Since Bwog broke the news of the ROTC referenda last month, the logistical details behind it have still been debated. However, it appears that the student councils at last have a plan. In an email sent by SGA earlier today, a letter from the four councils at the end spelled out more about the timing of, and the run-up to the survey.

The survey itself will go out to the student body the week of November 17th. Original plans had considered late October as the most likely date, but, according to the email, "we have had to postpone the dates due to difficulties in getting the survey technology set up." The survey will have one question ("Would you support NROTC on Columbia's campus?"), though it is unknown at this time how many possible answers the question will have.

The week beforehand, there will be two forums, one at Barnard and one at Columbia, in a "pro vs. con setup." The panels themselves will be composed of students as well, and students can submit questions. Deadline for participation in panels, despite the email not having reached any other undergraduate schools yet, is this Wednesday, October 22. The full email is after the jump.

With such a short time before the election, apparently even third-party candidates are prone to last-minute cancellations. The CPU-sponsored debate between Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, and Chuck Baldwin that was scheduled for Sunday evening in Lerner has been cancelled.

In an email sent a short awhile ago, CPU Communications Director Lauren Salz wrote, "Due to circumstances beyond our control, several of the candidates decided not to participate in the debate at the last minute." No word on which candidates spoiled the party first.

CPU's next big event will be an appearance by Nebraska Republican Chuck Hagel, next Friday at 2:45 p.m. in Lerner Cinema. The full cancellation announcement is after the jump.

So, having flubbed Spec's tricky midterm schedule (just go read yesterday's issue), we're back again to Quicking something else—this time last night's final presidential debate, conclusively won by some guy named Joe.

Politico's Ben Smith - who is obsessed - uncovers that Joe isn't registered to vote!

Slate's John Dickerson anticipates a feud with Bob the Builder

The Times' Gail Collins: give that man a "really fancy blog"!

The New Republic wonders if he's met Joe Six-Pack

E. J. Dionne says that Joe thinks Obama is a socialist

McArdle worries we're focusing too much on the fate of Plumbing Americans

And Joe himself: "you can speak pretty, but there's gotta be action behind it"

(...although, via Wonkette, it appears he may be an impostor!)

Catch the final installment of the exciting presidential debate series tonight at 9 PM. Your favorite campus political enthusiasts—the CUGOP, the Dems, and CPU—will be watching this thing in Lerner Cinema.

If you're stuck studying, try procrastinating with some liveblogs. Bwog recommends New York Times' the Caucus, Wonkette and Jonathan Martin/Ben Smith of Politico.

CPU has released ticketing information for the Columbia-hosted Presidential Debate that will include Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney and Chuck Baldwin. There will be 275 of the 400 seats reserved for CUID holders and you can get them either here or at the Lerner Lobby. The debate is this Sunday, 8 p.m. in 417 IAB. Full email from CPU is after the jump.

After the extravaganza that was the Obamacain ServiceNation Forum, other presidential candidates apparently could not help but get in on the action. According to McClatchy, three third-party candidates will be debating at Columbia this Sunday. Ralph Nader (independent), Cynthia McKinney (Green), and Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) will all participate in a debate moderated by Amy Goodman of Pacifica Radio.

Libertarians will be disappointed to learn that nominee Bob Barr will not be participating. According to McClatchy, "Barr said he has a scheduling conflict, but debate organizers say he wanted to appear only with Nader."

The debate will be carried on C-SPAN and www.thirdpartyticket.org.

UPDATE (7:55 PM): The debate is being sponsored by CPU, and will take place in 417IAB at 8 p.m. As for tickets, CPU Communications Director Lauren Salz tells Bwog that CPU is "making every effort to reserve as many seats as possible for CUID holders. Registration details will be announced as soon as possible, probably sometime tomorrow."

The highly anticipated second Presidential debate of the 2008 election commenced mere moments ago. Tonight's affair should prove to be quite the slug-fest, as both camps have turned up the heat with nasty smears and negative ads as of late, with just under thirty days until election day. Also, tonight's debate from Belmont University in Nashville, TN will prove to be extra-interesting as it features the first and last time that Obama and McCain will square off in a Town Hall-style format.

In typical fashion, the Columbia Democrats, College Republicans and the CPU (and LionPAC!) have teamed up to turn the Lerner Piano Lounge into the campus debate-watching hub. So, stop by and grab a lime-green seat, a corner of the suede swirly thing. If you can't make it out to the Piano Lounge this evening, Bwog's got you covered with news from around the blogosphere.

Bwog headed to Roone Cinema this evening ready for our daily dose of lively intellectual discourse, today's source being the first of three debates between the College Democrats and Republicans on issues pertinent to the upcoming election. We settled into our cushy seat surrounded by a vast sea of argyle sweaters and watched the games begin.

Tonight's debate, hosted by the CPU, focused on foreign policy and energy solutions. Each side was told to stick to their respective party platforms, even if their personal views differed. The Dems kicked off the night, using their precious 120 allotted seconds to discuss the various failings they found with the Bush Administration, calling the War in Iraq "stupid" and explaining the economic policies of the Administration as forming a collective "wrecking ball to the economy."

Bwog editor Pierce Stanley hops a lecture on the national stage, and wonders why more Columbians aren't doing the same.

Come Presidential election time, Lerner Piano Lounge transforms into a hotbed of political activity, with Columbia's political organizations frequently hosting watch parties for important debates, election returns, and speeches made by the candidates. This celebration of all things political in one of Lerner Hall's strangest rooms always comes with the added benefit of loads of handouts of free Famiglia pizza. However, last night was a quite the exception, as the College Dems hosted a watch party in the piano lounge for the twentieth (and perhaps final) debate between the contenders for the Democratic nomination for President. With the Democratic nomination just about sealed up by the new front-runner, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, last night's debate watch party was a decidely low-key affair, attended by only a mere spattering of debate faithfuls. Perhaps this lack of enthusiasm by Columbia students for last night's MSNBC debate is indicative of the current state of the race on a much broader level. Perhaps, this race is all but wrapped up, and its only a short time until Hillary decides to concede before risking destroying her political future.

