11-26-2008, 04:21 PM
|
#41
|
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: /dev/null
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop
I think the issue is (from the Ottawa Citizen report) that the motion with the objectionable wording was passed by council. Now there's back-tracking, with the result being the motion will be re-worded.
As such, the wording was, by association, endorsed by many in the passing of the motion.
Classic example of group-think without thinking.
|
Isn't it ironic that this occured in Ottawa of all places... 
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 04:23 PM
|
#42
|
|
All I can get
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by llama64
Isn't it ironic that this occured in Ottawa of all places... |
Hey, they don't call it "Cartoon U" for no reason...
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 04:54 PM
|
#43
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: CGY
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop
Hey, they don't call it "Cartoon U" for no reason...
|
I'm not laughing.
Another notch in belt of difference between educated and intelligent.
__________________
So far, this is the oldest I've been.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 05:38 PM
|
#44
|
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop
I think the issue is (from the Ottawa Citizen report) that the motion with the objectionable wording was passed by council. Now there's back-tracking, with the result being the motion will be re-worded. As such, the wording was, by association, endorsed by many in the passing of the motion. Classic example of group-think without thinking.
|
That's not true at all. This motion was typed up before the council meeting, dropped in front of them and most of the council never read the thing. They did discuss the crux of the matter - rotating charities - but they didn't have time to read all the wording in the typed motion.
Even if they did - what exactly were they to do? Vote against a motion they believed in? Abstain from a vote so something you believe in might be defeated? A vote for the motion was *NOT* an endorsement of how the motion was written.
That's just my opinion. Or maybe it's not, because I live in Ottawa where we all group-think and don't have any rational opinions of our own.
BTW - CUSA is going to look into having motions sent to execs BEFORE meetings so people can actually read them if they so wish. Might be a good idea.
Last edited by Devils'Advocate; 11-26-2008 at 05:51 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 06:05 PM
|
#45
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy89
No of course not. My Ancestors 400 years ago enslaved blacks killed natives, and expropriated territory that didn't belong to them. Clearly I by extention MUST be evil and therefore any disease that strikes me down must be a JUST disease.
You know if you want to feel great about where you might stand 30-40 years from now in this country look no further than the 'official' opinions, policies, and unofficial behavior of Student groups at some of our Universities like McGill, U of T, York, Concordia, Carleton, U of O, etc.
|
Oh yeah, the party is over for the white man. In 30 or 40 years, we won't even be allowed to vote or own property.
In related news, there seems to be a delay on the annual War on Christmas thread.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 06:42 PM
|
#46
|
|
All I can get
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate
That's just my opinion.
|
Yeah, no kidding it's just your opinion.
Might be good thing to read motions you vote on. Any other elected assembly would.
University Student Unions should be expected to do the same. We're not exactly talking high school mock parliament here. They're in charge of a lot of money and make decisions that reflect the university on whole.
No excuse.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 07:32 PM
|
#48
|
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: CP House of Ill Repute
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate
I kinda feel bad for the guy. He f'd up and now the whole country is out to get him....
|
The guy was probably loving it when he was getting interviewed and thinking he was some big shot getting his name in the papers before the backlash. Things could be worse for him though. He could have CF.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GreenTeaFrapp For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 07:50 PM
|
#49
|
|
All I can get
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate
|
Yeah right. A link to some lobby group opposed to omnibus bills. 
Doesn't appear to be the case here.
Nobody vets written motions on the table at Cartoon U? Lord knows the majority of the stuff is about as engrossing as dry paint, but there's bound to be some pretty dull wonks that populate their ranks.
You're supposed to catch that stuff before its entered into public record. For aspiring politicos, they all get a "F."
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 11:25 PM
|
#50
|
|
tromboner
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
|
I'd be surprised if the CF foundation didn't have a trademark on Shinerama... if you're donating to something else, it's not Shinerama.
Sad that in our society CF funding gets cut because it affects "mostly males", but massive overfunding for breast cancer is okay even though it affects mostly females. I tell you, female chauvinism can be just as bad as male chauvinism sometimes.
Another example is the women who demand that AT LEAST 50% of cabinet posts or university spots or whatever go to women. So unless they're always exactly equal, men will always get the short end of the stick.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 11:47 PM
|
#51
|
|
All I can get
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
I'd be surprised if the CF foundation didn't have a trademark on Shinerama... if you're donating to something else, it's not Shinerama.
|
You would no doubt be correct.
Quote:
|
Sad that in our society CF funding gets cut because it affects "mostly males", but massive overfunding for breast cancer is okay even though it affects mostly females.
|
Disagree. I don't begrudge 'em (Breast Cancer groups) a single penny if they manage successful fundraising campaigns. They help a lot of people. More power to 'em.
|
|
|
|
|
11-27-2008, 04:01 AM
|
#52
|
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop
Yeah right. A link to some lobby group opposed to omnibus bills.
Doesn't appear to be the case here.
Nobody vets written motions on the table at Cartoon U? |
No. According to an editorial in Carleton U.'s own newspaper, the guy that drafted the motion finished typing and photocopying the motion 5 minutes before the meeting started.
As for my link, my point was that people are concerned that Congressmen and the Senate DO NOT READ MOTIONS IN THEIR ENTIRETY BEFORE VOTING ON THEM. Many have admitted to NOT reading even the Patriot Act before voting on it. So for aspiring politicians, it would seem that they would get an E for "Emulation".
|
|
|
|
|
11-27-2008, 09:09 AM
|
#53
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
Sad that in our society CF funding gets cut because it affects "mostly males", but massive overfunding for breast cancer is okay even though it affects mostly females. I tell you, female chauvinism can be just as bad as male chauvinism sometimes.
.
|
especially sad becasue CF doesn't affect mostly males at all...but even the spectre of affecting 'mostly males' is a reason to put it on the chopping block
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:15 PM.
|
|
