The Bwog

It's Winter Break! Bwog will be moving in slow motion.

Political Activism Alive and Well During Summer Months

Bwog noticed the following masterpiece chalked into the sidewalk in front of the Citibank on Broadway. (It reminds us of the chilling day that Ron Paul supporters had somehow obtained and mastered chalk.) To ward off any devastating criticism of a possible political bias, the artist has assured us in a note written next to HRC's cheek, "McCain and Obama to follow." Check back later in the week for photographs of said Portraits of Straight Talk and Change/Hope, respectively.

(Hello, Politico!)

See also: Arts, Broadway, Chalk Art, John Mccain, Obama, Ron Paul

Posted by some dude : #1 · reply · track

June 5, 2008 at 9:34 PM (from campus)

i forget his name but this guy is a famous street artist. he did another piece i think on broadway around 113th st last fall (it was jesus from michelangelo's sistine chapel mural - it's faded but still there). btw, i know it's him because i used to watch him do the michelangelo and i saw him doing the hillary.

Posted by Wow : #2 (in reply to #1) · reply · track

June 5, 2008 at 10:02 PM

Oblivious train, passenger of one. Everyone at CU knows this guy. His 'name' is Hani, at least that's what he signs to all of his pieces, and if you want a true assortment of his work go down to West 8th St. He has dozens of mini pieces depicting store logos from along the street, and at the end (maybe on the corner of 8th and 5th Avenue, or 8th and University?) is another piece of artwork that I haven't been able to recognize. It's big, though, and impressive.

Posted by How : #3 · reply · track

June 5, 2008 at 10:34 PM

How is that political activism?

Posted by It's not : #4 (in reply to #3) · reply · track

June 5, 2008 at 10:38 PM (from campus)

it's sarcasm

Posted by the link... : #5 · reply · track

June 5, 2008 at 10:44 PM

bwog, the link to the ron paul chalk artists doesn't work...

Posted by what is barack's : #6 · reply · track

June 5, 2008 at 11:32 PM (from campus)

favorite candy bar?

He doesn't have one!

Posted by hillary clinton : #7 · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 5:06 AM

is a robot

[external link to www.hillaryclintonisarobot.com]

Posted by why : #8 · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 9:11 AM

no tag for HRC? She is the subject of the post, no?

Posted by HRCFan : #9 · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 10:22 AM (from campus)

Come on, of course not, we all know bwog is not but an Obama cheerleader. And why do we think it's sarcasm?

/yes, I'm still bitter.

//No, I will not support him.

Posted by hypocrisy : #10 (in reply to #9) · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 10:25 AM

bullshit. all these so-called "faithful Democrats" who are willing to vote for McCain just because they want to "make a statement" aka be fucking crybabies make me so mad. so in protest of your Democratic values, you're going to vote for a Republican with whom you don't agree on a single issue? yeah, okay. shut up.

Posted by democrat : #11 · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 11:14 AM

she didn't actually "win the popular vote" anyway

Posted by HRCFan : #12 · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 11:29 AM (from campus)

No, because I don't find McCain any better. I'm a faithful democrat but I find it disturbing that a candidate can win right at half the popular vote of the party and the idea of giving the nominee with half the votes the VP position is thrown by the wayside.

By the way, you embody the Obama supporters in this election. "Shut Up." That's what you want half the Democrats to do, but we won't, and you will be sorry in the general election. But if you would like to play ad hominem then kindly remove your head from your sphincter and note that nowhere in my post I said I was going to vote McCain.

You can't expect us to be labeled everything from racist to ignorant during this campaign and then to throw our support in with the same group who reviles us.

If anything, this election has been the best argument in recent memory for a multi-party system in the United States.

Posted by PoliSciMon Says.... : #13 (in reply to #12) · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 11:49 AM (from campus)

A first-past-the-post winner-take-all system leads to two parties both of which attempt to make their appeal as broad as possible.

