College Democrat Leader Can't Quote Things Honestly
What I find particularly amazing with the new College Democrat President, Seth Flaxman, is his inability to actually quote documents or statements accurately. I already have noted this in the past on this blog (see "Funny College Democrat Mistake") a way down. In a letter to the editor in the Spect today, though, Flaxman asserts that:
According to the College Republican’s Constitution (Article III Section II) they require that “Formal votes, pertaining to internal College Republicans policies and procedures, go to a vote at the next general meeting, with the majority of members present being sufficient to pass the proposal.”
What Flaxman ignores, however, is a small section in the middle of that line that he conveniently removed without even adding a "..." to indicate anything was cut. In reality, the section reads:
"Formal votes, pertaining to internal College Republicans policies and procedures, shall be initiated by any member of the general body. The proposal shall then go to a vote at the next general meeting, with the majority of members present being sufficient to pass the proposal."
It pertains to votes that originate from the general membership on ideas they might want to raise. It is intended to get a vote on any issue and to encourage new ideas, not to make every decision the result of a vote of the general board. Indeed, directly after that section, the constitution establishes the authority of the Executive Board to take decisions in its own name to recognize policies or groups, provided that it is established as a vote of the board:
"If such policy positions are initiated by the Executive Board and are not brought up for a vote, these positions must be stated as the position of the Executive Board of the Columbia University College Republicans, not as of the group as a whole."
And then he asserts how Democrats let anyone hear their speeches and question them, which, of course, is crap. When Hillary Clinton was running for NY Senate, she came to my High School and I could hear her alright, but when it came time for questions her staff insisted on filtering them first and allowing the ones they liked. Some openness.
And notice how Flaxman never refutes my point that the College Democrats stifle anyone who is not in their majority? Instead, he confirms it.
Rather than take aim at Columbia College Republicans for stifling its members, he cites a claim about the RNC. I won't argue that, even though I could. I will point out to Flaxman if I ever meet him, though, that the College Republicans are not the RNC, and that the College Democrats are not the "Big Tent." That we can prove beyond doubt.
According to the College Republican’s Constitution (Article III Section II) they require that “Formal votes, pertaining to internal College Republicans policies and procedures, go to a vote at the next general meeting, with the majority of members present being sufficient to pass the proposal.”
What Flaxman ignores, however, is a small section in the middle of that line that he conveniently removed without even adding a "..." to indicate anything was cut. In reality, the section reads:
"Formal votes, pertaining to internal College Republicans policies and procedures, shall be initiated by any member of the general body. The proposal shall then go to a vote at the next general meeting, with the majority of members present being sufficient to pass the proposal."
It pertains to votes that originate from the general membership on ideas they might want to raise. It is intended to get a vote on any issue and to encourage new ideas, not to make every decision the result of a vote of the general board. Indeed, directly after that section, the constitution establishes the authority of the Executive Board to take decisions in its own name to recognize policies or groups, provided that it is established as a vote of the board:
"If such policy positions are initiated by the Executive Board and are not brought up for a vote, these positions must be stated as the position of the Executive Board of the Columbia University College Republicans, not as of the group as a whole."
And then he asserts how Democrats let anyone hear their speeches and question them, which, of course, is crap. When Hillary Clinton was running for NY Senate, she came to my High School and I could hear her alright, but when it came time for questions her staff insisted on filtering them first and allowing the ones they liked. Some openness.
And notice how Flaxman never refutes my point that the College Democrats stifle anyone who is not in their majority? Instead, he confirms it.
Rather than take aim at Columbia College Republicans for stifling its members, he cites a claim about the RNC. I won't argue that, even though I could. I will point out to Flaxman if I ever meet him, though, that the College Republicans are not the RNC, and that the College Democrats are not the "Big Tent." That we can prove beyond doubt.
posted by Dennis at
2:15 PM
2 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
By
Dennis, at 9:08 PM
I'm not saying he didn't, since I have never seen him speak and so I would not know.
But I do reject Flaxman's assertion that Democratic speaker events are much more open. It's the hypocrisy that has so often turned me away from the Democratic Party.
I won't pretend that the Republican Party on a national level is perfect. I do know, however, that as pro-choice & pro-gay marriage Republican, I've never been made to feel unwanted by the Republican Party. Nobody's ever said to me "You're pro-choice, so you're not really Republican." I have, however, heard plenty of Democrats on this campus, such as those who supported the Iraq War, who have been treated like they weren't really Democrats.
For one example of this liberal hypocrisy, see Paul's column from way back when.
And about the College Democrats, a column written by an old board member about how closed the board has been
By
Dennis, at 9:11 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home