There's been talk in the U.S. presidential race about "phony outrage." I'm curious, does today's Hatchet editorial calling the University "heavy-handed" for phasing out the hippo resonate as a real controversy for folks?
Some specific parts that caught my eye:
The University's eventual removal of the hippo, a mascot students love and embrace, is a heavy-handed, unilateral and poorly defended move that should be seriously reconsidered.Do you actually love the hippo?
Students have embraced the hippo as representative of the more whimsical side of the University. On a campus populated with BlackBerrys and suits, the hippo grounds us and keeps our college image lighthearted.Is there really a whimsical side and non-whimsical side of GW? (And if anything represented pure whim, is the hippo a better example than, say, random Greco-Roman structures near the Gelman library?)
What the administration should realize is that the hippo is GW's most distinctive brand.Seriously?!?
When I think about Georgetown, I don't think about the Hoya--I think about a good school, the one that Bill Clinton went to. If I was neutral in this "controversy," learning that the hippo is GW's most distinctive brand might actually be the strongest argument for ditching it.