Full ASUC Slates
[Within the next day or two I will have some more detailed comments to offer, as I assume will Ben and many of our more astute commenters, but for now I just wanted to get this up on the front page] This list was typed up and provided to me by Ed Martinez.
PRESIDENT
Bell, Thomas - Independent
Gabriel, Oren Benjamin - Student Action
Karasek, Lauren Suzanne - SQUELCH!
O’Leary, Pammy - Independent
Ratto, Andrew - BEARS UNITED
EXECUTIVE VP
Gupta, Vishal Kumar - Student Action
Narodick, Ben - SQUELCH!
ACADEMIC VP
Liou, Joyce - Student Action
O’Connor, John - SQUELCH!
Ratto, Andrew - BEARS UNITED
EXTERNAL VP
Chu, Jason MacArthur - Student Action
Ratto, Andrew - BEARS UNITED
Tregub, Igor - INDEPENDENT
Waste, John - SQUELCH!
STUDENT ADVOCATE
Brownstein, Aaron - SQUELCH!
Gunz, Simon - SQUELCH! Sucks
Garvin, Andrew Douglas - Independent
Ratto, Andrew - BEARS UNITED
Please let me know if there are any typos in this post. Thanks.
Comment by Andy R. — March 28, 2006 @ 9:05 pm
Hey wtf Andy, at least credit me for my work on getting you the info.
Jerk.
Comment by Edward Martinez — March 28, 2006 @ 9:13 pm
Break the ASUC Slates!
I was fully expecting that the ASUC slates would be available online somewhere by now. I would have posted them last week, but I’ve been told to keep it on the DL. Anyway, information wants to be free and all so I’m going to take advantage …
Trackback by california patriot blog — March 28, 2006 @ 9:18 pm
thanks ed!
Comment by Andy R. — March 28, 2006 @ 9:26 pm
wait, did calserve really not slate anyone for exec?
Comment by Josh — March 28, 2006 @ 10:21 pm
And really… whats the deal with BEARS UNITED. is it just a joke or a haven for AEPi boys (or both)?
Comment by Josh — March 28, 2006 @ 10:24 pm
this is a joke
Comment by cheguevara — March 28, 2006 @ 10:52 pm
Maybe we’ll need a “Not Student Action” party next year.
Comment by Beetle — March 28, 2006 @ 11:41 pm
WTF happened to CalSERVE???
Comment by Anonymous — March 29, 2006 @ 12:41 am
The african american community and the latino community don’t get along and they can never agree to a slate. Duh, this happened last year when they decided to slate a no name no body to be president. Since CS can dole out enough senate slots to keep both happy and the party together, they do, and have seemed to side step the fractious issue by not slating execs at all.
Comment by captain duh — March 29, 2006 @ 7:05 am
I hate student action, and im not a fan of calserve at all. i hate their stupid mentality, the way they act, they way they think theyre better than anyone. and now all we can do is delegitimize the government because it has lost its legitimacy as a one-party government. boycott the asuc, and im throwing my whole entire weight behind senator tregub.
Comment by cheguevara — March 29, 2006 @ 10:56 am
calserve was successful one year when they slated Kris Primm. That was a damn good election year.
Comment by RepBast1984 — March 29, 2006 @ 11:03 am
Captain Duh is quite wrong. I was involved with last year’s CS slating, and there were NO problems at all … particularly not between the Black and Latino communities. In fact, the Black and Latino communities have very good and social and working relationships on campus.
Comment by Anonymous — March 29, 2006 @ 11:08 am
yeah, Justine Lazaro was a real concesus candidate, not a compromise to keep the party together at all
Comment by Anonymous — March 29, 2006 @ 12:03 pm
I don’t understand student government here at all. Someone mind explaining this whole business of political parties and slates? As far as I understand, most other colleges’ student governments are run much like those in high school as far as elections go, without a party system.
Comment by Anonymous — March 29, 2006 @ 1:52 pm
Damn, apparently I need to change my last name from Ganz to Gunz now. Oh well, if the ASUC demands it…
Comment by Simon Gunz — March 29, 2006 @ 3:17 pm
lol. boycott the asuc but support igor. oh the irony.
Comment by Anonymous — March 29, 2006 @ 3:55 pm
I support … I can’t believe I’m about to say this …. Lauren Karasek, Ben Narodick, and Igor Tregub. I cannot support anyone for Academic VP.
Comment by BCR's Former Worst Enemy — March 29, 2006 @ 3:59 pm
Igor in my mind stands for the anti student action.
Comment by cheguevara — March 29, 2006 @ 6:15 pm
Boalt and Haas both moved up in US News rankings.
Now that’s news!
Comment by Bhanu Singh — March 29, 2006 @ 6:49 pm
see? higher student fees WORK!
Comment by Anonymous — March 29, 2006 @ 6:56 pm
BCR’s Former Worst Enemy,
is there any particular reason to support Karasek and Narodick but no one instead of O’Connor? (I understand why you would support Igor over the others.)
Comment by clueless — March 29, 2006 @ 7:27 pm
Yes … Narodick is heavily qualified - 2 time very active center. Not only active, but he admits to mistakes he has made and trys to correct them. Narodick is constantly working to help students — even though I sometimes disagree with him, I believe he has the students’ best interest at heart, and it’s not an elitist, self-preserving interest. For president, the options are bad and worse. Karasek, is a MUCH better option than anyone else on there. I think she is more open-minded to compromise, and is less-influenced by “party politics.” And with Tregub, I have a lot of respect for the work he has already done (much like I have for narodick). As far as O’Connor, et al for Academic … I don’t know them. Since I dont recognize any of those names, I cannot comment on who is and who is not qualified.
Comment by BCR's Former Worst Enemy — March 29, 2006 @ 8:11 pm
my apologies. …lol … narodick is 2-time very active senator (not center)
Comment by BCR's Former Worst Enemy — March 29, 2006 @ 8:12 pm
it is very nice. perhaps we can discuss more about this topic at
http://www.berkeleyforum.blogspot.com , by UC Berkeley Students and Scholars… Just take a look!
Comment by Omid — March 29, 2006 @ 9:17 pm
There are so many people who haven’t the faintest idea of the differnce between the parties, controversies present and recently past, and just the whole makeup of the ASUC that I think it might not be a bad idea for Calstuff to do a primer on the ASUC. Freshmen, in particular, may fall victim to this ignorance, and I for one could use a long, detailed, neutral explanation of what’s going on.
Comment by J Koo — March 29, 2006 @ 10:54 pm
Jeremy-
There is no such thing as a neutral explanation of all of this ASUC party politics stuff. Everyone here is connected to the campus and student body in some way (most of us connected intimately to student groups as well), so we all have different lenses through which we view the affairs of our student body. Even this blog cannot be neutral (as genuinely as they try), especially because of the political activities of the authors.
The best thing to do is hear as many accounts and viewpoints as possible and decide for yourself.
Comment by Eddy C — March 30, 2006 @ 1:43 am
By that standard, that makes me neutral. Too bad I don’t care enough to follow it.
