American experience. There are sure to be many stories in the media over the next week or so about this commenoration. I have reprinted an article published just today by Associated Press reporter Erin Texeira entitled “Vietnamese in U.S. Take Stock of Community,” in which she interviewed and quoted yours truly in her article.

Another nice collection of articles comes from the Orange County Register, home to Little Saigon and the largest Vietnamese American community in the country. They will have a different story each day this week, so be sure to check their site every day for the latest article. The Register also has an excellent multimedia presentation of the events surrounding the fall of Saigon and ensuing evacuation and resettlement of hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese into the U.S.

For most Vietnamese Americans and me personally, this is a time to reflect back on how far we’ve come in overcoming the obstacles in our path, and to look forward to what the future holds for us as a collective community. As I’ve said before, as the Vietnamese American community continues to develop, flourish, and become integrated into the American mainstream, I hope that collectively, we will recognize, respect, and embrace the diverse elements that make up our community, in terms of socioeconomic position, age/generation, Vietnamese and English fluency, and most importantly, political/ideological.

I’ve covered this issue before, but here’s more evidence that the current efforts to regulate what professors can say and teach is unfortunately gaining momemtum: The San Diego Union Tribune reports that the California State Legislature has just barely rejected the so-called “Students Bill of Rights” which would have prohibited faculty from engaging in any form of ideological “indoctrination” toward their students.

As is always the case, there is no exact definition on what constitutes “indoctrination.” Instead, as the American Association of University Professors and others argue, such legislation is (1) so vague that it can conceivably expose professors to a whole range of accusations and charges from students, and (2) completely unecessary since virtually all colleges have thorough grievance procedures already in place for students to complain about a professor. As the article elaborates,

What [Republican Sen. Bill] Morrow’s proposal and similar ones nationwide don’t spell out is who decides what is ideologically unacceptable, and what happens to those professors who cross the new politically drawn lines. . .

“There is a reason why you have conservative action here, because most professors are liberals,” Morrow said. “Because you have inadequate rules to protect students, you have liberal professors harassing and haranguing them. If the roles were reversed, and I wish they were, but that doesn’t have anything to do with the bill, you would have the Legislature trying to do something about it. The professors work for us.”

I hope you can see just how ideologically biased Morrow’s comments above are. Apparently he assumes that liberal professors “harassing and haranguing” students are the norm on college campuses. Second, he believes that “professor work for us.” Wrong Bill, professor there work for the state of California, not for you and your extremist conservative agenda.

Up to this point, many of us in the academic world (i.e. the “ivory tower") have felt a sense of insulation from the right wing conservative movement that is sweeping across this country. Sadly, it appears that this sense of autonomy is over.

In contrast to the escalating tensions and turmoil between China and Japan, CNN and others report that in their recent summit, the leaders of India and Pakistan have declared that the peace process is irreversible between their two nations. As the article describes,

In their statement on Monday the two said they would boost business ties and cross-border travel, set up a joint economic commission and open consulates in Mumbai (formerly Bombay) and Karachi by the end of the year. Among the most concrete moves, the nuclear-armed neighbors agreed to open up the heavily militarized frontier dividing Kashmir, setting up meeting points for divided families and cultural exchanges.

Of course, we should not get ahead of ourselves since many differences remain unresolved between the two nations. But similar to the encouraging progress towards peace between Israel and the Palestineans, this improvement in relations between India and Pakistan is certain welcome news for Asians all around the world.

By now, you’ve probably heard about the growing controversy regarding House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. For a while now, Democrats (along with a few Republicans) have charged him with abusing his powers, unethical behavior, questionable ties to lobbyists, implicitly threatening those with whom he disagrees like federal judges, and in general, being an arrogant, grandstanding, bullying asshole.

Some Democrats fear his power but others like American Prospect writer Terrence Samuel point out that DeLay can actually serve as benefit for Democrats by giving them a focal point to direct their energy and anger:

If DeLay is right about one thing, it’s that he is on the Democrats’ agenda. After having tormented them for years, he has in recent weeks turned into the gift that keeps on giving. Democrats on the Hill have lately settled on a strategy of accusing the Republicans of extremism, overreaching, and abuse of power and the public trust; Tom DeLay is their poster child, especially in the wake of the Terri Schiavo affair.

A recent Gallup/USA Today/CNN poll showed that a majority of Americans believe that on moral values issues, the GOP is using its power in the federal government to “interfere with the private lives of most Americans.” With DeLay, Democrats now feel that they have a face to slap. “This is not just Tom DeLay’s behavior,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, “but the standards of the Republican caucus and how low those standards are.”

It’s nice to finally see a Republican political leader having to explain his actions and that Republicans are getting a taste of their medicine -- a figure who can do to Republicans what Democrats have had a hard time doing --dividing them into ideological extremes.