Comments on: Rosenberg’s letter to Con Court http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/ Free Minds, Free Markets, Free Booze Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:00:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Rosenberg http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95745 Rosenberg Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:00:06 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95745 Hey Ted, I've accepted responsibility for the entire fiasco. I do not dispute the grievance's charges against me. I have no obligation beyond that to explain to you anything. I am not in office, and I have a right to my opinion, which is stated in the grievance. The editorial did its work on me and so did the article (an article which the Emerald did not contact me for). I'd like to move on from this entire thing which happened four months ago. We all know that it was caused by my negligence. And that's all that we need to know. Frankly, I don't care much what decision the court comes to. Now let me go about my classes and get school over with. I hope you're had a good summer, and hopefully we'll run into each other. Hey Ted, I’ve accepted responsibility for the entire fiasco. I do not dispute the grievance’s charges against me. I have no obligation beyond that to explain to you anything. I am not in office, and I have a right to my opinion, which is stated in the grievance. The editorial did its work on me and so did the article (an article which the Emerald did not contact me for). I’d like to move on from this entire thing which happened four months ago. We all know that it was caused by my negligence. And that’s all that we need to know. Frankly, I don’t care much what decision the court comes to. Now let me go about my classes and get school over with.

I hope you’re had a good summer, and hopefully we’ll run into each other.

]]> By: Niedermeyer http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95743 Niedermeyer Thu, 27 Sep 2007 21:30:43 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95743 The only real argument I'm seeing here is "I would warn the Constitution Court that the pretenses for invalidating the June 13 meeting may be political in nature." Except that this is the ASUO and everything is political in nature. The only question left to ask is why shouldn't the June 13 meeting be struck down? What is the political benefit to you, Jon, in ignoring a clear violation of OPML? Is it because you think that the Senate won't approve OMB funding again? Is it because you think the senators who were appointed in that meeting are super fantastic, but they might not be re-appointed? I'm not afraid to say what I think, so here goes... first, the OMB funding will go through no matter what. Second, most of the senators who were appointed on 6/13 are pretty mediocre, and wouldn't be missed much if they were not reconfirmed. Third, people who advocate breaking the law simply to protect their own reputation, or their own summer senate presidency (you know who you are) are beneath contempt. The last election seemed to actually be about the issues, and yet here we are, only a few months later, and the issues that resonated with voters are being forgotten in the rush to add a few (useless) bullet points to their resumes. It seems like it's time again for people to re-examine why they really want to be involved in public service... The only real argument I’m seeing here is “I would warn the Constitution Court that the pretenses for invalidating the June 13 meeting may be political in nature.”

Except that this is the ASUO and everything is political in nature. The only question left to ask is why shouldn’t the June 13 meeting be struck down? What is the political benefit to you, Jon, in ignoring a clear violation of OPML? Is it because you think that the Senate won’t approve OMB funding again? Is it because you think the senators who were appointed in that meeting are super fantastic, but they might not be re-appointed?

I’m not afraid to say what I think, so here goes… first, the OMB funding will go through no matter what. Second, most of the senators who were appointed on 6/13 are pretty mediocre, and wouldn’t be missed much if they were not reconfirmed. Third, people who advocate breaking the law simply to protect their own reputation, or their own summer senate presidency (you know who you are) are beneath contempt. The last election seemed to actually be about the issues, and yet here we are, only a few months later, and the issues that resonated with voters are being forgotten in the rush to add a few (useless) bullet points to their resumes.

It seems like it’s time again for people to re-examine why they really want to be involved in public service…

]]> By: Timothy http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95739 Timothy Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:05:30 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95739 <blockquote>I really don’t like responding to anonymous posts. But you put me in a position where I had to respond.</blockquote> Just like that nasty senate made you not take minutes?

I really don’t like responding to anonymous posts. But you put me in a position where I had to respond.

Just like that nasty senate made you not take minutes?

]]> By: Whatadumbass http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95738 Whatadumbass Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:15:29 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95738 Jon, My real name is Will, short for William and "Whatadumbass" refers solely to me, not you. "Whatadumbass" is a term I generally hear from people as I walk away from them. Better now? Jon,

My real name is Will, short for William and “Whatadumbass” refers solely to me, not you.

“Whatadumbass” is a term I generally hear from people as I walk away from them.

Better now?

