BC's NROTC Results

Hot on the heels of the CC/SEAS/GS results, Barnard's numbers came in just a few moments ago. Here's how they look:

Total # Votes: 1,189
Yes: 453 (38.1%)
No: 736 (61.9%)

According to SGA President Sarah Besnoff: "The results of this vote indicate that this is an issue that will be discussed in the University Senate. Our University Senator will use these results when discussing student sentiment on the topic. Because of the clear majority for "no" votes, should our University Senator be asked to vote on the issue, she will vote "no" in accordance with these results."

Keep in mind that Barnard's tally isn't subject to the same objections as that of the other three schools, as students used their UNIs to vote via their eBear accounts (Barnard's SSOL).


Posted by Hey : #1 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 12:32 PM
nice appeal to populism as a leadership model.

"Because of the clear majority for "no" votes, should our University Senator be asked to vote on the issue, she will vote "no" in accordance with these results."

Are you serious? Leaders make tough choices based on principles. Would the pro-choice or gay rights movement agree that decisions should be made based on the majority view?
Posted by In addition : #2 (in reply to #1) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 12:35 PM
I have a number of gay friends who not only call out bullshit on the claim that allowing NROTC on campus would be a breach of the university's ethics but they printed out flyers arguing as much.
Posted by yeah : #3 (in reply to #2) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 12:38 PM (from campus)
I have gay friends too.
Posted by wow : #4 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 12:44 PM (from campus)
i am gay and i'm anti nrotc.

just because someone's a PART of that group doesn't mean they represent everyone in the group.
Posted by BC'10 : #5 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 12:46 PM (from campus)
Ingrate feminist bitches
Posted by Interesting cuz : #6 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 1:28 PM
Barnard is the most blatant violator of the discrimination policy at Columbia.
Posted by Yeah! : #7 (in reply to #6) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 1:41 PM
Barnard craps all over trans-gender students as well. That is, if women crap (I've never seen proof of this).
Posted by what about : #8 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 1:45 PM (from campus)
the non-stats-lingo version of the margin of error stemming from the fact that there is a 39 vote margin but that 2000 votes were tossed (as berg was pointing out)? I am not a statistics person so is there a way to incorporate this?
Posted by barnard : #9 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 1:45 PM (from campus)
barnard is not columbia, stop reporting about them on this columbia blog
Posted by well : #10 (in reply to #4) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 1:45 PM
touche dipshit.
Posted by yeah : #11 (in reply to #9) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 2:13 PM (from campus)
barnard isn't columbia. but it's across the street.... local news?
Posted by proof : #12 (in reply to #7) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 2:20 PM
do i have a video for you!
Posted by not Barnard : #13 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 4:15 PM (from campus)
Women don't poop. That's why they're full of shit.
Posted by yeah! : #14 (in reply to #6) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 5:29 PM (from campus)
and because two negatives make a positive, we should violate our discrimination policy again!
Posted by Actually : #15 (in reply to #14) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 7:19 PM
"we should violate our discrimination policy again!"

It's not clear NROTC would actually violate the discrimination policy because the discrimination policy protects against "unlawful discrimination" whereas DADT is a federal law and therefore by definition not unlawful, and applies to "its policies", meaning Columbia administered policies, whereas DADT is a federal policy. Other schools with ROTC and discrimination policies make the distinction clear that DADT is not their university's policy.

I'm not sure where this misconception started that NROTC would violate the discrimination policy, because it doesn't appear to be the case that it would.
Posted by aha : #16 · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Funny that the only school at Columbia which excludes (or, should I say, discriminates?) on the basis of sex-- and whose sole reason for existence is exclusion on the basis of sex-- voted this way. The irony is impossible to escape.
Posted by Not true! : #17 (in reply to #13) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 9:27 PM (from campus)
Women in fact do poop:

[external link to www.2girls1cup.com]
Posted by ah, yes : #18 (in reply to #15) · reply · track
December 2, 2008 at 9:43 PM (from campus)
"The law tells me to, so I did"

So many great statements begin that way.
Name:
Email:
Reply to:

Describe this color in one lowercase word.
78 °F, Partly Cloudy

About Us

Bwog is compiled by the staff of The Blue and White, Columbia University's undergraduate magazine.

Contact Us

Please send tips to tips@bwog.net.

Questions or concerns? Email editors@bwog.net.

Bwog is always looking for new writing talent. Email contribute@bwog.net.

In Print

Our Favorite Comments

5 bucks says: [read]
"That once she deals with Facilities, she'll give up on SPEW."
Ahaha: [read]
"Funny mental image of an old man with a walker yelling "BWOG" in that comment"

Bwogroll

Technical

Our headlines are syndicated through Atom. This site is powered by a modified version of the Publicate Content Management System, which is available for free.

Events

07/15/2009

Contact email: opinion@columbiaspectator.com

Spectator is now accepting applications for fall 2009 opinion columns. Write to opinion@columbiaspectator.com or go to to obtain an application. The application deadline is July 15, 2009.

Spectator accepts columnist applications from students at any undergraduate school affiliated with Columbia University. Columns are published every two weeks, and writers are expected to edit with an opinion page editor before publication.
http://www.columbiaspectator.com/about


01/6/2010

Contact email: events@bwog.net

Please provide the following:

Title
Location
Date/Time
Description
Contact email
Contact website
Logo/flyer image

We're excited to announce that we can now include images in line with your event listing! These can link to anything on the web. For example, you could include your organization's logo and have it link to your website. Or, you could have us post a thumbnail of your flyer and have clicking on it reveal the larger one.

Please do give us a few days' notice- our inboxes fill up quickly every day, so it may take a little while for your event to be posted.


Lost and Found

Lost (or found) an item? Email tips@bwog.net.