ULSU and Fianna Fail

shabouwcaw

As charming as the analogy with pregnancy advice is, it's not really the same is it? We're not asking the student unions to build campaigns for a woman's right to choose or some such.

Yes mate, it's not exactly the same, thats why its called an analogy.

Lets break this down to first principles so you can understand the contention.

Abortion - contentious and devisive issue, colour by political beliefs.
Marches & lobbying - something the SU organises
Professionalism - The behaviour we contend allows a differing of beliefs in a person, where they hold one view but in their job must carry out acts promoting the other.

These three premises also hold true of fees. Substitute "fees" for abortion in the above or the following sentence and the same applies.

Generic sentence - I believe X but because it is my job I have to promote X.

This holds true for all values of X. Welcome to constructive argumentation.

I take from the rest of your post that you're advoating direct action? That's a whole different kettle of fish. As i understand it, in a position as elected representative, one of your primary responsibities is to respect the paradigms and framework that elect you, else the system is pointless and leads to abuses. When you operate within a system, in order for that system to succeed, you must respect the integrity of that system. Checks and balances exist for a reason.

it would be wholly illegitimate and bad precedent for elected ULSU officers to engage in direct action and when contrained by useful things like laws, regulations and guidelines there is none of the "flaws" you outline in having a person who doesnt believe something doing a job.

in order to have direct action as you wish, you have to advocate it outside of a ULSU framework, so thats a nonsense.

@ToadVine Your constant rehashing of that quote is ridiculous. Derek is obviously contemplating a hypothetical, one that isnt as ridiculous as you feign outrage at. Just look at the constant debate over whether Julian Assange would be undermined by a possible conviction for his sexual assault allegations to see that one can be a (questionably) good leader independent of any allegations or transgression. Leadership as a quality is divorced from such things, as it is subjective and individual to each person and what they use to motivate followers.. While one can create an ideal of leadership, it doesnt mean the followers will subscribe to it. See Hitler, Omar Bongo Omdimba, Sadam Hussein or Kim Jong Il. They're all horrible people who I believe no one should emulate, but definately have a certain quality of "leadership" by virtue of their captivation and motivation of followers.

TheProdigy. Firstly, to point out hypocrisy. You quote another poster as advocating homophobia, and yet refer to someone as a "bum-chum" as perjorative.

Of course, and if he wasn't involved with a corrupt political organisation my view of such would be heightened. Incorporate the fact that a select few are defending him in not so much an amicable way and you would wonder what type of associates and dealings Derek is involved in.

I'm not involved with Derek in any level, I can't speak for the other fella, but that's a cheap shot. FF, while it has many faults, is hardly endemically corrupt at the level that Derek would realistically be involved at (ie. Orgra and very low grassroots) and guilt by association is just a slur. Quite frankly, do better.

My issue is in relation to concealing his pro fees opinion, which will happen during his forthcoming presidential campaign. Choosing not to disclose such information is doing a disservice to the student body as, if they were aware of such views, he would not receive significant support to be elected, which may still be the case either way as this information will most definitely become available to the electorate via alternative methods.

That's a hypothetical, Derek has announced anything yet, coz he's not allowed and also, Derek hasnt covered up being pro-fees in the past, why would you infer that he would this time? thats misleading and disingenous.

While the rest of that argument is premised on that I will rebut that too, again, thats premised on the idea that 1. people would care, as most will understand the "i believe one thing, but will work hard to do what you tell me coz thats my job" thing that seems to have stumped the enlightened minds posting in this thread 2. that fees remains something that everyone has a black and white view on. It is my personal view that when presented with a nuanced view of reality, people will respond favourably to it as it's more realistic. Hence middleground solutions and middleground politics are popular.

ToadVine

cson wrote: »

What has been or is being kept secret?

I support Arsenal and I'm pretty vocal about it but if I were running for election I wouldn't be adding in a line at the end of the posters saying "by the way I support Arsenal". In essence, my personal beliefs and opinions are for the consumption of those whom I choose to allow hear them.