]]> By: Jacque http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95737 Jacque Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:58:21 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95737 I love the ASUO. I love the ASUO.

]]> By: Rosenberg http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95735 Rosenberg Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:31:21 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95735 I really don't like responding to anonymous posts. But you put me in a position where I had to respond. I really don’t like responding to anonymous posts. But you put me in a position where I had to respond.

]]> By: Rosenberg http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95734 Rosenberg Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:30:26 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95734 Whatadubmass, do you want to tell who you are? Or do you prefer to post anonymously for a particular reason? I asked the staff member who takes minutes to try and find a replacement, and she told me she would try her best (hence: I attempted to find a replacement). My error was assuming she would find a replacement (thus, I assumed there would be a replacement). There was not a replacement. Whatadubmass, do you want to tell who you are? Or do you prefer to post anonymously for a particular reason?

I asked the staff member who takes minutes to try and find a replacement, and she told me she would try her best (hence: I attempted to find a replacement). My error was assuming she would find a replacement (thus, I assumed there would be a replacement). There was not a replacement.

]]> By: Whatadumbass http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95733 Whatadumbass Thu, 27 Sep 2007 01:55:58 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95733 Hmmm, something's not clicking in the old brain: <i>"This staff member called me within a reasonable period of time and informed me that she would be unable to take minutes for the June 13th meeting. <b>I unsuccessfully attempted to find someone who could act as a replacement.</b> The controversy over June 13th began when I inattentively forgot to appoint a senator to take minutes for that meeting."</i> Doesn't quite compare with Jon's post here on June 15th: <i>"Hey Ted, The lack of minutes was unexpected. We normally have someone at every meeting present to take minutes. When this person cannot show, they are charged with finding a replacement. <b>I assumed there would be a replacement,</b> so I’m probably to blame for not checking"</i> Must be me, or the booze. Hmmm, something’s not clicking in the old brain:

“This staff member called me within a reasonable period of time and informed me that she would be unable to take minutes for the June 13th meeting. I unsuccessfully attempted to find someone who could act as a replacement. The controversy over June 13th began when I inattentively forgot to appoint a senator to take minutes for that meeting.”

Doesn’t quite compare with Jon’s post here on June 15th:

“Hey Ted,

The lack of minutes was unexpected. We normally have someone at every meeting present to take minutes. When this person cannot show, they are charged with finding a replacement. I assumed there would be a replacement, so I’m probably to blame for not checking”

Must be me, or the booze.

]]> By: Timothy http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95730 Timothy Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:59:13 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95730 "Minutes by recollection are okay" sounds like the kind of bullshit Melinda Grier would dream up. “Minutes by recollection are okay” sounds like the kind of bullshit Melinda Grier would dream up.

]]> By: Jared http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95729 Jared Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:58:06 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95729 Re-read that again, Miles. I wrote, "the Student Senate Vice President". Re-read that again, Miles. I wrote, “the Student Senate Vice President”.

]]> By: Miles http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95728 Miles Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:40:29 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95728 So, let's see...this means that a) Juliana Guzman should have been responsible or that b) Chii-San Sun Owen would be responsible. Either way, someone in the ASUO Exec office screwed the pooch, and it's now walking funny. So, let’s see…this means that a) Juliana Guzman should have been responsible or that b) Chii-San Sun Owen would be responsible.

Either way, someone in the ASUO Exec office screwed the pooch, and it’s now walking funny.

]]> By: Jared http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95727 Jared Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:11:48 +0000 http://www.oregoncommentator.com/2007/09/26/rosenbergs-letter-to-con-court/#comment-95727 As much as I want to, I can't stay away from the drama - I had to weigh in. According to the Rules of the ASUO Student Senate Section 3.2(i), it states that the Student Senate Vice President is "responsible for the maintenance of meeting minutes and audio tape records", and not the Student Senate President. Nonetheless, it is disappointing that no Senator looked up during the meeting and said, "Hey, nobody is writing this down". As much as I want to, I can’t stay away from the drama - I had to weigh in. According to the Rules of the ASUO Student Senate Section 3.2(i), it states that the Student Senate Vice President is “responsible for the maintenance of meeting minutes and audio tape records”, and not the Student Senate President.
Nonetheless, it is disappointing that no Senator looked up during the meeting and said, “Hey, nobody is writing this down”.

]]>