Why would it be to Obama's advantage to include Clinton on the ticket, when she has attempted to torpedo his chances of winning the general ever since the eventual outcome of the primary became clear in February? Her appeal to "white, hard-working" voters (as opposed to all those non-white slobs who form Obama's base)? Her unique baggage (a former President looming in the shadows of the White House)? Her fundraising ability (except that Obama outraised her)? Hillary's talents (she is an excellent political operator) are much more useful to the Party in the Senate than in the White House, and her only motivation to be VP would seem to be the opportunity to run in 2012/2016. Clinton by making her final weeks of the campaign so strident even as her defeat was evident puts Obama in a Catch-22, as inviting her to be VP makes him look weak (kowtowing to her demand) but not putting her on the ticket enrages supporters like yourself.

Can you really say honestly that having HRC in the VP slot brings more than having Sebelius, or Kaine, or Richardson, or Clark? The air of entitlement surrounding Hillary poisoned so many Democrats' attitude towards her - the feeling that she DESERVES to be the nominee and the President - and that aura isn't going away as we shift into general election mode.

Posted by hypocrisy : #14 (in reply to #12) · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 12:37 PM

I...just flat out disagree with that multi-party system nonsense. Senators Obama and Clinton didn't vary a great deal in policy, just governing style. If you want an argument for a third-party system, the best argument you're going to find is, lamely enough, Ron Paul and Bob Barr.

Posted by Neutral : #15 (in reply to #13) · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 1:30 PM

I've never really understood all the arguments that Hillary was somehow guaranteed defeat back in February. Or March. Or April. Etc. It's true that she was behind that entire time, but Obama did not in fact clinch the nomination until June 3, and it wasn't by any stretch of the imagination inevitable until it happened. Why? Because neither candidate won enough pledged delegates to wrap up the nomination that way.

If you look at the final election tallies, compare the results and tell me why it was ever clear that she would lose or that continuing to campaign would be in any way an affront to Obama. CNN has a good summary at [external link to www.cnn.com]

Obama: 1763 pledged, 395 superdelegates

Clinton: 1640 pledged, 286 superdelegates

So you see, the superdelegates did in fact decide the election. And since that's the way the system was set up, it's totally fair that they did so. But had the election in fact been so cut and dried after Super Tuesday, then the superdelegates would have made their decisions sooner. As party officials, they're the ones who ought to have the party's interests at stake.

Posted by Neutral : #16 (in reply to #15) · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 1:38 PM

And as for the VP position, I've also heard a lot of Obama people talking about how the Clintons would somehow emasculate Obama, make him look weak, undermine him, etc. and frankly, that seems like a pretty poor endorsement of his leadership abilities. If Obama is a great leader, I think he can effectively use anyone in the vice presidency to good effect in his administration. While there are plenty of legitimate reasons to debate Clinton as a choice, "baggage" or "weakness" seems specious to me. It's the sort of thing reactionary Clinton-haters seem to throw out there, and it suggests that Obama would not be able to direct the campaign and administration of his own government, which again is a pretty backhanded endorsement. Perhaps the people who are most against Hillary Clinton as VP are Republicans seeking to undermine Obama? I say this as one.

Moreover, based on my count in the previous post, Hillary has 1,926 of the 2,118 delegates required willing or pledged to support her for the Democratic nomination for President. In the roll call vote for Vice President, wouldn't she only need another 192 delegates (perhaps some of Obama's superdelegates or some of the 108 superdelegates who haven't publicly committed) to support her candidacy for Vice President, even if Obama nominated someone else?

Posted by meh : #17 · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 2:00 PM (from campus)

yes. fight amongst yourselves.

Posted by Sort of : #18 (in reply to #15) · reply · track

June 6, 2008 at 2:23 PM

True, he didn't actually win a majority before Tuesday. (If you want to be hyper-technical, he won't even do that until the convention.) But by March, just about every political analyst in the world had correctly concluded that Obama was going to take a majority of pledged delegates. There were no big electoral surprises or significant toss-ups between the Ohio/Texas primaries and this week.

In order for Clinton to win a majority of all delegates, it was clear�even in March�that she was going to have to perform outrageously well in the remaining primaries AND swing a huge majority of the uncommitted superdelegates. (Note that the CNN count omits the ~150 superdelegates who still haven't officially declared, so his final margin is likely to grow considerably even if Clinton doesn't release her delegates.) That wasn't a total impossibility, but it was pretty damned improbable, barring a complete political meltdown on Obama's end.