Comment by Beetle — March 30, 2006 @ 2:06 am
Lord i hate piss-ant undergrads and their trendy application of post-modernist thought
Comment by captain duh — March 30, 2006 @ 5:45 am
Fine, I’ll take a skewed primer. Better than nothing.
Comment by J Koo — March 30, 2006 @ 11:05 am
Captain Duh … If you hate “piss-ant undergrads” of which, I am not one, why are you on an undergrad-run blog??
Comment by BCR's Former Worst Enemy — March 30, 2006 @ 11:26 am
I think the main reason CalServe didnt slate anyone is simple. Student Action slates the most popular people and will obviously win this election, so why bother. Im sure they slated many senators…the ones that actually make a difference…Bunch of idiots…the ASUC is simply a popularity game…sad…
Comment by Anonymous — March 30, 2006 @ 12:11 pm
But now that CalSERVE is out of the exec picture, what has that done for “third parties” and their ability to challenge SA’s power for the spots? I think it helped some and it hurt some.
1. I don’t see the Presidential election being a very close race.
2. The EVP race seems to be the most interesting dynamic so far. I think it will be close…preliminarily speaking (before campaigning has started), it seems to be a tossup.
3. AVP- I’m not informed enough to make an opinion on this one.
3. EAVP- I feel this one could be close (between Igor and Jason), or it could not be. It really depends how the campaigning pans out. We’ll see that later.
Comment by Eddy C — March 30, 2006 @ 12:49 pm
hi, im new to campus politics. someone tell me three beneficial things any of the execs did for the campus this year and show me three meaningful bills passed by senate.
also, things done by tom cordi and the asuc auxillary dont count.
Comment by new to all this — March 30, 2006 @ 6:22 pm
obviously new to all this isnt new if u’ve even heard of tom cordi…
Comment by huh... — March 30, 2006 @ 10:32 pm
Who the heck is Tom Cordi and what is the ASUC auxiliary…
/been here for 7 semesters, have testified in front of the senate, and know quite a few ASUC people
Comment by Morbo — March 30, 2006 @ 10:36 pm
You know, I just realized that comments may be held for apporval.
For the SQUELCH candidates which ones are graduating?
Comment by Beetle — March 31, 2006 @ 12:52 am
Tom Cordi is in charge of the business operations of the ASUC. He answers to the Store Operations Board and to one of the assistant/under chancelors.
The Auxiliary is the nuts and bolts of the business operations. Any surpluses from their endeavors (ie profits) goes to the Senate to spend, in addition to our mandatory student fees.
The student government has next to no influence over how the store operations is run, they pretty much signed it over to the University in 1998 with the agreement that they would be given a cut of the profits. This is one of the many reasons the ASUC is not independent, and its laughable that they claim to be.
Comment by captain duh — March 31, 2006 @ 6:16 am
The ASUC is not independent. If they were independent we would voluntarily pay money to the ASUC and they would be held accountable for that money being spent. Instead, they are given money stolen from us by the Regents and given to the ASUC.
Comment by RepBast1984 — March 31, 2006 @ 7:50 am
Every year the same ‘Who will it be?’ question comes up, based on fundamental misunderstandings of ASUC Elections.
There will be no challenges this year. Student Action will win every slot, by large margins. That’s great if other Candidates intend to have a good time fighting them, but they have no chance.
This is because there is no such thing as an ‘individual matchup.’ Student Action runs as a Slate. So Mr. Narodick is not running against Mr. Gupta. He’s running against Gupta, Chou, Liou, and Gabriel. The cross-voting between the four is, if not perfect, good enough. There has never been a candidate popular enough on his own to outweigh the combined powers of four well-chosen candidates running together, and most likely there never will.
Could Mr. Tregub win a fair fight against Mr. Chu? Possible. But that’s not what’s happening. If he seriously hopes to win he’s wasting his time…
Comment by Kevin! — March 31, 2006 @ 10:14 am
What is up with student government? Its a popularity contests, especially for Student Action’s case, where they slate freakish looking people (not all of them) who don’t know crap about anything major going on in Berkeley, CA, in US, and the world in general. Yea yea i know people say that the ASUC should focus on campus related matters but how can you be the only autonomous student government in the nation, along with having control of millions of dollars and not use that privilege to influence policy or make significant symbolic statements that fall in line with what is going on today.
Student Action should stop with the brainwashing people to run for their slate.
I’m not affiliated with any parties, but I know that when a party like student action tells homeless people to tear down non-student action flyers, or spits and smears any non-student action chalkings clearly undermines the quality of campus elections.
If things dont change, then i dont see no reason why we shouldn’t all BOYCOTT THE ASUC!
Comment by Anonymous — March 31, 2006 @ 1:27 pm
yea..speaking about student action and their conservative pals, you fired up right wing people at berkeley, SHUT UP! You have no reason to be complaining about “lefties” taking over the campus and not allowing you to express your conservative speech. Bush is in power, the republicans are in power, the supreme court is filled with conservative minds. What else can you ask for?
Geez, just admit that you people are in power, and stop taking on controversial position that will divide the campus even more than it already is.
fyi - i voted for bush, I am a republican, but I value free speech from both sides of the spectrum…the real american way!
Comment by Infamous Anonymous — March 31, 2006 @ 1:36 pm
Who is InfAnon talking to?
To the anonymous above that, having loads of money at their disposal is not a “privilege,” it’s a responsibility. It’s simply not part of their job to use the money for those purposes.
Comment by Beetle — March 31, 2006 @ 3:04 pm
I have to admit, it was a lot more fun to run as a Squelch candidate when there were two serious candidates to annoy and ridicule. With just one real slate, it’ll be a lot less fun.
Comment by Simon Gunz — March 31, 2006 @ 10:13 pm
Simon,
You could always annoy and ridicule Andy. I’m sure he’ll get a kick out of it. Direct your ridicule to his executive candidate persona, of course. You can’t ridicule his senate candidate persona, because party infighting would be a very (insert whichever political party you want) thing to do. Not very characteristic of SQUELCH.
Comment by Eddy C — April 1, 2006 @ 12:18 am
I was just thinking about something… all of the Presidential candidates are Greeks.
