deicer Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 He just never disappoints!http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/new-video-surfaces-that-appears-to-show-incoherent-mayor-rob-ford/article16433057/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 He just never disappoints!http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/new-video-surfaces-that-appears-to-show-incoherent-mayor-rob-ford/article16433057/He would have been the first serious alcoholic to dry out by going to the gym. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mizar Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Torontonians may be faced with an awful choice. Re-electing the embarrassing man who will look after their money or voting for a well behaved mayor that will waste huge amounts of their money. They may be forced to re-elect Ford. Mind you, if he resigned and a similar platform type were to run, they could have wonderful ne w mayor. But it looks like Ford may force people to vote for fiscal responsibility but not personal responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrlupin Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Torontonians may be faced with an awful choice. Re-electing the embarrassing man who will look after their money or voting for a well behaved mayor that will waste huge amounts of their money. They may be forced to re-elect Ford. Mind you, if he resigned and a similar platform type were to run, they could have wonderful ne w mayor. But it looks like Ford may force people to vote for fiscal responsibility but not personal responsibility.Somehow, I am sure Torontonians aren't using the same limited frame work you propose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mizar Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Somehow, I am sure Torontonians aren't using the same limited frame work you propose.You mean that they might be happy to elect someone who wastes their money in a nice dignified manner.I suggest that perhaps it is you that might have the limited framework and have not taken the time to actually consider why a man who has acted so foolishly still has such a significant amount of support. It appears to baffles some, especially supporters of the spendthrift politicians. Is it because they like their mayor drunk and smoking crack. I think not.But a lot of people are sick and tired of dignified politicians who think that the taxpayers money is something to be spent on fancy artwork, expensive public service pensions, expensive projects to create traffic jams by shutting down busy street lanes year round so bikes can use them during a polar vortex, closing economic generators like airports and the manufacturing jobs they support because a few moved near the shoreline, etc, etc. No doubt Olivia Chow(who will almost certainly run for mayor) has a lot of grand ideas. She seems to behave in a very dignified manner. And she cant wait to spend your money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrlupin Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I did not say you had a limited framework. That would be throwing an insult at you. I said you were using a limited framework to present the sittuation. That's quite different.Have a nice day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mizar Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Ok, I think that it is best that I accept that my framework is limited as you have stated. But as you have stated an opinion that I am using a limited framework, could you please expand the framework for me so that I can understand better.Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Someone got creative.... Chock might like this one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chockalicious Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Ha, Good Grief, what did we do before the internet?Like most Jamaican rap I can't understand what is being said! I won't go into detail about dancehall vs dubstep vs reggae (mainly cuz I don't know) and I haven't busted out a Shabba Ranks tune since the early 90s.All of that being said Bob Marley is still one of my all time faves. I don't listen to much Peter Tosh or The Wailers anymore but Bob still gets regular play. Everyone has the right to interpret music their own way but it always struck me as sad that a song about violence against women (No Women No Cry) was co-opted by drunken frat guys.And Mitch, this is for you just because. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCmTlg0hA9w&feature=player_embeddedAlso figured I could add this:http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/01/21/rob-fords-drunken-jamaican-english-laced-rant-translated/The other two are more obscene, what our Jamaican translator called “indecent language.” The first, “raasclat,” is a deeply offensive term that refers to a rag used to wipe one’s buttocks after defecation. As slang lexographer Jonathan Green explained in a 2011 online post, “raas by itself means the buttocks, and by extension the whole person.”The second, “bumbaclot,” is said to be Jamaican equivalent of “f*ck” or Quebec’s “tabernac.” The word also refers to a rag, but usually one used to absorb menstrual blood. Most notably, it is mentioned in the song “Oh Bumbo Klaat” on the 1981 Peter Tosh album Wanted Dread and Alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrlupin Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Mizar,Framing has to do with how you present information. In your above example you presented the Torontonians with two choices when election time comes. You also presented Rob Ford as a fiscally responsible person who embarrasses Toronto. Then you presented choice number two as "a well behaved mayor that will waste huge amounts of their money".The frame you used in this case is the following:-Toronto has only two choices-One mayor is fiscally responsible but embarassing-Other mayor is going to be wasteful with moneyIn many cases, the way information is presented will change how people decide. I'm not from Toronto but I somehow think the citizens there will be using different criterias then the ones you chose and will also have different evaluations of the candidates presented.If you really want to know what framing is, look up framing effect.Have a nice day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mizar Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 In your above example you presented the Torontonians with two choices when election time comes. You also presented Rob Ford as a fiscally responsible person who embarrasses Toronto. Then you presented choice number two as "a well behaved mayor that will waste huge amounts of their money".The frame you used in this case is the following:-Toronto has only two choices-One mayor is fiscally responsible but embarassing-Other mayor is going to be wasteful with moneyI suspect that most of us have a framework that we set up when stating an opinion and that most others are no different. Obviously at this point we cant predict the future for mayoral candidates as the front runners have not been established. So, we have to look at the past. Toronto seems to have a recent history of spendthrift mayor and council. I have given spending examples above. For the first time in a long time, someone has come along willing to make big cuts and hold back spending. I dont think this framework of history is inaccurate.I predict that there will be two big names in the race for mayor of Toronto. Ford and Chow. Of course we will have to wait to see what her platform is. I suspect it will be obscured and there will be concentration on the mayors behaviour to disguise her NDPish ideas. But this is all just prediction and could be completely wrong.But once again, the most important question I have is, why is this buffoon so popular with such a significant part of the population. My answer, it is based on the past.Once again I ask, why is this buffoon so popular with so many people. It is not because he is a buffoon. It is because, in my opinion, what you said with minor changes to wording: -Toronto had only two choices-One mayor was fiscally responsible but embarassing-Other mayor was wasteful with money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.