It also seems likely that most of the undeclared superdelegates knew which way they were leaning by March but withheld their endorsements for purposes of political expediency (i.e. - not wanting to cross the Clintons, waiting for their states to vote, etc.) Was it smart of them to let the clock run out? Hard to say yet. On the one hand, it was good for the party to let every state have its say; on the other hand, there were a lot of unpleasant, damaging knocks exchanged in the last two months that may come back to haunt the Dems in November. Either way, I do think the result was pretty clear from March onward.

Re #12: there are, indeed, some asshole Obama supporters, but the Clinton camp had more than its fair share, too. (We've been called sexist, elitist, gullible -- you name it.) The point is that the hoards of Clinton supporters threatening to jump ship seem to be doing so on the grounds that Obama or his supporters were abnormally mean, which seems a) untrue, and b) completely oblivious to the political implications of putting McCain into office. I'm glad you don't fall in that category.

Posted by angry rant : #19 (in reply to #18) · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 12:24 AM (from campus)

those 150 superdelegates who haven't officially declared could vote for hilary, which would make her the nominee.

all i have to say about obama is that he fucked the democrats in the ass by running. hilary could have easily won in november and had 2 terms, and with obama as a vp, would have secured his place for another 2 (2020/2022).

Posted by hahahaha : #20 · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 2:43 AM (from campus)

silly Americans.

Posted by whatever : #21 (in reply to #19) · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 2:57 AM

That wouldn't make her the nominee, actually, the superdelegates who officially declared plus the pledged delegates give him a guaranteed victory whatever those 150 do.

OK a few points:

A) "Half the democratic party" voting for Clinton: Yes it's a close race. What's your point? There's one winner, either way half the people didn't vote for the winner.

B) The VP Idea: VP isn't a second place prize in the primary, it's an actual position in government. One of ya'll said it's a sign of weak leadership that Obama wouldn't be able to work with Clinton: fuck that, it's an action of weak leadership to appoint the wrong person to the position just because they got votes in the primary.

C)Personal politics with Hillary Clinton: What's troublesome is the idea that she should get the nomination, VP spot, etc. because she deserves it and has one: not because of any actual qualities of leadership.

For example, if you think Hillary Clinton was the better candidate because she had experience, why shouldn't Obama choose a former governor as a running mate? If you support her policy positions, why not choose one of many other democrats with similar policies? Hell,if you're gonna play identity politics and say you need a female leader, why not Sebelius, who yes, does not have as much political baggage as Clinton (love her or hate her, Clinton has a lot of allies which is a double-edged sword that Obama may want to avoid.)

The point is, it becomes about this vague idea of Clinton "deserving" this for no fully justified reason. There are a lot of potential reasons to vote for her, but I haven't heard a good reason she's entitled to anything.

Posted by politico : #22 · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 1:29 PM

that's huge for bwog

Posted by Columbia : #23 · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 2:10 PM

Leave it to Columbia kids to turn this comment section into a political debate.

Posted by Whatever : #24 · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 4:11 PM

After that speech today, Obama would be crazy to pick anyone else for VP. She didn't just endorse him, she exhorted her supporters to do the same. And I don't think there's a politician in American who would do a better a job campaigning for him.

Come on, she even said "yes we can!"

Posted by yo but man : #25 (in reply to #24) · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 7:42 PM

i'm also sick of this ultimatum. it's as if clinton/her supporters are threatening obama - that if he doesn't pick her as his VP, those 18 million people are going to vote for mccain and spite him, and sorry, but that's not party unity. that's pretty ruthless.

meanwhile: "She didn't just endorse him, she exhorted her supporters to do the same." Was she supposed to just be like i endorse Barack Obama but you shouldn't? John Edwards did the same thing and encouraged his supporters to back Obama when he endorsed him. that's not exceptional leadership or fantastic unheard-of grace. that's sort of what she had to do to avoid being stoned personally by Howard Dean. I don't buy "oh she's willing to endorse the guy who won, that's so brave of her, make her Vice President."

Posted by nah : #26 (in reply to #24) · reply · track

June 7, 2008 at 8:41 PM

Again, what makes her unique? Other candidates told their supporters to back Obama when they endorsed him.

Clinton is endorsing Obama a) because his policies are very similar to hers and he won the contest and b) because otherwise she will lose her credibility with the Democratic party Is it a good decision and the right thing to do? Yes. Does that make her the VP pick? No.