I’m not going to say here whether or not I have any preference of my own among them… but I think this is interesting to think about. Everyone is talking about an Oren Gabriel landslide… and I’m not saying whether I think this will be the case or not… but having a candidate field with only Greeks could have an interesting impact on splitting up the Greek vote. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. But in the EVP and EAVP race, I can see traditional CalSERVE supporters voting for the non-SA candidate… but in the presidential race, they have no alternative to the institutionalization of the Greek community in ASUC politics, and they might vote for nobody for President. I’m only speculating, and maybe they do actually have a clear choice… they could be anybody-but-SA or they could just not care because nobody running represents their interests in their mind. But this race could easily be determined by the Greek community and freshmen in the dorms alone…
Then again, maybe all my musing is meaningless and Oren will wipe the field clean even with competition within his own base. I just thought it might be interesting to point out in case nobody thought about it. I’m more just bringing it up to see what folks think about this…
Comment by Jason O. — April 1, 2006 @ 4:05 am
Haha what I’m REALLY wondering is who is getting Manny’s endorsement for President…
Comment by Eddy C — April 1, 2006 @ 1:24 pm
…(Well not really but its still funny)
Comment by Eddy C — April 1, 2006 @ 1:25 pm
I just wanted to dispel some misconceptions that the student government has no influence in our commercial operations. The Store Operations Board is composed of mostly students and a lot of the improvements to the student union have been initiated by executive officers or even senators. All you have to do is look at recent ASUC history and see how executive officers have helped make some of these improvements. Granted, some of these can’t be done in a year and must be passed on to the next administration. The Gelateria Naia lounge concept is one such idea that was begun by an executive office. The sad thing is that once something is common, it is no longer original or considered an accomplishment by the student government. That is the case with the current Bears Lair Pub and will be the case in the future with Gelateria Naia.
Comment by Manny — April 2, 2006 @ 4:04 am
the Mario Party will be the new major political party in the ASUC. All this talk about the other parties is futile. Just stay tuned and you will be shocked!
WAAAAAAAA!
Comment by voter — April 2, 2006 @ 3:42 pm
Manny don’t be retarded. That the chancellor lets you all play government and talk at the SOB meetings doens’t mean you’re independent, or have ANY influence over how the store ops is run, which is what I actually said. The chancellor still has a god clause in every agreement the ASUC has ever made with the University and when it comes to who runs things its the Auxiliary who by contract and design answers to the University.
Comment by captain duh — April 3, 2006 @ 6:47 am
a gelato bar. gawsh, how exciting. what a fucking achievement! god forbid that the student govt shouldnt get credit for that
me, i take a big picture view, and i credit the student governent with the uc administration’s 100 year record of taking more and more control and $ from students while they just fork it on over with whatever hand they arent using to stroke the chancellor.
this takes the form of levying ever increasing educational and student fees, but also in their seizure and gradual control of student initiated programs and assets, activities, and power. everything from the OSL and the committee on student conduct, to whether some stupid frat wieners can party in the street, to control of the multi-multi-multi million dollar athletic program.
meanwhile we’re supposed to take pride in a bunch of simpering wieners fighting over crumbs and falling over themselves to see who can suck the chancellors penis the hardest. oh, and making sure that “students” get the “credit” for the gelato bar.
pathetic. if you knew your own history, you wouldnt want to take credit for it.
Comment by mano — April 3, 2006 @ 3:04 pm
Damn those ASUC administrations from many decades ago that let intercollegiate athletics get away from the ASUC and into the hands of the University!!!
Comment by PBE — April 3, 2006 @ 4:05 pm
Jason-
I don’t know if the presidential candidates’ greek affiliation makes as much of a difference as youre giving weight to it, but I will say this: not all “greek” is the same. Unless Taz Patel wants to come back and run again, I dont think there are any candidates that can claim to have been as involved in the greek system as Lauren Karasek. But shes also been very CalSERVE-friendly about it because she always advocated from multicultural greeks too. I have personally heard members of CalSERVE’s leadership say that Lauren Karasek is what the greek system should aspire too. I also personally know the Lauren got in a fight with Marcia Riley in front of the Committee on Student Affairs because Marcia called multicultural greeks a “problem.” I dont think voters need to feel alienated by Lauren’s greek affiliation (or really by anyones, but especially hers).
Comment by anon — April 3, 2006 @ 4:53 pm
pammy oleary for president. i like her morals and she is exactly what sorority sisters should aspire to be. no comment on the other (greek) candidates.
Comment by anonymouse — April 3, 2006 @ 6:19 pm
pbe: not just intercollegiate athletics. music. drama. debating. the code of conduct. registration and student groups. and tons more. millions of dollars and self respect, down the drain.
and now they can raise student fees 100% over 5 yrs without even so much as an asuc organized protest. but hey, at least we have gelato on lower sproul, right? getting rid of that pesky dignity? done!
Comment by mano — April 3, 2006 @ 6:50 pm
I guess that’s what I’m saying… normally the SA candidate garners virtually all the Greek support. This time, unless Lauren is seen as nothing more than a typical Squelch! candidate and a graduating senior who isn’t running seriously, she could garner a good bit of the CS vote, as you argued, as well as a good bit of the Greek vote… Andy and Tom will transfer to Oren or Lauren after the first and second rounds, and who knows–we could have ourselves a race? I’m not going to put out my personal feelings on the race, but all I’m saying is it could be more of a campaign than people think… keyword: COULD
Comment by Jason O. — April 3, 2006 @ 10:44 pm
And I’m not sure where Pammy would fit in, I feel that Pammy and Lauren would compete for the same group of votes, but the stronger candidate would gain transfers from the weaker of the two. I could be wrong, but I get the sense that Lauren is more revered by the Greek community, but that there might be some people frustrated? I’m not quite sure what went down during the Panhellenic elec…tions, so maybe someone can chime in more specifically about this…
Comment by Jason O. — April 3, 2006 @ 10:48 pm
Mano, if we’re using slogans and catchphrases, make sure that you don’t forget to include such gems like, “SERVE-ing up the students to the University since 1984″ or “Students for Progressing towards a more powerful University”.
I realize that these may not have the same cachet as the overDONE flyers, but the student government autonomy has been in long decline (according to your definition) far before SA came to power.
Comment by PBE — April 4, 2006 @ 12:50 am
PBE what makes you think i give calSERVE a pass on that issue? it is just as guilty as SA on this. nothing is stopping CS from doing organizing and activism on important issues outside the senate. no, the only thing standing between CS and relevance to students is CS. and if CS folk are reading this, no, CS doesnt get to take credit for the activism and organizing of its constituents.
CS has a very interesting and neat history that, unfortunately, most current CS seem to have zero real appreciation of. yes, CS “came out of” the anti-apartheid movement but it was an adhoc power grab that was done because the movement was strong, and it would be useful to have the ASUC, so since we could, we did. CS was the expression of a tangible movement on campus. these days, it seems CS is mostly in it just to win elections. and to the extent that CS now operates as little more than a junior league political machine churning out future-wanna-be lobbyists, consultants, and assorted miserable democrats — it has lost touch with its raison d’etre (tangible political activism and real student mobilization) it offers a side of irony to go with the wiener spectacle it dished up by the greater cult of the ASUC.
Comment by mano — April 4, 2006 @ 1:29 am
young democrats vs. young republicans: http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/123050.php
Comment by wiener spectacle — April 4, 2006 @ 11:32 am
wiener spectacle… what the hell is that and what does it have to with young dems/reps?
Comment by Jason O. — April 4, 2006 @ 11:59 am
Sorry. It’s a tenuous connection, but the described incident was a camp for ’student leaders’ in high school and junior high, which is typically the type of student who runs for school president, and then does the same at college and then go into real government. You know how 80% of students really don’t follow student politics at all? It was also what I just bumped into on the internet.
