This is Leonard's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Leonard's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Leonard
Recent Activity
So let me get this straight Phil. You are going to correct this in the paper, when the real shame is that, with all the PR people the city has they still have to hire consultants to smooth things over, but you are going to let the crap in Saturday’s paper from Robinson stand? Robinson’s crap was more than misleading. A lot was totally incorrect, and I bet the city didn’t bother contacting you to correct it, did they.
Grand Robinson, you’ve got to be joking. Doesn’t the Mercury check a few of these basic facts before printing it? This, from a chartered accountant? I don’t understand. Did Summerlee personally manage the University’s pension plan? And Wetstein isn’t the chair of finance and hasn’t been for a while. The finance committee had nothing to do with the budget change from 9 % to “a more manageable three per cent”, and the tax hike was 3.66%, not 3%. It wasn’t the finance committee, it was staff that brought a list of cuts forward. What a slap in their face. Wetstein even stated that he voted in support of items that actually increased the budget, not decrease it! Wetstein was no more involved in the city hall fiasco than any other councillor, likely limited to voting behind closed doors. And for Subbor, Wetstein voted to kick them out in the first place, setting up the showdown. Even if Subbor pays “costs”, it will still end up costing taxpayers million of dollars in the long run. Thank you Karl! Hardly a newsmaker of honour. I wouldn’t be surprised to find Grand Robinson listed on the “re-elect Karl Wetstein team” coming to an election near you. I hope the paper runs a few corrections on these gross and total inaccuracies.
Back in 2005? It didn’t stop there! It continued until at least last year (and probably continued right up to this revalation!) with Brian Holstein, in this blog (and elsewhere??) ranting about the previous council cutting down “healthy trees in Royal City park”. Of course that was just because it was the Quary council who was in charge. The "healty trees" were just as dangerous then as now! And, in twisted irony, the Guelph civic league, of which Holstein is a massive supporter, hired, get this, Pete Williams, to show that the (almost) dead trees were just fine and Quary was bad. Was this the same Pete Williams who was charged in the Reid tree cutting incident??? And of course, the Guelph civic league and Biran Holstein (one and the same) haven’t made any fuss with some 50 trees being cut in the same park because their queen, Karin Farbridge is now in charge and it must be right. Oh the irony. Oh, and did anybody mention the other trees cut down in the same park since Farbridge took over also went without public outcry by Holstein or the civic league. Oh the irony.
Back to fulsome discussion, perhaps if one looks into another source (dictionary.com) and the usage note: "1. offensive to good taste, esp. as being excessive; overdone or gross: fulsome praise that embarrassed her deeply; fulsome décor. 2. disgusting; sickening; repulsive: a table heaped with fulsome mounds of greasy foods. 3. excessively or insincerely lavish: fulsome admiration. 4. encompassing all aspects; comprehensive: a fulsome survey of the political situation in Central America. 5. abundant or copious. Usage note: In the 13th century when it was first used, FULSOME meant simply “abundant or copious.” It later developed additional senses of “offensive, gross” and “disgusting, sickening,” probably by association with FOUL, and still later a sense of excessiveness: a fulsome disease; a fulsome meal, replete with too much of everything. For some centuries FULSOME was used exclusively, or nearly so, with these unfavorable meanings. Today, both FULSOME and FULSOMELY are also used in senses closer to the original one: The sparse language of the new Prayer Book contrasts with the fulsome language of Cranmer's Book of Common Prayer. Later they discussed the topic more fulsomely. These uses are often criticized on the grounds that FULSOME must always retain its connotations of “excessive” or “offensive.” The common phrase fulsome praise is thus sometimes ambiguous in modern use." one would conclude that in the context of the editorial and the general usage of the word today, it was an appropriate use of the word and Kathleen Farrelly should focus on something important like the massive spending problem of this council. After all, Judge Gray didn't write a letter to complain, did he?
Toggle Commented Oct 19, 2009 on Arresting language at From The Editors
Yes, this is outrageious and one has to wonder why Rotary bought into this. A-Paul-ing likely has it right. Did Rotary also ban bottled pop, bottled juice and bottled beer? Did they ban mothers from bringing bottled milk to suckle their newborn? Did they serve keg beer to people in their own mugs, aluminum containers or bowls or do they just let people dip it out of a trough? If indeed bottled juice and pop was available, what message does this send to kids and parents? That water is bad and sugar drinks are best! j dimontino's idea that it be "suggested" is reasonable. Hypocrits! Outrageous! Just plain stupid!
Toggle Commented Jul 1, 2009 on Almost at a loss for words at 59 Carden St.
This is extremely dangerous and very troubling. This Hans guy seems to be away most of the time, seems he fired urbacon without council approval and given what was in the paper the other day about the county of Wellington's experience about escalated pricing, decisions such as this cannot be left to one person, especially this one!
Toggle Commented Jun 21, 2009 on Too few hands on the purse strings? at 59 Carden St.
The 2:0 is misleading, makes it sound like the city was a big winner. The real score is more like: Guelph minus 4,500,000, Subbor minus much more. Certainly not a big 2:0 winning streak for Guelph. Nobody was a winner in this one. Both were big loosers! It was just who lost more. Even if guelph gets costs, they won't recover all of them so the final score might be: Guelph minus 2,500,000, Subbor minus much, much more.
Toggle Commented Jun 12, 2009 on City 2, SUBBOR 0 at 59 Carden St.