Let him pick a vice president who works with his administration, instead of trying to make it some gift position for anyone who runs a tough campaign and then concedes.

Posted by Fuck that : #27 (in reply to #19) · reply · track

June 8, 2008 at 6:31 AM

I hate this bullshit about Barack screwing the party by running for President instead of VP. When will Hillary and her supporters lose this irritating sense of entitlement?

Posted by mccain : #28 · reply · track

June 9, 2008 at 2:20 AM

mccain and his people are hoping and praying that hillary clinton is the nominee for vice president. the base is not excited at all, but with clinton on the ballot you can bet that the conservatives will be fired up to get out, hold their noses, and vote for john mccain.

why risk that if you're obama? moreover, why let all the clinton drama, plus her ambitions, plus the bill clinton sideshow, threaten to weaken your administration? the only reason i hear is that it's necessary for party unity. well, i'm sorry, but the idea that the party will be split if clinton isn't on the ticket is ludicrous...it goes against every trend that points to this being a democratic year. obama is facing a very appealing john mccain (the only republican nominee who can win this thing), and he needs to grab a swing state governor or a military guy (NUNN) who can come out swinging against mccain's strong suit - keeping america safe.

Name:

(Log In | Register your identity)

Email:
Reply to:

Describe this color in one lowercase word.

27 °F, Fair

Search

About Us

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

Contact Us

Please send tips to bwgossip@columbia.edu.

Questions or concerns? Email bweditors@columbia.edu.

Bwog is always looking for new writing talent. Email bwog@columbia.edu.

In Print

Trouble in Little China

A conflict moves from the Middle Kingdom to the Mid-Atlantic.

James Downie

O Ye of Little Faiths

Meet Columbia's smallest congregations.

Alexandra Muhler

View this month's issue...

Our Favorite Comments

Generic Asshole: [read]

"Ew! How could you ever go to [popular Columbia spot]? It's overpriced and so fake! For REAL [service/product]..."

good analysis: [read]

"Dspar. But you know what, I think the real reason there was a crash is because there are far too few..."

Bwogroll

Technical

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

Events

Postcrypt Art Gallery is looking for a Webmaster!

01/10/2009

Apply now and keep everyone updated on the artistic pulse of the Columbia campus! Postcrypt Art Gallery is looking for a dedicated webmaster to maintain the official Postcrypt site, www.postcrypt.info. Please e-mail jenny@postcrypt.info with your name, year and school, experience, and statement of interest.

The application deadline is January 10, 2009.

Columbia East Asia Review - Call for Papers

01/24/2009

Contact email: info@eastasiareview.org

The Columbia East Asia Review is currently accepting submissions for its 2009 edition. Research papers from all disciplines and majors are welcome. For more information and submission details, please visit us at www.eastasiareview.org

or e-mail us at info@eastasiareview.org. The deadline for submissions is January 24, 2009.
East Asia Review Website

Helvidius 2009 - Call for Papers

01/24/2009

Contact email: helvidius@columbia.edu

Publish that senior thesis! In its 20th year of publication, the Journal of Politics & Society is inviting submissions for its 2009 edition, which will be distributed in Barnes & Noble and Borders. Please email essays to helvidius@columbia.edu or visit http://www.helvedius.org
for more info. Deadline: January 24, 2009, all disciplines welcome.

Apply now to join the editorial board of the Columbia Undergraduate Journal of History

01/26/2009

Contact email: cujh@columbia.edu

Positions on the editorial board are competitive, and choices are made by a committee of current editorial board members. To apply, send the following materials to cujh@columbia.edu with the subject line: Prospective Editor Application

Include your name, year, and majors and specializations;

A list of courses taken in the history department, or related courses relevant to the field of history (Philosophy of History; Historical Sociology, etc);

A writing sample of 5 to 7 pages, double-spaced, 12 point font dealing with a historical topic; it may be an excerpt from a larger paper, include a brief abstract if necessary;

An estimate of your availability for the Spring 2009 Semester; include other commitments and positions, and your ability to commit to the extensive reading and editing that a position on the editorial board requires.

