Rob Ford has been removed as mayor

[TimKerr]

Good thing you're being objective about the whole thing.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Good thing you're being objective about the whole thing.

Where's that applaud button when we need it.

 

[Kin]

Although I don't agree with Nik refusing to back up his remark, he is right in that we should do our best not to talk politics on this board.

My "remark" is that you are engaging in a silly level of hyperbole. I'd be happy to "back that up" if you weren't doing it for me.

 

[Justin]

Although I don't agree with Nik refusing to back up his remark, he is right in that we should do our best not to talk politics on this board.

My "remark" is that you are engaging in a silly level of hyperbole. I'd be happy to "back that up" if you weren't doing it for me.

You used sarcasm to criticize my opinion on Miller...without elaborating it. But honestly who the hell cares.

 

[louisstamos]

I know you just said you don't want to go any further with any political arguments, but after I apparently wrote one of the "dumbest things you've ever read on the internet," I have to have back at it.

Get off your high horse. Ford had nothing but good intentions trying raise money for a children's charity and made a minor mistake regarding a voting technicality. Illegal? Yes. But what he did harmed no one and nothing, it was a minor mistake, and the magnitude of the punishment considering the minuscule nature of the mistake he made is a farce.

I want to make this abundantly clear. Ford's punishment for raising money for charity using city letterhead: Paying back $3150. (which he was absolved from by council anyways)

Ford's punishment for voting in a matter in which he had a pecuniary interest - his seat vacated.  Do you see the difference?  He had the best intentions when he raised the money yes, and that's why his punishment there was so little.  He did NOT have good intentions when he voted for himself not to pay back the $3150 loaned.  He voted to absolve himself - and that's the issue.  There is no high horse involved.

Using the same example I used earlier - let's say your cousin is on trial for shoplifting something relatively minor, and you receive a letter to sit on his jury.  If you do not declare that you're his cousin and there is a conflict of interest, even if he would have gotten off anyways (i.e: a unanimous vote), the moment they discover you're their cousin, it's declared a mistrial and YOU yourself may face very harsh penalties for not declaring a conflict of interest and abusing the legal system - even if the original crime was relatively minor.  THAT's the issue.

As for your defense of Kyle Rae...that is seriously the dumbest thing I've read on the internet in a long time. And that says something. Governments have an obligation to spend the taxpayers' money wisely with accountability. If you want to throw yourself a retirement party, why should I have to pay for it? It's ridiculous. If someone working in the private sector has a retirement party with company money it's usually because of the goodwill of his superiors. Kyle Rae on the other hand gave the finger to the taxpayers and decided to indulge in people's hard-earned money so he can sip champagne and eat caviar. You are seriously okay with this? It's disgusting.

Firstly, I actually had to plan a retirement party for three of our faculty recently.  Maybe 150 people attended.  No caviar or champagne, just some wine, some beer, some pub food.  Do you know how much it cost?  Just over $3000.  They're not cheap...especially space rental.  And I imagine Rae's was much bigger since it was open to his constituents and supporters.

And while I'm not in Rae's riding, my Councillor, Norm Kelly, has represented me for quite a long time - 12 years in the amalgamated city (and 18 years as a Councillor in general).  If he decided to throw himself a retirement party worth that much - I would be fine with it, even if I've largely disagreed with his politics...but he has been the one who has represented me, and he's earned that right.  Firstly, in the end, as a taxpayer, his party cost me $0.004 cents.  And that goes the same for any Councillor in the city who represented.  They've earned it. A party for a Councillor who served their riding for 19 years, especially if it's open to the constituents, isn't a big deal for me.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Get off your high horse. Ford had nothing but good intentions trying raise money for a children's charity and made a minor mistake regarding a voting technicality. Illegal? Yes. But what he did harmed no one and nothing, it was a minor mistake, and the magnitude of the punishment considering the minuscule nature of the mistake he made is a farce.

It's not a matter of 'harming' anyone in a physical sense - he 'harmed' democracy.  Do you not see the conflict of interest ramifications from what he did?

I'll let Marcus Gee of the Globe & Mail explain it:

Among the donors he approached were lobbyists and a company that does business with the city. The commissioner found that seven lobbyists or clients of lobbyists who had donated to the football charity had either lobbied Mr. Ford or registered an intent to lobby him.

The danger is obvious: if a lobbyist does a favour for a councillor ? even if it means donating to a good cause ? he might expect something in return. Mr. Ford, who rails about corruption at city hall, should have seen that.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/rob-ford-has-only-himself-to-blame/article5670796/

 

[Kin]

You used sarcasm to criticize my opinion on Miller...without elaborating it.

