Admit Day is coming April 13 — that long-awaited fiesta where the happiest (or most motivated) 0.5 percent of UCSD’s students try to convince the newly admitted freshman candidates that UCSD is just like any other large public school.

For a day, UCSD students have pride in their sports teams, an active and exciting on-campus social life, wonderfully accessible professors and sections for large classes where magnificent teaching assistants carefully teach you anything you miss in lecture. Even the parking will be perfect (Admit Day is on a Saturday, after all).

As momentous as the coming occasion is, another yearly tradition associated with admissions is closer to hand: the release of the statistics on the newly admitted pool. Last year, the UCSD press release came Tuesday, April 3. I imagine the admissions office wisely refuses to release anything on the Monday after April Fools’ Day.

While the timing of the release of the information is dependent on the UC Office of the President, the statistics will probably be relevant for two reasons. First, conservatives will use them to say that the numbers of minorities admitted to UCSD are rising, and thus our still-anemic, underrepresented minority population has no need of affirmative action programs.

Secondly, with a record number of applicants — nearly 42,000 of them (8.8 percent more than last year) — UCSD can probably afford to be a tad more selective this time around. The administration will no doubt laud the record-setting academic achievements of the incoming freshmen, “”U.S. News and World Report”” will take note of our rising average S.A.T. scores and high school GPAs, and UCSD will be a fine and improving institution for it.

Now if only S.A.T. scores translated into some measure of respect for undergraduates at this university; decent on-campus housing and parking situations come to mind. It seems rather ironic that when so much of a university’s public stature comes from the selectivity of its undergraduate class, absurdly selective views of the UCSD populace are necessary to entice people to accept. And people wonder why a “”school with UCSD’s ranking”” has all the pride and on-campus life of a community college. Well, that is, except for on April 13.

ueen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, passed away Saturday, and the press fondly recalled her courageous stand in Buckingham Palace even as bombs pounded away at it and London during the Blitz bombing of World War II. Her defiance and affability, it was noted, not only brought her closer to the hearts of her people, but also gave them the courage to stand against invasion.

It is perhaps fitting that on Saturday, another leader stood in defiance with his people against a bombardment against his own building and his own city, Ramallah.

f a solution works once, perhaps multiple tries will be better. One wonders whether the glut of slates in this year’s A.S. elections have come about due to actual interest or whether they are an inevitable conclusion after last year’s mockery of the principles of divided government when the entire Unity slate won.

One has to wonder whether the average UCSD student actually took the time to read the voter information pamphlets and understand the candidates, or whether they simply voted for the slate with the most signs on display. The evidence suggests the latter, and no doubt, candidates in this election have wised up and realized that to win, they must gather up as many of their buddies to run for as many posts as possible.

This is ridiculous; it implies that recognition is the only factor in a student election, and consequently, there are no real issues at stake. That sounds a lot like high school, does it not?

I horribly wish that there were enough people who could run on an “”apathy”” slate. I bet a lot of UCSD students would vote for a student government that ran the line “”We’ll do nothing except some concerts, and return the rest of your money. If you do not feel any substantial loss by the next election, we will have made our point.”” It is my understanding, though, that the “”TOGAA”” slate apparently is running under some variation of this proposition.

One might argue that the composition of the student government actually does matter. After all, it takes important political stances on issues outside the immediate focus of UCSD, such as affirmative action and the war in Afghanistan, which have relevant political divides in both the mainstream and at UCSD. And wow, that “”pro-America resolution”” made our lawmakers in Washington proud and galvanized our troops overseas. No doubt the opinion of the A.S. Council at UCSD is going to sway California voters’ decided opposition to affirmative action. Please.