Here is a link of angry french students. even Berkeley was nothing like that in the 70s except a few key incidents. Give us our pensions.
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=france+riot&c=news_photos
Comment by wiener spectacle — April 4, 2006 @ 12:43 pm
mano is correct. I’d only add that the lack of organization and slate also demonstrates that the present calserve signatories and “leaders” are highly incompetant.
Comment by V — April 4, 2006 @ 1:26 pm
Mano, for once, I am in total agreement with you.
The sky can now fall.
Comment by PBE — April 4, 2006 @ 1:29 pm
does anyone ever notice that CalSERVE’s latina candidate is always really hot?
Comment by ANON — April 4, 2006 @ 2:22 pm
just like with any hazing process, those stupid little preteens were bending over because they wanted in with the older kids. in 4 years, it will be them sodomizing the younger generation. its the same thing at cal, except the administration/regents/statelegislature is the older kids with the broom and the power that the stupid student govt. types want a part of.
thats a nice visual image for you, a 13 year old kid with a broomstick stuck in their rectum. think of that, next time president manny or his equivalent, beaming with what is supposed to pass for pride, runs through the list of asuc acccomplishments. a gelato bar? what else? oh yeah, online elections….. kinda. higher fees? or isnt that an “accomplishment”? feel free to help me out here.
brooming? done.
Comment by mano — April 4, 2006 @ 3:52 pm
it is worthwhile to point out that the interest and intensity of student government and student groups at Berkeley is pretty high. There are barely no other campuses with political parties, and usually groups have five members at meetings who can’t organize anything.
Comment by sim — April 4, 2006 @ 6:25 pm
Jason-
What went down during Penhallenic elections is that the system is stupid. There are 12 people in the room instead of having everyone in sororities vote. Everyone knows that if there was a popular vote Lauren would have won (that is if they even know what panhellenic is or that Lauren ran). But the current system lets a lot of personal stuff come into the decision (and Lauren’s personal life was a major factor) and lets the current execs have way too much influence. Dont forget that Lauren was on one of the most divided panhellenics ever and she stood by Christina Zhao when the rest of panhellenic basically tried to plan a coup. And now the new panhellenic is increasing fees so I guess thats a shame.
Comment by anon — April 4, 2006 @ 7:02 pm
I would have to agree with Mano. but lets not forget that there are a couple of activists who get fooled into thinking that the ASUC is a resource that could be better used than it is. Of course, these activists either don’t win because they are “too liberal/”limited”" or, they win and …. I will end here. EITHER WAY, THESE PEOPLE HAVE ISSUES WITH CalSERVE AS WELL!!!
Comment by BCR's Former Worst Enemy — April 4, 2006 @ 7:39 pm
Will the leftists who have issues with CalSERVE please be more explicit?
Not too long ago, CalSERVE was criticized for being too radical, uncompromising, and community-based. Now it is criticized for being too inside and electorally focused.
It seems they can’t win.
I’m still voting for them gladly.
Comment by Jim Fung — April 4, 2006 @ 9:39 pm
Oh wow, this is sooo what I wanted to come back from Spring Break to find [insert obvious sarcastic tone here].
Friendly reminder to everyone: all of the presidential candidates are friends to some degree, and not in a just an on-facebook kind of way. Pammy and I have occassionally hosted Bollywood film festivals at my apartment, Andy and I are, well, Andy and I, Tom was President of TKE while I was on Panhellenic and we fought the evil empire together, and Oren and I, well, I didn’t wanna have to be the one to tell y’all this, but sometimes we cuddle. So while we’re all down with healthy competition (obviously) and I’m sure appreciate everyone’s support, I doubt any of us are happy to see conjectures that basically amount to “who is more Greek?” We’re all Greek, it’s chill, it’s neither a merit badge nor something to be threatened by, I promise. (Jason, I do understand where you’re coming from with the musing about such things, we’re chill too.)
Marcia Riley and I did disagree over her characterization of multicultural and culturally-based Greeks while in a discussion with the Committee on Student Affairs, but I would veer away from classifying it as a “fight.”
As far as Panhellenic elections are concerned, I don’t even know exactly what happened there because the proceedings of said elections are confidential (but I do know that there are 13, not 12, delegates). Nonetheless, I knew the rules that I was playing by before I signed up for the game, just like any other candidate, and I can respect the results. One can easily argue that the Panhellenic that I served on was in a position to be under far more stress than other Panhellenics before it, and that’s something that should be taken into account when one looks back on the 2005 Panhell who, in the overall analysis, I think did a damn good job and I respect everyone who was on it. As far as fee increases are concerned, it is correct to assert that I am vehemently not a fan, but I made my view known through the proper channels in the community, and other individuals/chapters certainly have that opportunity. The long and short of it is, I’d really appreciate it if we didn’t have to bring up an election that happened several months ago that I spent more than a couple days crying over and whose proceedings should be far less than public.
Oh God, I’ve fallen off the Calstuff comment wagon…
Comment by Lauren Karasek — April 4, 2006 @ 10:26 pm
haha jim. id never criticize them for being too radical. you cant please everyone, but thats not the point. your “cant win” point exemplifies why calserve has made a transistion to suckiness. when you have a good idea of your own identity, it doesnt matter what other people say about you. having an identity, pride and sense of self allows an organization to prioritize being true to itself, instead of worrying about what others are saying.
anyway, lets look at calserve. for the sheer amount of energy that goes into the calserve party and electioneering, there is very little, shall we say, “value-added” for the constituency (the “base” or “community” or whatever you want to call it). i, as a member of “the community”, am asked to help elect, push this organization, put in time and effort and what not, and what do i get in return? sure, i might get parties and friends and such, and free pizza and these social things are nice, but my _political_ position on the campus is not enhanced in the least bit by the supposed “alliances” i am making with other progressive groups. membership in calserve is an input only process. it doesnt translate into anyting tangible in terms of meaningful political power on campus. thats a big problem.
anyway, calserve was strong, once, and membership meant something. it was strong because it was really a coherently articulated single-issue coalition, and it had a shrewd, no bullshit approach to the asuc (see above - knowing yourself). the attitude toward the asuc was “the asuc is just a resource, a tool, and we are going to take it over and use it to further our goal (divestment from SA)”. todays crop seems more bent on “the asuc is a vibrant political entity of its own that we are invested in, lets be savvy and nuanced and play the game as much as possible”. calserve’s original identity was that it was the shadow of a real movement, it was independent of the ASUC. in other words, it had its own, real, independent identity. now, calserve is basically just part of the whole asuc “thing”.
anyway, i know plenty of folks in calserve and i like them. but im generalizing here. both calserve and the asuc in general NEED to take a long hard look in the mirror, a long hard zoolander look, and ask, who am i? some serious self reflection is in order, because no matter how you group the student body, there is no sense of any identity or pride, theres just a gigantic indiginified mess of wieners.
anyway, if i ever had a posse of folks the size and energy of calserve, id direct the energy into something real. that energy could easily turn this campus upside down, and both the chancellor and the asuc would be begging for mercy by the end of a semester. unfortunately, berkeley students are soft boiled little wieners, all of them, so its unlikely that things will change soon.