Because, again, what I find objectionable is the hyperbole, not the opinion. It's precisely that kind of partisan rhetoric that makes discussing politics such a trying experience. Saying any mayor would "doom" the city or that a relatively mediocre mayor as "unforgivably horrible" is a great big flashing neon sign that I have no interest in discussing politics with you, regardless of your affiliation or viewpoint.

 

[louisstamos]

One last point...

Governments have an obligation to spend the taxpayers' money wisely with accountability.

Not only does it enrage me as a conservative...

I'm curious as to how you feel about Bev Oda...as a conservative...

 

[Tigger]

That is a fairly satisfying headline, and I don't even live in Toronto.

 

[Joe S.]

I know I'm way over simplifying things - but I always saw Ford as mayor akin to when Homer became sanitation commissioner.

 

[bustaheims]

I know I'm way over simplifying things - but I always saw Ford as mayor akin to when Homer became sanitation commissioner.

Thanks. Now I've got "The Garbage Man Can" stuck in my head.

 

[TimKerr]

I know I'm way over simplifying things - but I always saw Ford as mayor akin to when Homer became sanitation commissioner.

Thanks. Now I've got "The Garbage Man Can" stuck in my head.

Funny, I have the theme song to 'Sanford and Son' stuck in mine

 

[Deebo]

I know I'm way over simplifying things - but I always saw Ford as mayor akin to when Homer became sanitation commissioner.

Thanks. Now I've got "The Garbage Man Can" stuck in my head.

Funny, I have the theme song to 'Sanford and Son' stuck in mine

"Oh gosh. You know, I'm not much on speeches, but it's so gratifying to... leave you wallowing in the mess you've made. You're screwed, thank you, bye."

"He's right. He ain't much on speeches."

 

[Justin]

I want to make this abundantly clear. Ford's punishment for raising money for charity using city letterhead: Paying back $3150. (which he was absolved from by council anyways)

Ford's punishment for voting in a matter in which he had a pecuniary interest - his seat vacated.  Do you see the difference?  He had the best intentions when he raised the money yes, and that's why his punishment there was so little.  He did NOT have good intentions when he voted for himself not to pay back the $3150 loaned.  He voted to absolve himself - and that's the issue.  There is no high horse involved.

I understand that. If you read my previous comment, I stated that Ford made a "minor mistake" regarding a voting technicality. I also acknowledged that what he did was illegal, there is no disputing that. My point is the punishment is wildly outrageous considering the minor flub, and this whole thing wouldn't have even happened if Ford wasn't a conservative. You think Clayton Ruby and his gang would pursue this if Adam Vaughan made the same mistake? Give me a break. This was completely politically motivated because people don't like Ford's politics, THAT'S why they want him out of office. Though, if you want to sit on your high horse and proclaim that Ford deserves to be kicked out of the Mayor's office solely for this small mistake, then you're an ass.

And while I'm not in Rae's riding, my Councillor, Norm Kelly, has represented me for quite a long time - 12 years in the amalgamated city (and 18 years as a Councillor in general).  If he decided to throw himself a retirement party worth that much - I would be fine with it, even if I've largely disagreed with his politics...but he has been the one who has represented me, and he's earned that right.  Firstly, in the end, as a taxpayer, his party cost me $0.004 cents.  And that goes the same for any Councillor in the city who represented.  They've earned it. A party for a Councillor who served their riding for 19 years, especially if it's open to the constituents, isn't a big deal for me.

This paragraph proves that people who work in government with the same line of thinking as yourself are part the reason we're in debt. The government has a responsibility to put tax dollars to good use, and if you think Kyle Rae's display of his shocking sense of entitlement with his ego-driven goodbye party for himself is good use of our hard-earned money, then I feel sorry for you.

I'm curious as to how you feel about Bev Oda...as a conservative...

Bev Oda was ill-suited to sit in the House of Commons and I'm glad she's stepped down. She gave the Conservatives a bad name, and her sense of entitlement was just horrible.

(from wikipedia)

-In 2006, Oda paid back $2,200 to taxpayers after the Liberals found that she had incurred nearly $5,500 in limousine rides at the 2006 Juno Awards in Halifax. In 2008, she was accused of hiding over $17,000 of limousine expenses billed to taxpayers.

-During a 2011 conference on immunization of poor children Oda had refused to stay in the conference hotel (the Grange St. Paul) furnished by hosts. She instead stayed at the Savoy Hotel at a cost of $665 per night for three nights, ordered orange juice at a cost of $16 and hired a limousine to transport her between her new hotel and the conference. She was also charged 250$ for smoking in a non-smoking room.