You clearly have an axe to grind with the constant quoting of the same post. So do us all a favour and change the record like a good lad.

I think you might be missing my point ... I'll outline it again for you (in simpler terms this time).

I believe that anything said by an election candidate in a public forum (which may be relevant to the job the candidate is running for) is open for questioning by perspective voters. I also believe that if the election candidate holds beliefs or another position/job that has the potential to effect his/her performance of their duties then that should also be open to question. My point is confined to issues that affect the persons ability to do his job. These are the issues that I believe should be made publicly known (and not hidden or kept secret). Thus, being a supporter of the re-introduction of 3rd level fees would affect an SU Presidents ability to represent students. Being an Arsenal supporter would not.

If I was a potential voter in any upcoming UL student union election, I would think it essential that I was aware than any SU presidential candidate actively canvasses for the reintroduction of 3rd level fees with OgraFF. Do you not think this should be declared by any potential presidential candidate?

Hope I've phrased that in a way that is easier for you to understand.

Insect Overlord

ToadVine wrote: »

If I was a potential voter in any upcoming UL student union election, I would think it essential that I was aware than any SU presidential candidate actively canvasses for the reintroduction of 3rd level fees with OgraFF. Do you not think this should be declared by any potential presidential candidate?

Why not wait until campaigns begin and ask your questions then? You'll have a better chance of getting an honest answer if you're patient and reasonable. Hounding a guy around the Internet, quoting things that were posted in 2008, is a bit creepy to be honest.

ToadVine

shabouwcaw wrote: »

@ToadVine Your constant rehashing of that quote is ridiculous. Derek is obviously contemplating a hypothetical, one that isnt as ridiculous as you feign outrage at.

Are you speaking for Derek? How you know he is "obviously contemplating a hypothetical"? Derek has been on this thread since I posted that quote and he has not mentioned anything about it being "hypothetical" or withdrawn the quote. Thus, I am assuming he meant exactly what he said about a convicted rapist having the potential to be the best Taoiseach ever.

As for your other points, I still maintain that anyone who holds a belief or position/job that is directly opposed to the work they will be required to do when elected should declare this. In this case, I believe Derek should declare that he supports the re-introduction of 3rd level fees and he has actively canvassed for this in OgraFF. Its then up to the students of UL to make up their own minds if they want him to be SU president or not.

These other beliefs and positions/jobs should be made clear. That is my point.

cson

@ ToadVine: See post #93

Plus you've oodles of time now to prepare for the hustings, you can polish the scud missiles right up. Or maybe it's easier to be a warrior behind a keyboard?

cson

ToadVine wrote: »

As for your other points, I still maintain that anyone who holds a belief or position/job that is directly opposed to the work they will be required to do when elected should declare this. In this case, I believe Derek should declare that he supports the re-introduction of 3rd level fees and he has actively canvassed for this in OgraFF. Its then up to the students of UL to make up their own minds if they want him to be SU president or not.

Ad infinitum. :rolleyes:

ToadVine

cson wrote: »

Ad infinitum. :rolleyes:

I was trying to put my point in simpler terms for you. Seen as you didnt get me the first few times ...

ToadVine

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Why not wait until campaigns begin and ask your questions then?

cson wrote: »

Plus you've oodles of time now to prepare for the hustings, you can polish the scud missiles right up. Or maybe it's easier to be a warrior behind a keyboard?

OK, I'll wait for the election and put all my questions to any declared candidates then.

@cson ... how do you post on boards.ie if not using a keyboard? Do you really understand all this interweb and message boards stuff? You need a keyboard! Its when your talking to a person in real life that a keyboard may not be essential ...

Insect Overlord

ToadVine wrote: »

how do you post on boards.ie if not using a keyboard? Do you really understand all this interweb and message boards stuff? You need a keyboard! Its when your talking to a person in real life that a keyboard may not be essential ...

