1. Re: McKean

    Columbia ain't perfect; it has problems that should be dealt with. But for god sakes, you're being a tad overwrought.

    And it's hard to take your criticisms of the Core seriously now that you just admitted to not really reading and engaging with the current texts. What, did Aristotle and Kant, for example, not seem important enough to you, as such apure-hearted, righteous first-year and sophomore?

  2. ZadeJon

    Agreed. If McKean is as down as "also Re: McKean:" suggests then it is quite cruel to pity him or put him down. We should try to lift his spirits and see if we can be as positive as possible!

    • Re: McKean  

      Yeah, I guess you're right. But that's difficult to do when he spends most of his (public, published) time directly or indirectly criticizing Columbia students, a category which includes us. He's alienating himself.

  3. Alyona

    So, why has no one commented yet on the preferential treatment of atheletes during registartion period? I would have thought that would be a wee scandal on this page.

  4. So...

    Should Bollinger pay for McKean to see a top notch therapist on the Upper East Side?

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.