The DEADLINE for all applications is JANUARY 26th, but we encourage you to prepare your application and send it right away. Email it with writing sample attached to: cujh@columbia.edu

Spectator Books - Call for Writers

02/01/2009

Contact email: periwynkle@gmail.com

Do you like to read and write about books, attend literary events/exhibitions, and frequent caf�s and bookstores for readings by authors and poets? If you answered yes to any part of the above question, you should write for Spectator Books! My name is Yin Yin Lu, and I am the new Spectator A&E Books Editor. There are many benefits and inimitable opportunities for Books writers besides being able to see your name in print: interviewing all sorts of published writers, from debut novelists to Nobel Peace Prize winners, attending events at the NYPL, Symphony Space, book festivals, and museums for free, and getting free review copies of books before they are released! Last semester, for instance, I interviewed Lytton Smith and Karen Russell, both published graduates of the Columbia MFA program, attended a talk with critics James Wood and Daniel Mendelsohn at the NYPL, and heard Malcolm Gladwell speak at the New Yorker Festival.

Besides being exposed to these exciting opportunities, another reason you should write for Spectator Books is that it is not a long-term commitment - you can contribute as often or as little as you like. You can start your own column, write a recurring feature, or submit an article once every few weeks (or once the entire semester). Moreover, articles are flexible in terms of length and style, depending on whether they are features, reviews, or pieces for the Eye (Spectator's weekly arts and features magazine). Or you can post reviews of any length or style anytime you want on Spectacle, A&E's new and amazing blog.

There really are no obligations to being a Spec Books writer besides actually writing the articles that you want to. I will be sending e-mails with pitches and other information every week, and holding biweekly meetings at the Spec office, but those are not mandatory and are just an opportunity for me to assign pitches and meet my writers.

Completely enticed? Mildly interested? Still uncertain and would like more information? Whatever the case, e-mail me at periwynkle@gmail.com.

CUFP Production Season

02/09/2009

Contact email: cufilmproductions@columbia.edu

Columbia Undergraduate Film Productions is launching our inaugural Production Season to write and produce original short films for our Film Festival!

CUFP Production Season will consist of intensive Screenwriters' Workshops and Directors' Workshops to offer you full creative and logistic support from your peers as you make your films on campus! We are looking for talented writers and directors who are passionate about film to create fresh, interesting material for our film festival.

Ideal candidates will be enthusiastic about film, dedicated to the workshop process, and excited to work on short films in a CUFP workshop setting. Workshops will be late Sunday afternoons and some Monday evenings.

The DEADLINE for Writers' Applications is Friday January 23.
The DEADLINE for Directors' Applications is Monday February 9

All Applicants: Send an e-mail with your name, e-mail, phone number, and school and class information to CUFPproductionseason@gmail.com. Please write a short personal statement (why are you interested in CUFP Production Season? How will you benefit from the workshop process?). Make sure to include all relevant experience with film and writing and/or directing.

**Writers: Please attach a screenwriting sample in Microsoft Word format. Writing sample should be maximum 5 pgs and should give us an idea of your narrative style and genre interest. It does not have to be the short film you will work on in workshop, but if it is not please include pitches/ideas for a short film you would like to workshop.

Rhapsody in Blue (Urban Affairs Magazine)

02/15/2009

Contact email: rhapsody@columbia.edu

Rhapsody in Blue, Columbia's urban affairs journal, having successfully, if belatedly gotten its first semester magazines in hand, is going to try again.

We're back to North America this semester. We need pitches from you. We want thoughtful, interesting, fun pieces that say something about cities. What are you interested in writing about? The first step is to send us a pitch--a paragraph about what you want to talk about, how will you do it? Pitches are due February 15. You'll hear from us if it's a go and drafts due a month later.

Old issues are on our website if you'd like to see more. Great opportunity to publish ideas from class, etc.

Send an email by us with any questions. Our FIRST MEETING for anyone interested in learning more about writing, editing, web or layout will be Wed, JAN 28, at 7:30, Broadway Piano Lounge. Also stay tuned for the study abroad blog, which should be going somewhere this semester. Let us know if you're interested in that as well.

Advertise Your Event!

01/6/2010

Contact email: bwog@columbia.edu

Email your event ads to bwog@columbia.edu.

Lost and Found

Lost (or found) an item? Email bwog@columbia.edu.