Ahem...

cson

Right I'm not going to bother with this thread anymore.

Mark Twain wrote:

Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.

He sums up my feelings quite well.

ToadVine

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Ahem...

Still a keyboard, no?

shabouwcaw

So now we are arguing about the definition of a keyboard?

I call Poe's Law

ToadVine

cson wrote: »

Right I'm not going to bother with this thread anymore.

Its good to give up when you know you've been beaten. You were in danger of being this guy for a minute there ...



Also interesting that you resort to calling someone a "fool" when losing a debate. For future reference, the way to make a point is to refute the other persons position in a clear and articulate way, giving examples where appropriate. It is usually seen as a bit childish to call someone names and storm off in a huff when losing ...

ToadVine

shabouwcaw wrote: »

So now we are arguing about the definition of a keyboard?

I call Poe's Law

I agree ... ridiculous.

I'm stunned this is the level of intellectual debate that goes on in UL. I had higher hopes to be honest.

Peteee

Tragedy wrote: »

Now, can someone tell me who that is and why some loon is calling me his name?

Tragedy, stop with the personal insults please.

Everyone else, back on topic, as it has gone wildly off it.

shabouwcaw

Actually, i thought the original keyboard gag was priceless. I'm just amused you engaged with it.

/offtopic

Basically, I think we've all conclusively proven that Derek has always explained his political affiliations and his stance on fees etc.

I think most of us agree this is the correct behavior for someone in his position.

I think most of us agree ULSU do a good job, notwithstanding their executives political affiliations.

I think most of us agree that the correct time to bring up these kind of attacks are at the hustings.

Can we all just get along?

ToadVine

shabouwcaw wrote: »

Actually, i thought the original keyboard gag was priceless. I'm just amused you engaged with it.

Yeah, I missed that particular "gag".

But then maybe you are easily amused.

canned_ulkc

Ok - let's play a guessing game!
There's someone on this thread who's login name incorporates this very subsection of the board.
Another part of his login name describes agroup he is involved with (not a politcal one - lets not go there!)
and the first part of his login name he is particularly proud of. It's a little bit funny (if only to himself) that he has used his surname as a verb and placed it in the past tense. This comes from having wittingly described his own surname (he's really full of complete horse **** this guy) as "putting into cans"

Tragedy wrote: »

As I'm apparently one of "a select few are defending him in not so much an amicable way", I just want to declare my interests in this.

According to TheProdigy, I'm Tony Canning.

Now, can someone tell me who that is and why some loon is calling me his name?

So no Tragedy - you're not Tony Canning - I am (in case it's still not obvious enough for TheProdigy)

I'm interested to know though Tragedy, the circumstances surrounding the apparent desire of TheProdigy to identify you (or, possibly more accurately "accuse" you as myself?!)

I do hope it was in no way to accuse you/me of the worst of crimes - being associated with anything that the bandwagon are chasing down with big sticks?

I'd like to say more but I wouldn't want to isolate or insult anyone - who knows, the rumours that I was ALLEGEDLY taking a year out to run for ULSU president in 2011 could actually be true..... Oh, and whether true or not I would like to state that I am in no way associated with any political organisation, though i LOVE to complain about them all... I can see we'll all get along fine (allegedly)

Gael23

TheProdigy wrote: »

Of course, and if he wasn't involved with a corrupt political organisation my view of such would be heightened. Incorporate the fact that a select few are defending him in not so much an amicable way and you would wonder what type of associates and dealings Derek is involved in.

I dont know why this thread has descended into such accusations as above.

Ive only been in UL since September last but even since then, ive seen Derek do some really good work. Now I am completely anti FF and in fact a member of a political party, but I judge Derek and all the SU officers on their own merits.

Jigga

SarahBeep! wrote: »

So are you suggesting UL chose a different day to head to Dublin and not show solidarity with other 3rd level institutions and students when we were all mrching with a common aim?

No. I'm suggesting the exact opposite.

