What I find astounding and hilarious is how the Senate went IN to the meeting with the intention of disclipling a senator, and came OUT of the meeting with the intention of attending sensitivity training. I keep forgetting that I’m not watching a South Park episode.

If you’re letting CXers tie you up between their stuttering sessions, you’re doing something grievously wrong, Ted.

Amen.

I campaigned for the Campaign for Change today but now I don’t care. Sen. Papailiou votes nay on Gulley; Hamilton is off for good (which I suppose was less her fault) - I’ve been telling people to vote “Change” because they had experience and were responsible and intelligent. Kind of rings hollow now.

Such are the griefs of true believers… shoulda voted for ted.

I love Nate Gulley.
I plan on having his babies, because I want to fill the world with little Nate Gulleys. It is my goal to be the perfect wife to Nate. Every night I will cook the perfect meals for him. Then I will rub his feet after he is done with work. oh, how do I love Nate? Let me count the ways.
1) love the way he smells
2) love the way he makes motions in senate
3) I love to watch him while he hangs out in the MCC (he doesn’t know I watch him. sshhh its a secret)
4) I have a weird thing for the way he wears his hat.
I love Nate Gulley

Yeah..fitting she should file the grievance.

Oh shit, do alums read this?

Never.

Ian Says:
May 25th, 2006 at 2:29 am e

Erickson, Faust, Malena, Kato, Irvin, and Filippelli walked out. Hamilton and Papailiou also left at that point, although I have not confirmed that they left specifically because of the Insurgent line item.

What groups need to understand is that a basic level of accountability is important, and not a threat to their well-being.

The man speaks the truth.

Either way, we’ll have a competent, capable leader.

For the first time in ASUO history.

If my “strong stance” is what surprises you or anyone, it is merely the product of seeing the situation up-close. My critics seem to question only my motivations, not the practical value of my suggestions. As the head of a fee-funded program, and as someone who has learned more outside of the college classroom in than in it, I do understand the value of student programs and groups. What groups need to understand is that a basic level of accountability is important, and not a threat to their well-being. Decisions should be made in the context of annually rising fees and tuition, as well as the context that the groups would like. That’s all.

Anyway, nobody will care in two days. Here’s to that.

I’m starting to like these games.

I’m glad your preferences aren’t based on “conservative principles”. You’re probably right that your take on all this is just not what I expected – musta been all that Foucault. It does surprise me that you’re willing to take such an aggressive tone in your commentary (seems unwarranted, but I guess you gotta take a stance?)

I think that when it comes to our interpretations of the “recent history of the asuo” and the integrity and tactics of both campaigns, that we just fundamentally disagree. That’s fine. It’s probably not necessary to do the back-and-forth on a comment thread.

A quick word on ethics though – I would urge you to hold Emily accountable only for what she and San say and what their campaign endorses. Be fair. She has way too many fliers to hand out to effectively censure every douchbag who offends people. Failing that it’s frustrating that the call-outs can’t at least be even-handed.

Being a lover of a fee-funded program doesn’t make funding my pet issue. I am actually most compelled by the accessibility and affordability side of things – what can I say? . . . It’s the bleeding-heart in me. I do like to see student groups that do good things receive the funding that they need, but as Editor-in-Chief of a fee-funded program I bet you do too.