Comment by mano — April 4, 2006 @ 10:26 pm
If you define “greek” as superbly nifty and one who comes to class even when there are boring guest lecturers, then trust me Lauren is very greek. No, better said- hella greek.
Comment by Eddy C — April 5, 2006 @ 2:28 am
Id vote for Lauren…
Id get my friends to vote for her too!!
Comment by Brandon Smith — April 6, 2006 @ 9:36 am
vote for Pammy O’Leary
Comment by RepBast1984 — April 6, 2006 @ 11:49 am
IGOR AND DANIEL FRANKENSTEIN JR. (WHAT’S HIS NAME?) SHOULD HAVE RUN ON THE SAME SLATE. WHO WOULDN’T VOTE FOR IGOR AND FRANKENSTEIN? SHIT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AWESOME.
on a serious note, everyone should vote for igor. i know my mom is.
Comment by anonyfag! — April 6, 2006 @ 3:07 pm
mano, it’s student government, the whole point is getting free pizza and cheap sex. don’t confuse this for something that actually matters.
Comment by chet, the friendly CEO — April 6, 2006 @ 3:14 pm
PS we all know that you’re a priviliged whiteboy, so cut the crap with being a member of the calserve “community”. you fit right in with the duke lax team.
Comment by chet, the friendly CEO — April 6, 2006 @ 3:17 pm
chet,
blah blah feeding tube blah blah..
love, mano
Comment by grand ayatollah anonymous — April 6, 2006 @ 5:30 pm
why didn’t igor run with daniel frankenstein’s bro? that would’ve been awesome:
frankenstein-igor 2006
oh well.
(on a serious note, everyone should vote for igor; he’s ridiculously qualified).
Comment by anonyfag! — April 7, 2006 @ 8:54 am
qualified people dont quit.
Comment by Anonymous — April 7, 2006 @ 10:34 am
normally they dont quit, but when you realize that you have been used how else are you going to respond. SA claims they are about putting students first, but if they were why havent they really accomplished anything significant this year and why is their philosophy only getting their people elected. its time that the student government actually serve the students and not their own interests.
Comment by anon — April 7, 2006 @ 12:24 pm
Wang quit SA, but remained in the senate. So yes, there are other ways to respond.
Comment by Beetle — April 7, 2006 @ 12:51 pm
yeah but Wangs decision was kind of disengenuous. from what i remember from that piece igor wrote, his departure was out of frustration over the politics and because he wanted to serve the student body in other ways, like through the city.
Comment by anon — April 7, 2006 @ 1:07 pm
translation: igor quit because the people in power were a bunch of douchebags who didn’t nominate him because he was too “nerdy” looking. Never mind that Igor was one of the top vote-getters in the senate election. Igor is my friend and SA will have hell to pay for hurting a friend of many people.
SA said the same thing about Billy Wang, that they liked him as a senator because he was fobby looking but they didn’t want to promote him.
I’m tired of Student Action’s lies and their bullshit. Apparently representing all students means trying to find good looking people to run and win and then implement questionable policy. Suddenly some girl who looks nice in a miniskirt as a way to get votes is more important than someone who really amde a difference in the community like Billy and Igor. I’ve supported them for too long. Now it’s time for Student Action to crumble, and I wish CalSERVE would actually run an executive slate to do it.
Comment by Anonymous Poster — April 7, 2006 @ 6:03 pm
Anyone supporting SA is a f’n tool. There, I said it.
Comment by cw — April 8, 2006 @ 12:59 am
Chris, thanks for the very well thought-out explanation of your views.
Lauren, you’ve piqued my interest implying that you like Bollywood.
… Now of course I don’t think that alone would be a reason to vote for somebody for an important position like ASUC President, but it certainly helps that you have good movie taste, given positive comments people have made here about your qualifications and history.
Igor Tregub has a very activist-y looking website for External VP. I don’t know him, so I’m not sure if that’s just posturing, but it does help that he was appointed to the Berkeley Labor Commission by Dona Spring.
I wonder why the Daily Cal hasn’t done a story asking CalSERVE why they are not running an executive slate this year?
Those are my comments for now.
Comment by Jim Fung — April 8, 2006 @ 2:07 am
Igor was not picked by SA becuase he has not done much all year. He set up a meeting with the Mayor to apologize for his ridiculous letter over the summer. A letter in which he shamelessly emphasized his senate platform and tied it in to a shooting of a community member.
His fundraisers for relief efforts cost more money to put on than they raised. What were they? Simple PR events. They were shameless publicity stunts as he did events that were bad but events that would put his name on the paper.
Igor is nice but he is not effective in anything he does. Furthermore, he lists accomplishments that he has had nothing to do with.
Comment by voter — April 8, 2006 @ 11:41 am
So let me guess this straight. Jason and Joyce did more than Igor thsi year. NO ONE KNOWS WHO THE HELL THEY ARE! And if you want an Asian, there’s Ki-Hong Li. Jesus I hate student action.
Comment by Anonymous Poster — April 8, 2006 @ 2:00 pm
Igor has done plenty to help students this year. Igor was the strongest supporter of online voting while he was in the Senate. If you check out the bills on the poor ASUC website, Igor authored more then his fair share. After he resigned as a Senator, he continued his work to keep improve Northside and helped reach a deal with Top Dog. As far as fundraisers go the ones I know of were successful and had nothing to do with PR.
Igor was one of (if not the single) hardest working and most dedicated Senators who did his best to represent students.
Comment by Chris Page — April 8, 2006 @ 5:41 pm
I find it ironic that “voter”, who ever that person is, claims that igor has really done nothing this year. He was one of the hardest working Senators and is committed to serving students. This is unlike certain ASUC officials who have really not accomplished anything this year and are really out to promote themselves.
Comment by anon — April 8, 2006 @ 6:00 pm
Do you really think people here are dumb enough not see it when one side tries shameless to slander their opponent behind the veil of anonymity?
Yes I am partisan. I’m in Igor’s camp and thats why I’m speaking out to defend him. At least I’m making this much clear, unlike a certain commenter above.
Comment by Anonymous — April 9, 2006 @ 2:40 am
one party government…..did we learn anything from history? what makes us any different from communist goverments when there’s only one real poltical party around?
Comment by Anonymous — April 9, 2006 @ 4:46 pm
I can think of a few minor differences.
Comment by Beetle — April 9, 2006 @ 4:56 pm
maybe the fact that calserve isn’t on the ballot because they CHOSE not to nominate anyone? I guess all those other parties in Russia chose not to run anyone either?
Comment by chet, the friendly CEO — April 9, 2006 @ 6:01 pm
Whoever is head of CalServe must be the dumbest person since Terry McCauliffe. Josie Alvarez would have smashed Oren Gabriel through the ground.