The massive attendance from UL was very good and it wasn't a case of 'pleading with' students to attend, many sought out the details and travel arrangements by themselves.

What it indicates is how strongly the UL student body felt about fees and that they were willing to get off their arses about it. And that's great.

It's a pity then that it was left to the tiny and insignificant College of Further Education SU to organise a march that nobody knew about in Limerick. Of course, they marched on Peter Power's constituency office. I can see how being the one who would propose such an activity would be difficult for a sympathiser of Fianna Fail, but this it is a situation that really isn't on.

I'm not advocating direct action. Far from it. I'm just wondering aloud if a degree of PROACTIVITY on this issue is warranted? Considering registration fees are gone up to €2000 now.

It's disappointing that people haven't being able to address these concerns and have instead resorted to complaining about how unfair it is to raise someone's political affiliations when discussing political issues.

billy the squid

Whilst you raise some interesting points, the lack of publicity for the limerick protest march would be the responsibility of the Campaigns officer, not 99er. I have no idea what party the Campaigns officer is affiliated to.

canned_ulkc

I think the above points out one of the discussion routes that would have been a considerably more productive route to explore.

Another route to explore I think is that fees were brought up at an SU AGM some time back. So far as I can remember those in attendance were asked to vote on what (or even IF) there would be a kind of fall-back position from the no-fees stance.

This is called democracy. I have seen nothing within the SU to suggest any lack of commitment to the stance voted on at that meeting.

I hope I'm not mis-remembering the details....

TheTownie

As a regular "joe soap" UL student who has no political affiliation nor any grudge against anyone, I think certain aspects have become muddled or just not articulated correctly. I think this is an important issue to clarify.

As we all know, whenever there are SU elections there are candidates promising to do x, y and z. This leads you to believe they will be attaining a position where they can be influential and have a major roll in decision making.

Then on this thread there have been posts, in a nutshell, playing down SU officers influence and painting a picture of "do as your told" officers.

So, in essence, are SU officers as influential as the campaigns make them out to be??

Or are they just one vote in a room of many that set policies to be adhered to??

Or is it just the president who is the influential one??

Would appreciate if someone clarified this and apologies in advance for my ignorance on the level of freedom (or lack of it) SU officer's are privy to.

Mervyn Crawford

(Post 92 ref Julian Assange:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/jan2011/assa-j12.shtml)

Members of political parties who do not declare that membership when putting themselves forward for a position of leadrship are misleading their audience.

There is tremendous confusion concerning the political issues facing everyone. The government,Dail parties, the press, the unions lie to us day in, day out.

Hard work etc is meaningless in itself. As has been pointed out these efforts can be motivated by personal ambition. Rather than a desire to defend the rights of the student body from attack by the college and the state.

Gael23

billy the squid wrote: »

Whilst you raise some interesting points, the lack of publicity for the limerick protest march would be the responsibility of the Campaigns officer, not 99er. I have no idea what party the Campaigns officer is affiliated to.

I dont believe Vivion Grisewood has any strong political affiliations.

Seloth

Jeezus this has turned into some Conspiracy thread:eek:!

FerrisBueller

Just going to throw this out there, do any of ye have FYPs which need to be worked on during January rather than a thread which is really going to get nowhere?

Some have political affiliations, some do not. Honestly, I couldn't care less as long as the job they're running for gets done, and that's the way the majority of people will think-in the now. I
s it written on the nomination form that it needs to be disclosed?

Mervyn Crawford

FerrisBueller

I can only conclude that you do not treat the issues facing students, young people - indeed everyone - as of any import.

The world economy is crashing. Governemnts have opened up their national treasuries to the multi-billionaires and the rest of us have to settle their debts. State services are being ravaged, unemployment and production are repeating levels not seen since the 1920s.

Do you think the rich and their servants in the world's governments are going to leave us alone?

What demeocracy is there when every Dail party (FF, FG, Lab, Green, SF) have said they will settle the debts of the super-rich?

