Brandon Hammer

The global landscape today is much more rocky and uncertain than it seemed eight years ago. American forces remain stuck in Iraq, Iran continues to develop nuclear weapons and threaten the stability of the rest of the Middle East, genocide continues in Darfur, and China and India continue to grow rapidly. The way the presidential candidates propose to deal with these issues and the differences of their policies are therefore extremely important. Nevertheless, between insignificant sound bites and the media's focus on menial issues, it has become more and more difficult to figure out the various candidates' positions. A number of us at the Roosevelt Institution, a non-partisan student think tank, have therefore researched the top three Democratic candidates and compiled their views on the most important foreign policy issues facing the United States today. We have looked at each candidate's stances on the Middle East, with special attention to Iran and Iraq; examined plans for dealing with the growing strength of China; and seen how each candidate plans to deal with the crisis in Darfur.

While there is no shortage of innuendo or sexual references on network primetime, sex is a subject that seems to belong exclusively to cable. CBS's new series Swingtown, though, is all about sex: adolescent sex, adult sex, monogamous sex, polyamorous sex, moral sex, immoral sex, safe sex, and unsafe sex.

After news broke that Eliot Spitzer had been caught paying for sex, the public displayed a seemingly inexhaustible fascination in the woman involved. Secret Diary of a Call Girl, Showtime's new series, seeks to tap into this interest by taking viewers into the world of high-end prostitution.

The past month has been a grueling and tragic one for Israelis, Palestinians, and those across the world who have witnessed horrible images of fear, hatred, and destruction in Israel and Gaza. The loss of human life is utterly devastating and heartbreaking. For many people, particularly on this campus, there are clear sides of this conflict, clear white and black depictions of the political landscape, and clear rights and wrongs. But for many, assessing the conflict itself and the methodologies in which it was carried out is not so clear-cut. Rather, it is a struggle. Within the Jewish community specifically, individual opinions on the subject are widely diverse. Among the Jewish population within Israel as well as within Columbia, there is a wide array of nuanced opinions. At the outset of the war, for example, an Israeli pacifist organization, Peace Now, maintained that Israel had "a basic right to defend itself" but criticized the idea of a military operation. Similarly, Meretz, Israel's leading left-leaning party, endorsed the idea of an air campaign but publicly denounced the ground operation. As far as the Columbia Jewish community is concerned, Hillel, philosophically, is "steadfastly committed to the support of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure and recognized borders and as a member of the family of free nations." That said, supporting Israel's right to exist and being "pro-Israel" does not necessarily mean agreeing with any one method of maintaining such existence. Some may feel that the only legitimate way for Israel to achieve secure borders is through political negotiations while others may hold that force is necessary as a short-term measure to underscore political negotiations. Within Columbia at large, Hillel welcomes powerful debate and diversity of opinion. In the coming weeks, we hope that comes through interpersonally and programmatically through serious learning on the subject as well as providing forums for multiple views to be expressed and heard. It is important, however, to differentiate between those expressions of opinions that are legitimate and those that are rooted in hatred. Since the beginning of Israel's attack on Hamas, there have been an alarming number of deplorable acts of anti-Semitism perpetrated throughout the U.S. and Europe in response to the war. England has seen several of its synagogues defaced, two Jews in Denmark were shot, and at least 55 anti-Semitic acts, including the throwing of Molotov cocktails at a synagogue in a town north of Paris, have been reported in France. No matter what, attacking innocent individuals of one ethno-religious group merely because of actions committed thousands of miles away by individuals of the same group is racism, and in this case, anti-Semitism. On the same note, allusions of this war to the Holocaust are also hurtful and unproductive. On Dec. 30, one Florida demonstrator at a Gaza rally shouted for Jews to go "back to the oven." While perhaps not physically inflictive, such expression also breaches the line of acceptability. Moving forward, it is our great hope that there will be challenging and thoughtful dialogue and debate across campus when it comes to discussing the Middle East. Such debate, however, must be careful so as not to devolve from legitimate discussion to hateful slurs. Sarah Brafman is a Columbia College junior majoring in history. She is the president of the Columbia/Barnard Hillel. Brandon Hammer is a Columbia College junior majoring in film. He is the Israel Coordinator of the Columbia/Barnard Hillel.

On Russia's southwest coast lies Georgia, a small, progressive democracy whose freedom is currently under attack. Following real democratic elections in 2004, Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, failed to attain complete control over this small former Soviet Republic. Recently, though, as Georgia comes closer to joining NATO and completing its separation from Putin's sphere of influence, the Russian president has gone all out, essentially threatening to destroy the nation's economy. Following Georgia's arrest of four Russian spies, Putin, a former KGB operative, has tried to starve Georgia into submission by cutting off travel between the two nations and stopping import to Russia of wine and mineral water, Georgia's two largest exports. One might argue that Putin's actions were purely a response to the arrests, yet Georgia's release of the suspects has not stopped Russia's economic attacks. The United States and its allies, meanwhile, sit quietly, barely protesting this brazen attack on a democratic, pro-American nation.

I have never understood why cynical Americans complain that companies are pushing the holiday season earlier and earlier by commercializing Christmas and Hanukkah. It is not as though Christmas songs and green and red Starbucks cups detract attention from an all-important sentiment that we are supposed to be feeling during early November. Instead, the actions of the American businesses to focus attention on the holidays create a longer season of caring, soul-searching, anticipation, and overall happiness.

When I received a call from my father telling me about Sen. John Kerry's "botched joke," as the media is now calling it, I was pretty annoyed at the Republicans. "Fuckers," I said to myself, "why do they always have to make a mountain out of a molehill? Honestly, it is pretty clear that he was just characteristically inarticulate and meant that Bush was stupid." Yet I later realized that the comment has struck so hard and could spell political disaster for the Democrats on Tuesday because the way it came out (implying that students who don't do well in school get "stuck in Iraq") is actually pretty true. Perhaps we're forcing those who cannot or do not go to college to die for our freedom.

Most of the early presidents are known for something big: Washington, the great general, was the man for whom the office of Chief Executive was designed. Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence and the president who purchased the Louisiana Territory. Madison was the "father of the Constitution." Monroe even had his own doctrine. But who the hell was John Adams?

The Super Bowl was an extremely exciting event for four years of my life. Because my mother was from that heart-breaking sports town of Buffalo, New York, I readily recall the great sense of excitement and hope before the four Super Bowls from 1991 and 1994. For each of those games, though I was three the first time and got confused as to whether the Buffalo or the Bill was the mascot, I remember chanting "Let's go Buffalo!" and rooting for some guy named Kelly. I remember so much excitement and hope before every game. It would be this year, we thought. The Bills would win the big game at last.

Last year, it seemed quite obvious that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' nominees for best picture were all extremely politically charged, mostly with respect to American politics. Crash and Brokeback Mountain addressed issues of discrimination based on race and sexual preference, Munich and Good Night, and Good Luck both used allegorical stories to examine and criticize the way we deal with the perceived threat of terrorism, and Capote discussed the justification, or lack thereof, for the death penalty. This year, however, critics and viewers have argued that the Academy looked away from American politics to focus on the global picture. Caryn James of the New York Times argued, "As the Academy Award nominees for best picture suggest, it has been a terrific year for films about global politics." She defends this argument by saying that Babel addresses lack of communication across seven continents and that Letters from Iwo Jima, which examines the Japanese side of the famous World War II battle, beat out director Clint Eastwood's other film (Flags of Our Fathers) from the American perspective.