News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it means a 'Rob Ford would prefer to not be fulfilling Mayoral duties on a stat. holiday' scheduling issue.
 
Must have been hard for him to meeting and greet the public, the day after he, tied one on, celebrating the New Year at his favourite watering hole. My guess for the levee cancellation - Ford hates mingling with strangers. He is extremely uncomfortable around the unknown and the levee is usually attended by citizens that aren't hot, young women and sports jocks.
 
Perhaps, but I haven't come across any reason to believe that he ties one on more than the average person, and so I'm not sure it's something he can be 'called on.' (DD in Florida put aside).
 
I haven't come across any reason to believe that he ties one on more than the average person, and so I'm not sure it's something he can be 'called on.'
Click to expand...

But he isn't an "average person"...he's the mayor. And as an important elected political figure, there are certain expectations. But it fits a pattern doesn't it....he can't attend any Pride functions (traditionally done by the mayor) as it interferes with his personal cottaging time. He can't vote on important Council matters. as he prefers to teach football instead. He cancels the traditional New Years Levee for "personal" reasons. Doesn't really matter whether it's because he plans on being hung over or because he finds those kinds of events unpleasant. They are stupid and selfish reasons.

The sooner he's out of our hair, the better.
 
Doug Ford just said that the Levee is not cancelled, just that it will be different this year. Invited guests only?
 
freshcutgrass said:
But he isn't an "average person"...he's the mayor. And as an important elected political figure, there are certain expectations.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but what these 'certain' expectations are is another matter. Attending Pride? Yep. Levee? Yep. Voting? Yep.

Not tying one on at a New Year's party...? Not sure. So long as he can entirely hide the hangover at the Mayoral function the next day, I couldn't care less if he got bombed the night before. To me, that's a personal issue, and that's where I draw the line at 'certain expectations.'
 
It's often problematic when the electorate expects behaviour from their elected officials that's supposedly morally superior to their own. Why can't the mayor tie one on from time to time? Seems a bit hypocritical to hold elected officials to standards higher than our own.
 
Either the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing or Doug Ford is going into damage control in the absence of his brother, the "mayor", who secretly blew the country for some vacation time.
 
Lenser said:
It's often problematic when the electorate expects behaviour from their elected officials that's supposedly morally superior to their own. Why can't the mayor tie one on from time to time? Seems a bit hypocritical to hold elected officials to standards higher than our own.
Click to expand...

It's the 'position of power' thing. You have a higher level of responsibility and discretion as you have a higher level of power. A CEO can't get bombed at the Christmas party, but half the staff can tie one on and not overly hurt their reputation. The head of a hospital can't be getting her checkups at a private clinic in Chicago. Etc.
 
Yeah, I'm with you to a certain degree, then I'm not sure I'm on board. I think that the issue I have is with too broadly construing the responsibilities one has in his job, and then thinking he must exercise a proportionate amount of discretion as a result.

We can all agree (I think...hope) that what Rob Ford likes to watch on TV is up to him. His job shouldn't have any bearing on that--it's in the privacy of his own home, it's on cable tv, etc. etc. But we can also all agree that how he votes on council does have a bearing on his job.

It's the middle point where things get murky. Though I don't think a CEO can get bombed at the company's Xmas party, I think he can get bombed at a private one. Likewise, I don't think Ford can get bombed at a public gala where he is attending in the capacity of Mayor. But if he hits up a pub on New Year's and has a few, in the capacity of a private citizen, that's his business.

As for the head of the hospital example...I spose here our intuitions just differ. If one wants to spend his personal resources to seek healthcare outside of the system, criticizing him for it is, to my mind, just an unfair infringement on his autonomy, a value that I think outweighs whatever responsibilities he might have to his job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top