And you say it does not matter if those running for SU office hide their political affiliation.

We need to clarify our view of the political landscape. We need to know what has to be done. If 'leaders' lie to us how can we begin to get to the truth.

I would also point out that it is the so-called 'Lefts' who are most often practitioners of the dark art of hiding allegiances.

The faux-radicals of the SWP and the Socialist Party represent in fact a more dangerous trap than the 'strokes' of FF busted flush, et al.

As we are pushed to the left by circumstance we need to view very critically the tub-thumping of Boyd-Barret, Higgins and co.

These two groups (forming the new United Left Alliance) are working assiduously to tie us to the trade unions and to nationalism.

This is a world crisis which cannot be solved in Ireland; and cannot be solved by trade union reformism.

What those running for office have to say is crucial.

Tragedy

Mervyn Crawford wrote: »

And you say it does not matter if those running for SU office hide their political affiliation.

We need to clarify our view of the political landscape. We need to know what has to be done. If 'leaders' lie to us how can we begin to get to the truth.

You've already lied more in this quote than anyone on this thread has proved ninty9er has in both his elections campaigns and his term as whatever sabattical officer he is(edu?).
Ferris Bueller didn't say it doesn't matter if they hide their political affiliations, he said he doesn't care less what their political affiliation is as long as they do the job elected to do. That has no link whatsoever to what you are saying he said.

Also, can you prove ninty9er or any other sabatt officer HAS hidden their political affiliation? Not making it part of their campaign isn't the same as hiding it.

I would also point out that it is the so-called 'Lefts' who are most often practitioners of the dark art of hiding allegiances.

What? Care to verify this somehow? No? Ok.

What those running for office have to say is crucial.

Which has what to do with ULSU sabatts exactly?

Preachymcpreachpreach Preacherson is too busy preaching methinks.

Hard work etc is meaningless in itself. As has been pointed out these efforts can be motivated by personal ambition. Rather than a desire to defend the rights of the student body from attack by the college and the state.

If a hypothetical best Taoiseach to ever leader Ireland, does it because of ambition and desire for recognition and monetary recompense, fame, glory and to leave a mark on history rather than to better the good of all(does that even exist in real life?), does it make ANY quantifiable difference to the net effect of their leadership and their achievements?

Is a sabatt officer who talks about not having political affiliations, no ties, declaring all his interests and doing the job purely and solely for the betterment of all - but does a **** job of it while meaning well, better than someone who does it for egotistical reasons but get things done and genuinely helps students?

Hard work isn't meaningless. Hard work tends to get results. Results matter for more than preaching and proselytizing and putting words in peoples mouths do.
I want results, not politicians who talk a lot and tell people what they think they want to hear(RAWR ONWARD STUDENT REVOLUTION)

canned_ulkc

Mervyn Crawford wrote: »

FerrisBueller

I can only conclude that you do not treat the issues facing students, young people - indeed everyone - as of any import.

And anyone reading a line like that could only conclude that you are a complete drama queen who possibly should talk to someone about medications to quieten the paranoid voices in your head!

Also....

Do you think the rich and their servants in the world's governments are going to leave us alone?

I saw Derek in the hurlers the other night and he had SO much money that he convinced a few midgets to be demeaned for cash. Basically he insisted that they queue up behind each other with pints of Guinness on their heads. Each time he drank, the midget in the front had to get to the back of the queue (I even heard Derek quote a dig at health cuts in the late 80's Scrap Saturday radio show by telling one to "pick up that leg there and hop it to the back of the queue").
I heard Derek describe his reasoning to his golfing buddies "It's so that each drink is just slightly different from the last rather than getting to the ****ty end of the pint which I always felt tastes of left-wing liberal and then starting all over in a fresh one"
I couldn't hear the rest - something to do with diminished marginal capacity or something like that.

P.S. I know the term "midget" isn't politically correct. But then, that just remains in the same vein as the rest of the thread....

I hope I made you smile....