In which Bwog correspondent and past-life high school orator, Andrew Flynn, sojourns to a recent Harvard high school debate tournament and waxes philosophical about the current state of that ever so nebulous academic activity.

When the wind-chills of February announce their arrival in Morningside Heights, when long papers and dry readings begin to weigh heavily on my soul, there is no respite I look forward to more than getting on a coach bus filled with rowdy 15 through 18 year-olds and making the seven and a half hour trip to Cambridge for the annual Harvard Speech and Debate tournament.

Harvard is one of the kings of high-school forensics competitions. (Unlike at my local state tournament, Harvard does not need to remind its competitors that defecating in the classrooms is against the rules.) Here, thousands of high school speakers and debaters from across the east coast and Midwest (sometimes further) meet to match wits and spend their downtime wandering aimlessly around the Epcotesque tourist trap that is Harvard Square. But, "Harvard" is a bit misleading.

The debate among e-board candidates Tracy Chung, Michelle Diamond, and Natali Segovia took place Monday night in Carman lounge, redolent with the scent of JJ's chicken fingers. All parties presented initially campaigns centered around a rhetorical motif of sorts. Chung's Rebel CC campaign spoke first, with the theme of "rebelling against the status quo and bureaucratization of a body that should be a true representation of student activities." Segovia's Voice spoke to themes of "diversity," consistently hitting upon the diversity of experience and backgrounds of the ticket members. The party even tied advising reform into diversity: "We all have diverse interests that can be better served by the advising system." One Columbia, the most polished of the three parties, wanted a stronger and more connected Columbia, with each member introducing themselves by saying, "My name is ____, and I want to build a stronger community by..." The ideas were not earth-shatteringly different (though neither of the other two parties introduced environmental issues) but the tableau was hard to ignore.

After the jump, the major promises made by each ticket:

Out with the new, in with the old, as Bwog correspondent Armin Rosen reports on the good old-fashioned crazy Israel-Palestine debate.

Between farcical stage-rushings, dictatorial speaking engagements, gay porn-star conservatives, bizarrely poor choices for class day speakers and Ann Coulter it's been a truly historic year for unintentional black comedy at 116th and Broadway. Columbians, as if collectively unsatisfied with usual comedic fodder, have been turned serious debates on things like immigration and nuclear madmen into something out of a Coen brothers' film. And luckily for the blogging set, it is a trend that is continuing unabated.

Tonight's tableau: a PhD candidate hurling an f-bomb at one of the world's foremost experts on Zionism at Lionpac's "Is Zionism Racism?" talk on the fourth floor of Kraft. On its own, it might seem lame —Saifdean Ammous's use of the best fuckin' word in the English language was incidental, passing, gratuitous and not particularly venomous as far as uses of the word go. That it happened amidst a very tense back-and-forth with pro-Zionist Tel Aviv University professor Anita Shapira might make it understandable, perhaps even excusable.

Kate Ryan sent Bwog this photo from the comments board of the Hewitt Dining Hall at Barnard, where a great debate is being waged.

The first comment, by Jonathan (jcm2120), reads:

"Fire the sandwich lady (the regular one) She is absolutely rude, disrespectful, and shows no pleasure in doing her job."

...to which Alli (acl2118) replies:

"I love the sandwich lady. Jonathan is rude because he can't get any. The sandwich lady is hott [sic] and turned him down :("

We now eagerly await the Manager's Response...

In true Bwog style, we've read all of the 400+ comments (though it might be 500 by the time we post this) so you don't have to.

Regarding the violence that erupted:

Posted by i can't believe this: [#144] [reply]

I'm actually shocked by the ignorance and arrogance displayed by so many of the posts on this thread. For all the complaints I've heard about how Columbia is this bastion of liberalism, I find most people here to be overwhelmingly conservative! It was a protest, people. The whole point of a protest is to cause a disrupton. Protests shouldn't just be grudgingly allowed in our society and our university, or penned in some "free speech area", they should be actively encouraged. Why aren't there more protests, more disruptions? I count protest a viable, valuable form of public debate...

And in reply:

Posted by mike: [#156] [reply]

I also protest violence against another human beings, immigrant or not, but I do not do so using violence.

By using violence, mob tactics, and overbearance, you have lowered yourselves to the level of these "minutemen," these fools who like to dress up in army gear and play "Mission Impossible" with people's lives.

One thing you have gained from this protest, at least, is one more columbia student disgusted with the so called "liberals" who cannot tolerate opinions other than their own.

In which Bwog correspondant Taylor Walsh lets you in on the drama that is the class of '08's respresentative body.

The story of the '08 class council is one of the more bizarre in recent CCSC lore, so last night's debate promised to be an interesting one. And despite a slow start, it did not disappoint.

While both current '08 VP Neda Nevab's Access Party and Matthew Schoenfeld's Lions ticket remained surprisingly docile and rehearsed in the first part of the debate, as soon as they were allowed to directly question one another, the gloves came off.

Schoenfeld, infamous for his e-mails, threw the first punch, asking Neda to explain why she had asked two members of his party to run with her. Nevab didn't miss a beat, responding that she had spent her time on council working well with both Christopher Tortoriello and Lindsey Lazopoulos, and that she had thought they would make great representatives on her ticket. Fine, except that Lazopoulos is running as Schoenfeld's VP, and a murmur went through the 60-person crowd as everyone realized what Nevab was implying: Oh no she didn't!