Thank goodness she's gone.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Judge who presided over Ford's case has reservations about the MCIA (Municipal Conflict of Interest Act)...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/11/27/toronto-ford-conflict-of-interest-act.html

The Ontario law that forced Toronto Mayor Rob Ford out of office is now under scrutiny, having been called a Draconian and unfair law that offers punishment that doesn't fit the crime.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Charles Hackland, the same judge who presided over Ford's case, called the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA) "a very blunt instrument that's attracted justified criticism."

Others share similar viewpoints, nameily...

...lawyer Stephen D'Agostino and others are arguing that the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act is a law that now needs to be changed.

"Essentially what the act says is one strike and you're out," D'Agostino said. "There's a lot of difficulties with it, not only the severity of the penalty for small cases of conflict."

Lawyer Maureen Whelton agrees.

"It needs to have a result other than the seat shall be declared vacant," Whelton said. "It needs to have another option for the court."

Even Paul Magder, the originator of this lawsuit against Ford had his opinions...

Paul Magder, the man who brought forward the lawsuit against Ford, told CBC's Power and Politics on Tuesday that perhaps the law was put in place for a reason.

But when asked if the punishment for Ford was fitting to the crime, Magder said he wasn't sure.

"I believe that's what the rule is. I'm not sure if it fits the offence, but that's what it is," he said.

"The fact that the law is written so that the consequences are the vacating of that seat, of the mayor?s seat ? I don?t know why it's so extreme, but if it had been something else, then he would have had to pay whatever the penalty was."

But according to political scientis Myer Siemiatycki of Ryerson University...

" i actually think the act gets it right in the kind of zero tolerance approach it takes," Siemiatycki said.

 

[bustaheims]

What Ford did was neither a "minor mistake" nor a "voting technicality." Not participating in a vote that has a direct and obvious impact as you as an individual is a major misstep and is practically the definition of "conflict of interest." Seriously, high school student governments know better than that.

 

[Kin]

I understand that. If you read my previous comment, I stated that Ford made a "minor mistake" regarding a voting technicality. I also acknowledged that what he did was illegal, there is no disputing that. My point is the punishment is wildly outrageous considering the minor flub, and this whole thing wouldn't have even happened if Ford wasn't a conservative. You think Clayton Ruby and his gang would pursue this if Adam Vaughan made the same mistake? Give me a break. This was completely politically motivated because people don't like Ford's politics, THAT'S why they want him out of office. Though, if you want to sit on your high horse and proclaim that Ford deserves to be kicked out of the Mayor's office solely for this small mistake, then you're an ass.

Translation: Rob Ford was wrong on principle but it was a minor infraction so it isn't a big deal.

This paragraph proves that people who work in government with the same line of thinking as yourself are part the reason we're in debt. The government has a responsibility to put tax dollars to good use, and if you think Kyle Rae's display of his shocking sense of entitlement with his ego-driven goodbye party for himself is good use of our hard-earned money, then I feel sorry for you.

Translation: It doesn't matter if it was a minor infraction, it was a violation of principle and is therefore a very big deal.

 

[Justin]

I understand that. If you read my previous comment, I stated that Ford made a "minor mistake" regarding a voting technicality. I also acknowledged that what he did was illegal, there is no disputing that. My point is the punishment is wildly outrageous considering the minor flub, and this whole thing wouldn't have even happened if Ford wasn't a conservative. You think Clayton Ruby and his gang would pursue this if Adam Vaughan made the same mistake? Give me a break. This was completely politically motivated because people don't like Ford's politics, THAT'S why they want him out of office. Though, if you want to sit on your high horse and proclaim that Ford deserves to be kicked out of the Mayor's office solely for this small mistake, then you're an ass.

Translation: Rob Ford was wrong on principle but it was a minor infraction so it isn't a big deal.

This paragraph proves that people who work in government with the same line of thinking as yourself are part the reason we're in debt. The government has a responsibility to put tax dollars to good use, and if you think Kyle Rae's display of his shocking sense of entitlement with his ego-driven goodbye party for himself is good use of our hard-earned money, then I feel sorry for you.

Translation: It doesn't matter if it was a minor infraction, it was a violation of principle and is therefore a very big deal.

Haha, honestly Nik I have to hand it to you for that crafty twisting of words.

Here's the difference: Kyle Rae's action gave the finger to the taxpayers of Toronto, while Ford's harmed no one and affected nothing. It was an infraction of a procedural technicality.

 

[maplesyrup]

I can't help but think the witch hunt never happens if he wasn't such an um, giant douche? - Apologies to those who don't like that word and apologies to the actual feminine hygiene product. 

 

[Kin]

Here's the difference: Kyle Rae's action gave the finger to the taxpayers of Toronto, while Ford's harmed no one and affected nothing. It was an infraction of a procedural technicality.

Yeah, that's just restating your double standard.