Comment by Anonymous Poster — April 9, 2006 @ 6:41 pm
“Igor was not picked by SA because he has not done much all year.” Yeah, I think its pretty funny how the opposition justs wants to slander Tregub. That must mean that Igor is truly a threat to the SA candidate. Excellent.
Comment by Anonymous — April 9, 2006 @ 11:48 pm
http://www.dailycal.org/sharticle.php?id=21785
I’m very excited by CalSERVE’s justification for why it’s not running an executive slate. If it leads to better coalition-building independent of the ASUC, it will totally be worth it. mano, looks like you wrote them off too quickly as being too ASUC-centric.
Having said that, I think CalSERVE should still endorse candidates in the executive races. I need some signals for who to vote for!
Comment by Jim Fung — April 10, 2006 @ 1:57 am
can “Jim Fung” possibly be a real person? His comments are filled with the naivety of a 6 year old.
Comment by grand ayatollah anonymous — April 10, 2006 @ 4:17 am
Jim Fung, are you seriously so party oriented that you rely on a party to tell you who to vote for? How about some ground level research, which is what I did in supporting Igor and Pammy O’Leary.
And do you believe everything a party says? CalSERVE can’t build a strong coalition without without running candidates; it makes them look like they’ve given up completely. And believe me I support CalSERVE as the definite alternative to the SA monarchy.
Comment by RepBast1984 — April 10, 2006 @ 7:56 am
Anyone that’s a threat to SA is my friend
Comment by ANONY — April 10, 2006 @ 7:59 am
ANONY, you must not have many friends as it doesn’t seem like there are too many ‘threats’ to SA this year.
Comment by PBE — April 10, 2006 @ 2:28 pm
Your logic is backwards. I have friends but those who are a threat to SA are also my friends.
If threat to SA —> my friend
is not the same as
my friend —> threat to SA
Comment by ANONY — April 10, 2006 @ 2:33 pm
Considering I’m like the only person who doesn’t post here anonymously, that’s rich, “grand ayatollah.”
My email is jfung79@berkeley.edu
I rely on parties to help me decide who to vote for, yes. Unlike most of you, I am not an ASUC insider who knows everyone already and knows who to believe. On state propositions, don’t tell me it doesn’t help you to see who has endorsed “Yes” or “No.”
Comment by Jim Fung — April 10, 2006 @ 4:25 pm
I don’t care who endorses what propositions, and if I do care I still frickin’ read up on the props before I vote for them.
Student Action has done the inevitable: they’re tryign to create a monarchy.
Comment by RepBast1984 — April 10, 2006 @ 7:42 pm
Does anyone care about the fact that Igor QUIT SENATE because SA didn’t slate him. Isn’t that a major signal that Igor is only loyal to his duties when he’s getting something out of it.
I know for a fact that Igor not only quit SA, but QUIT SENATE (abandoning his duties) because Student Action did not slate him for an executive position. He even submitted a convoluted Daily Cal op-ed “confessing” this!:http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=20910
I don’t think that public servants should be so fickle to abandon their duties on a whim and then decide to run for an even higher office. It was Igor’s right to quit senate, but he should not come crawling back to the student body for an other elected seat of even more importance.
Comment by Emerson — April 10, 2006 @ 10:05 pm
igor probably shouldn’t have quit. but i don’t blame him for doing it. he was the most active senator, and even though some of his projects were unsuccessful, at least he had projects, which is more than i can say about most senators.
but i don’t think he quit because he wasn’t getting something out of it. He quit because SA was using him, plain and simple, and that had to be really upsetting and jaded on the way the politics were playing out. now that he’s had a chance to reflect, he seems to still be interested in helping the students. you can’t blame him for that.
Comment by new to all this — April 11, 2006 @ 12:06 am
dude SA doesn’t use anybody, speaking as someone who’s actually inside the party (haha ben, you can prolly figure who i am by tracking the ip huh - and like my intials can’t make it more obvious). i don’t know why people keep on saying the same ole crap like that when it’s unfounded, speculative, and dumb. igor’s a great guy, and i know that, since i’ve served with him on senate the entire semester last fall until he himself withdrew from senate the first week of school this semester.
HOWEVER, although i think him a great guy, i don’t think that it was the best option for him to step down from senate like that and instead choose to build up his political base and concoct his EAVP qualifications by serving in commissions and what not. is that not personal interest/gain being prioritized over students’ interests? now Ben knows that i’m not the one to put someone down, and i’m not in any way intending to do so, but i’m just trying to lay down the facts that some groups of people are badly misconstruing. I mean I wish the best for Igor, but hasn’t he had his chance of serving students? and did he not choose to turn that opportunity down when he quit senate? what’s the guarantee that he won’t do that again as EAVP? with Jason Chu, he’s coming in with even more passion and desire to serving the students, addressing their issues, and expanding the office beyond the average student’s perception of the office as a fees office. Just because he is/was not a senator in no way makes him less qualified or able in effectively being EAVP. look at sharon han and the work she’s done. she got so much crap last year for being a newbie and being a possible crappy EAVP, but damn, look at what she’s did this year compared to all the EAVPs put together before her. most senators and asuc folks can testify to this.
yes, you might not have any guarantee that jason will do as good of a job as EAVP as past EAVPs but we do know that one EAVP candidate possibly has his own agenda at heart.
lastly, SA is not on some mission to monopolize or take over the asuc. its only concern is bringing students from amongst the campus community who have a specific agenda and passion for serving their communities and students. that’s why it has no specific mission statement. its goal is bringing to the table real concerns, issues, and projects that our students have and want to address. i love calserve, i love sa and it’s sad to see groups of people tearing down these kinds of groups because they are taking the initiative in trying to cater to all the voices on campus. (don’t worry, no one’s paying me anything to say all this. i quota’d and got into senate on my own as an independent from my community.)
anyway, i just forgot that calstuff was so fun to read during election time. eh, just dropped by since it’s been a year that i last read the blogs. keep it up ben and andy! lates! =D
Comment by DK — April 11, 2006 @ 1:47 am
I know for a fact that Student Action uses people. Student Action used me. They only called me up during campaigning season because they were too busy dicking around with their positions of power to care about the people who get them places. One of my friends, who was a very avid campaigner and a devoted bill tracker had to wait a year before he was offered the Senate Aide position. The year before, a certain politician lied to him and told him that he was going to become senate aide. The most qualified person was certainly not selected. I campaigned for years with SA and each year,t hey forgot about me after they took office. Then they called me up because I had some kind of important influence on them to camapign but never more. They’re opportunists.
I also talked a lot with Billy Wang and Igor. And they were both the hardest working senators. Which ones get chosen for the position they aspired? Not the hardest working senators. Student Action and their supporters were saying Billy was too “creepy” yet he was the most respected senator in the Asian community. Igor was too “nerdy” to win an executive race yet he was one of the top vote grabbers in the senate election.
