Charlow’s loathsome acts, subsequent “eyebrow raising”
Teetotalers at Columbia are people too
Read this: Minutemen protesters rebuff charges against them
Staff beats around the big ol’ bush
What’s going on at UT, And at USC
By
Bwog Staff on
Apr 05, 2007 
24 Comments
Loading …
Copyright 2023 Bwog Limited. All Rights Reserved.
24 Comments
@blahblahblah Protestors:
Please for the love of all fuck…say something original for once. You go to the most selective university in the Ivy league and my cellphone has more pre-recorded greetings than you.
@DEAR SPEC What’s the point of comparing CC’s statistics to Yale? No other school like Columbia (Penn and Cornell also have seperate schools) isolates their Arts and Science admission data.
In short the second-lowest-rate record is BOGUS.
Even the admissions office has started reporting joint numbers.
Fucking intra-school politics…
@Mrs. Garcia has always stressed that she believes racism is the real motivating factor behind the Minutemen, which may be true, even if we’re sick of talking about it. But let’s not play down her allegations that Columbia’s disciplinary process is racist and/or is seeking to suppress activism – those are new and very serious claims. If she REALLY BELIEVES that this is the case, then by all means she should challenge it.
@college admissions are completely out of control.
@Anna Is anyone as outraged as I am to know that the financial aid office is ridden with corruption? We’re all getting screwed and fucked!
@For real This is what we should really be protesting. Even with Columbia’s, admittedly generous, financial aid. These allegations are outrageous and we should demand that our loans be forgiven
@hmmmmmmm eyepoke! eyepoke!
@thank god... i already go here. those numbers are frightening.
@nytimes nytimes article still broken. get it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/education/05loans.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
@isn't it more newsworthy that the president of SGB has criticized the discipline process than that its targets have?
http://www.columbiaspectator.com/home/news/2007/04/05/Opinion/Investigate.Discipline.Go.Deeper.On.Race-2823981.shtml
@philosopher “Students for Substance Free Space”
What’s that? Some sort of metaphysics discussion group?
No! Here’s the explanation:
“I wanted a better place to live”
@dear karina et al let me echo the sentiments of others and ask you to take your crying elsewhere. when you pull the race card so often it loses its emphasis. and your (collective) diction is shit, to boot
@Jessica Link fixed. Lo siento.
@Anonymous the admissions stat of the Spec headline was the biggest confidence boost I’ve gotten in a while–thank you bwog!
CC Leads in Admissions Selectivity
8.9% Admit Rate Is Lowest in Ivy League; Barnard Rate Up Slightly
HA.
@agree w/ #2 I also like their powerful imagery.
“…was kicked violently in the face by…”
Anyone on Bwog seen someone peacefully kicked in the face lately?
@Please Make It Stop If I have to read Karina Garcia and co. spout their self-righteous bull-crap again, I may throw up.
You got off with a wrist slap for completely destroying the 1st Amendment. No, you didn’t win; people now sympathize with the Minutemen regardless of their message.
Perhaps the Latino students were the most upset by the speech and therefore acted most violently against it, hence merited the most severe punishments? No, that’s can’t be right because the whole of Columbia’s administration must be racist.
I think the Minutemen are scum, but what the “Lucha” did was give them creditability and the moral high ground, something they don’t deserve.
Thanks again for reminding the world of Columbia’s ridiculously far left-wing, protest-happy, insular stereotype. I’m glad people will think I’m as crazy as the Lucha are when I mention my Alma Mater.
@ridiculous i dont know why i even read her aritcles i know im going to get pissed everytime
@hey genius The First Amendment had nothing to do with it.
“CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
@yes thank you. It is impossible to violate someone’s 1st ammendment rights by bitching loudly.
Nevertheless, the protesters were still idiots and definitely played right into Gilchrists hands.
@anti-literalist Hey Genius, the First Amendment hasn’t been that limited for over 200 years. The Supreme Court has interpreted the statute to proscribe individuals depriving others of their right to speech, not just Congress making laws that do so. For example, it’s still illegal, at least partly because of the broadly construed “First Amendment Rights,” to violently prevent someone from speaking in a public forum.
Number Two was exactly right. Latin American activism no doubt suffers more from rabble-rousing race-baiters like Garcia than fringe extremists like the Minutemen.
@Like Flag Burning? It’s illegal to violently prevent someone from speaking in a public forum for the same reason it’s illegal to burn someone else’s flag. Neither one of them has anything to do with the first amendment.
In any case, this sounds like a battle of semantics– yes the protesters acted to stifle free speech, which is a principle to which the University adheres voluntarily. Yes, they violated the University code of conduct by stifling an invited speaker’s speech.
They didn’t violate Gilchrist et al’s First Amendment rights, though, since they’re not agents of the State.
@no, they didnt “act to stifle free speech”. even armin rosen’s just argued that: http://blog.cupolitics.org/node/96
@16 again. That article was right on the money. Since I was blathering about semantics, I’ll correct myself. I don’t think the protesters intended to end the speech. They intended to disrupt it, make a point, and then be escorted out.
The problem with civil disobedience is that when you’re breaking the rules, people aren’t going to have much sympathy for you when CU security fucks up and you use “less-bad-intentions” as your defense.
If I can make a bad analogy: you’re still in lots of trouble if you punch a guy in the stomach intending only to hurt him, but he ends up dying. The protesters only wanted to punch free speech in the stomach; it ended up having a heart attack and shitting its pants and leaving behind a smelly, shit-covered corpse.
@hrr The New York Times link is broken