Let Jason run. Student Action simply needed dorm contacts this year because they have no RA support. Manny was the center of RA unity last year and it was more effective getting all the RA’s and dorms to support him. In doing this, they sacrificed the strongest student action senator and they will pay dearly.
Comment by Anonymous — April 11, 2006 @ 7:10 am
A person does not need the almighty title of ASUC offical to serve students.
Comment by Chris Page — April 11, 2006 @ 8:35 am
Then why would SA nominate someone in direct blood line succession to his elder to be President? This looks fishy. Why didn’t SA nominate an Asian to be President.
Comment by Antidisestablishmentarianism — April 11, 2006 @ 1:05 pm
any threat to SA will only make it stronger.
thats why ben is calling himself a speedbump. We all know hes going to give it everything he has in his quest for that illusive exec office - but he doesnt want to appear as a threat in order to fool SA into a comfort zone.
There is no comfort zone. Ever.
Comment by Anonymous — April 11, 2006 @ 2:47 pm
student action does use people. but then again, doesn’t everyone? but i remember what happened to igor and billy….
Comment by Anonymous — April 11, 2006 @ 2:49 pm
Yeah, CalSERVE uses people too. They used Kris Primm for example. But at least they have integrity. Student Action is worse than the dirt under my shoes. When you’ve seen the regime that had the most corrupt officials ever, you can never go back.
Comment by Anonymity — April 11, 2006 @ 3:41 pm
As a personal friend of Igor’s, I hope that I may be able to shed some light into his resignation and decision to run again. I may be straining our friendship, as Igor has not given me permission to write this. Yet, upon seeing some of the criticism (of course, very thoughtful and constructive criticism) leveled against him, I do feel the compellation to respond in my position as a friend.
Ever since I met him, he struck me as one of the most un-SA SA senators. Even when he had his disagreements with members of other parties, he had a lot of friends in communities that traditionally aren’t represented by SA and commanded much respect among them.
The reason he commanded so much respect is that he could see behind the box that a party - any party - can sometimes built. He told me that he first considered an independent bid, and chose APPLE, when his mentor, Misha, a former independent senator banded with SA to run for president. I was at one of his first Senate meetings, at which a coalition of Latino groups was arguing for funding to put on a community event. He stood up and lucidly said that he agrees that, on the basis of their lack of representation in the ASUC and at Cal, they indeed deserve more money than SA was willing to give them. He received sooooo much heat for this from SA. I remember him frustrated, but ready to still work with communities in other ways. He invited then-EAVP Liz Hall (from CalSERVE) to a student fee town hall that he organized. I can’t think of any other SA senator who would do that.
What he was hopeful is that, if he runs again for Senate and wins, he would possess more leverage to reform the party from the inside, so that it begins to provide tangible benefits for ALL students as it claims to do. He was well on his way to doing that, as he enjoyed much respect among the new senators. After DK’s (who presumably is David Kim) comment came out, he told me that he was one of the people who at first convinced David to rejoin SA and promised him that he will work hard to create a set of values that would guide the party.
This was all cricumvented by the party leadership. Though he continued to be on good terms with them and never talked smack about them to me, I remember his frustration, his anger that they would yell at him for such things as making sure Diversity Week has an equal representation of 3 SA’ers, 3 CS’ers, and 3 independents rather than all 9 senators working on it from SA. He sucked up whatever pain inner-party politics was dealing to him and took it well. He worked his butt off that semester. Yes, he made mistakes, as any human being and public official does, but, by and large his projects were successful and done from the heart. He was less effective than he wished to be because different offices with which he wanted to work with didn’t necessarily want to work with him (case in point, according to him, would be the Academic Bill of Rights, and the AAVP’s office’s tradition of returning emails a month late and only after much coaxing).
He resigned because, ultimately, he felt that he was not in a position to change the party; the influence the leadership was providing was just too strong. He didn’t want to leave SA (though by that time he had little in common with it except the name) out of respect for his fellow senators. He took his projects with him and finished two of them (Top Dog business hours preservation on the Northside and the first ever co-op-ASUC town-hall) as an outsider to the ASUC. The experience surrounding and following the resignation was traumatic, but he wanted to get back in the fold of serving students as soon as possible. That is the ONLY reason he applied for a city commission, and I know that for a fact. He had told me at the time that he was done with ASUC politics.
So why is he running again? I and many others of his supporters take full responsiblity for that. We asked him to run. There are people, including people in the external office itself, who felt angry at the way SA had played politics this year and would not work there again if they were to have the same experience in the future. They were excited about Igor’s potential candidacy. We all felt that he was the most qualified candidate. And when he found out that CalSERVE was not running this year, we were concerned that, just as this year, the door won’t be open to underrepresented communities were he not to run.
Igor decided to run because he ultimately felt that it was the right thing to do. His decision to do so was made well after he completed his Northside projects and got on the city commission (something that members of SA may not realize). I recall him calling me 2 days before filing deadline and still telling me he was struggling with the decision.
He could only imagine what he was getting himself into, this after an already difficult semester of resigning from something he loved dearly and then trying to find other avenues of service. He had already scheduled a Katrina alternative spring break to Mississippi and insisted on fulfilling that responsibility, which set his campaign back by a week. He knew that, as an independent, he didn’t have any of the resources SA did except his name. And he knew that his name would be muddied up all over the blogs, as has been the case. He knew that and yet, he felt that these are sacrifices he was willing to make to ensure that ALL students are truly represented in office next year. The fact that he is still out there every day smiling like nothing has happened after a semester that could give a heart attack to anyone else boggles my mind. But Igor is beholden to only one agenda, and that is the agenda of serving students.
I’m sorry that this post is so long, but I felt the record had to be set straight. I’m sorry, Igor, that I posted this without your permission, but I feel that people should know the generous human being that I do.
Comment by a friend of igor's — April 11, 2006 @ 7:36 pm
Dear God! Lauren Karasek is running for ASUC president?! God help us all if she wins! Talk about a girl who has a double standard set for her versus the rest of the world!
Comment by Anonymous — April 11, 2006 @ 9:03 pm
Hey you better be careful talking about Lauren that way. I don’t care who you feel is more qualified to be ASUC President… you’re passing judgment on her as a human being, and your comments show that you don’t know her at all.
Comment by Jason O. — April 11, 2006 @ 10:01 pm
Anonymous please expand… what do you mean about lauren?
Comment by RepBast1984 — April 12, 2006 @ 6:31 am
i think this should prove to be a very “fun” election year this year
Comment by lucky bob — April 12, 2006 @ 2:44 pm
“a friend of igors”:
dont give yourself so much credit in this process. you and the external cronies had very little to do with igor running. SA and Igor know why he’s running - and for the EAVP office in particular. Just ask Igor.
blind ambition goes a long way.
Comment by political opportunist — April 12, 2006 @ 8:48 pm
He could have easily quit the party. He didnt have to quit service to students.
Comment by political opportunist — April 12, 2006 @ 9:13 pm
maybe igor isnt the “political opportunist” but the person who is writing the comments above.
Comment by anonymous — April 12, 2006 @ 9:40 pm
political opportunist,
Igor didn’t quit seving students. He left a medium that was hindering his effectiveness.
Comment by Edward Martinez — April 13, 2006 @ 12:17 am
Igor didn’t quit his service to students, what type of logic are you using? The only way to serve student is through the Senate? And to the issue that “he could have quit the party,” the point is moot; Igor has a clear set of convictions that guide him to leave a body when he feels he cannot be effective. He continued to engage in public service (his site says he serves on the campus Labor Commission, and if you even read your email, you undoubtedly got his emails about working on the Northside Business Taskforce (which he has been working on even when people didn’t want him to before AND after quitting), funding student groups, et.al. I don’t think I’ve seen one credible hit on Igor besides trying to say that his quitting Senate makes him ineligible for the office of EAVP. That’s ridiculous.
In fairness, I don’t at all dislike Igor’s competition, I have looked at the platforms of both candidates and realize that, damn, Igor quit the ASUC and then felt the need to stage a come back. He must REALLY has priorities and passion for that particular post and has clear things he wants to do. You’ve got to AT LEAST respect that passion.
I’m clearly voting for Igor, Oren, and Vishal regardless of talk about how many votes Oren and Vishal already have as compared to Igor. If one really considers the platforms and prior experiences of these three candidates, one would vote for them. Igor not only talks about wanting to be EAVP, he has showed us that he is actually aware of the multitude of issues the EAVP has to deal with, such as the fee hikes, such as crime, such as encouraging students to engage in civic duty at the national through city realms. Isn’t he ON the Berkeley Commission on Labor?
Anyhow, that is that.
Comment by Anonymous — April 13, 2006 @ 12:50 am
NEWS FLASH: Most of Igor’s projects failed. In fact, I cannot think of any that reached completion besids the Tsunami Relief coalition which he had MASSIVE help of other senators for.
And does any one remember that INCREDIBLY ignorant letter that he wrote to the mayor claiming that the death of that woman on College and Dwight, close to Newman Hall. “Service not politics,” Igor loaded his three campaign issues into that letter and made the claim that this act of violence provided a danger for the Greek system. This self-serving opportunist used a woman’s death as political capital for himself. That is NOT what I want to see in my next External Affairs Vice President.
Comment by Emerson — April 13, 2006 @ 7:26 am
I repeat, “Igor has a clear set of convictions that guide him to leave a body when he feels he cannot be effective.”
Comment by Anonymous — April 13, 2006 @ 9:47 am
I think it is incorrect to state that most of Igor’s projects failed. He was one of the hardest working people in the ASUC and had a number of accomplishments. On that letter he said, yeah I read it and the timing was not right, but I can tell that he was very angry over what happened and he felt he had to do something to make the area more safe for students. It didnt look like there was a political agenda, only an interest in taking action and making things better. Its ridiculous that “Emerson” is making these false and petty attacks. Obviously this person is supporting Jason Chu. What is there to gain from viscously attacking his opponent? It is absurd, unproductive and politically stupid. You are turning of more people by doing it, get your facts right and take a lesson in strategy before you right such dumb comments
Comment by anonymous — April 13, 2006 @ 12:11 pm
I’m just saying, Igor is perhaps one of the most ineffective people i’ve ever met. I guarantee you that if he’s elected he will have ruined relations with most administrators. Not to mention, he’s a tool of the city of certain city council members, while simultaneously blundering in his approach with the mayor. I have seen NO productive results from him and in fact the list of accomplishments on his website are lists of things he barely started and never completed.
Comment by Emerson — April 14, 2006 @ 8:05 am
Let me ask you what productive results you’ve seen from oren or Vishal and let me compare that to Igor, a 2 term senator had to offer. Igor stood up for communities that weren’t his own. He didn’t win by trying to look cute for voters. And you know Student Action only picked the people they did for their ethnicities. I thought they were above that and above ASUC monarchy. I’ve worked for them in many capacities and I know how fucking crooked and sneaky they are and how many of their executive candidates get to power.
Comment by Anonymous — April 14, 2006 @ 8:13 am
will people stop calling igor a two term senator. that invalidates those people who actually served two terms without quitting. i gave igor my #1 vote last year, and he quit. fool me once, shame on me
but fool me twice - i think not.
Comment by Anonymous — April 14, 2006 @ 9:57 am
emerson, tool of certain city councilmembers? and I wish people would stop bad mouthing Igor. The reason he quit was because he couldnt get anything done under the political environment. I think that speaks more to the partisanship and ineffectiveness of the ASUC than to his character and commitment. Anyone who knows him understands that he is a fully committed and capable person.
Comment by anonymous — April 14, 2006 @ 10:29 am
also emerson, unlike other people Igor will actually fight for students to the administration, rather thank kissing their ass and doing what they want. i mean yeah he isnt the smoothest character, but hes smart and hes dedicated and he will work hard to make the student voice heard. also based on what i read on his website, he was able to organize a successful meeting with the mayor even despite that letter. So yes hes not necessarily a politician, but is that what we really want? and at least he wont sell out students.
Comment by anonymous — April 14, 2006 @ 10:37 am
One cannot claim that a dude who ran under the “Get Jiggy with Igor” slogan did not try to get cute with voters.
Comment by Beetle — April 14, 2006 @ 11:10 am
i tried going to Northside to eat the other day and everything was closed. Tell me, what else is false on that pseudo-done list that Igor created? Hell, my mom can organize a meeting with the mayor…that in itself doesnt say anything about fighting for students.
Comment by Anonymous — April 14, 2006 @ 2:38 pm
hey, it was get jiggy with iggy. get it right.
Comment by new to all this — April 14, 2006 @ 3:23 pm
i am looking at the website now and it says “Spring 2006: Worked with Top Dog to establish extended weekday business hours and student discounts for Northside branch.” it seems like he makes no claims to have extended the hours of the entire northside, though it appears to be one of the issues he wants to work on. i see no falsehood here.
Comment by anonymous — April 14, 2006 @ 4:01 pm
so tell me all of the wonderful things Jason did that Iggy didn’t. If you can’t name something shut up and vote for a non-SA person.
Comment by RepBast1984 — April 14, 2006 @ 4:03 pm
Yeah, I got one of those coupons from Igor, and it said Top Dog is open 11pm M-F. And then I came there at 10:55pm, and it was still open. So whoever wrote comment 135, get your facts straight or shut the fuck up.
Comment by Anonymous — April 14, 2006 @ 4:12 pm
LOL at the comment above. And, “here here” to the one before that. I bet the two anonymous people fighting are the two opposing campaing managers. This would only REALLY matter if the electorate actually read this blog. They’d get a kick out of it.
Anyhow, I’m voting for Igor. This “abandoning the Senate” BS is just that. No one from SA has trumpeted Jason’s qualifications yet. Impress me, really.
Comment by Anonymous — April 15, 2006 @ 11:58 pm