aggienaut | Entries tagged with kai savaree-ruess

   In my five years of involvement in ASUCD, I have seen a lot of extremely shady antics. As I’ve mentioned before, I do not believe power corrupts, I believe power allows the already-prone-to-corruption to show themselves. There are a lot of scandals in real government, and students love to point these out – but what most people don’t realize is that its not because the people involved in our government are more prone to corruption than your average person – its that they have much greater opportunities (and are under much much greater scrutiny, thus revealing every indiscretion).
   That said, I believe what ASUCD does is show us how badly your average ambitious person behaves when given a little bit of power. Or at least, when not behaving downright badly, it really exhibits how much their perspectives change to what is convenient for them.

The Good List
   Unfortunately, those with exemplary good ethical standards don’t necessarily stand out the way bad ethics do. I would like to start on a good note however, by mentioning those who have impressed me with their ethics:

Surprisingly Admirable:
(ii) ( Ari Kalfayan )

(i) ( Nafeh Malik )

Exemplary Nonstudents:
(ii) ( Don Dudley, SJA & CJB )

(i) ( Mark Champagne )

Actually Exemplary:
(5) ( Go Funai )

(4) & (3) ( Justices Powers & Wheat )

(2) ( Jon Leathers )

(1) ( Aggie Editor-in-Chief Matty Jojola )

   It should be noted, that I cannot account for the most EFFECTIVE people in ASUCD, since I am not in a position to judge how well people are running the busses or running GASC etc etc. The above is a list of those who have had the opportunity to show exemplary ethics (or at least, for the group above that, have more value than people give them credit for). And below, below is a list of the most lacking in ethics.

ASUCD’s Most Ethically Misguided

Mildly Annoying:
(iv) ( Paul Harms )

(iii) ( Kalen Gallagher )

(ii-i) ( Sara Henry & Paloma Perez )

Ethically Dysfunctional:
(22) ( Thomas Lloyd )

(21) ( Anyone who, during their term, abandoned or defected from the platform they were elected on )

(20) ( Jamie Ackerman )

(19) ( Chris Goran )

(18) ( Mary Vasquez )

(17) ( Aggie Reporter Talia Kennedy )

(16) ( Aggie Reporter Aimee Theron )

(15-11) ( Aggie Editor-in-Chiefs Vo, Whelan, Fuller, Stone & Hamilton )

(10) ( Andrew Peake )

(9) ( Kai Savaree-Ruess )

(8-6) ( The Unqualified Candidates )

(5) ( Rob Roy )

(4) ( Kristen Birdsall )

(3) ( Chief Justice Turner )

(2) ( Vice President Beaman )

(1) ( Tiqula Bledsoe )

(BONUS) ( Bonus! )

   And now… I probably have significantly more enemies. It should be noted that I think many of the people mentioned above are very nice people in general. In particular I feel a bit torn about the “Unqualified Candidates” themselves because they all turned out to be pretty nice people and kept themselves out of any further shadiness that I know of, but it would be hard to justify not including them on the list.
   Anyway, my hope in posting this is that people who are just becoming involved in ASUCD will read it and keep in mind what NOT to do in the future.

Current Music: Cocksparrer - Take Em All

I. OMG Bees!!
   So earlier today I'm sitting at my desk and I look up to see our yard is filled with bees. I think "oh the bees are swarming again," but then I realize, oh wait we don't HAVE any bees anymore. I run out to investigate. By the time I get my shoes on the swarm has moved up the hill. I find a clump of bees about 2/3rds the size of a basketball on a branch.
   Later mum comes home and I tell her about it. She says we're still getting bee droppings on our cars regularly (lots of little yellow dots) and speculates that maybe there is a colony very close that we are not aware of. We're looking at our roof and seeing nothing. Just for novelty's sake I mention that bees usually inhabit the pitch where two parts of the roof come together and we go around to look at that part of our roof. Lo, there are bees there!! Further observation indicates they are probably just scouts from the passing swarm though (they were just bouncing around rather than making, so to speak, a bee-line in and out).
   There was some discussion of having me execute the swarm. Interestingly though, while I generally didn't feel overly much remorse when I killed hundreds of thousands of bees a day for my job, the prospect of killing some on my own time actually feels rather morally unsettling to me. d=

II. Defendant Rights in ASUCD
   As one will recall, recent prominant ASUCD Case # 34 regarded whether a witness could be considered the party to a closed session on an ASUCD employee's job performance, and therefore override that employee's wish to have the session closed. The ASUCD Supreme Court found that the codes clearly stated that only "the appointee / employee being discussed" had a right to cause the session to be closed.
   Subsequently, counsel for the Defense (ie those who lost the case), have written a Senate Bill which would change the bylaws to support their side. It redefines party as "(1) The ASUCD employee or appointee the session has been called on. (2) Any witness giving testimony that the Senate President Pro Tempore has deemed to be a Party in the matters discussed in the closed session."
   Incidently, the background for the bill reads "A recent court case showed that there was a need to define the term “party” in the bylaws on closed sessions." I think its debatable at best if the case "showed" that. I was there and I found the current definition of who had the relevant rights to be extremely clear.

   Anyway, the point is this is about the right to confront one's accuser. If the defendant waives their right to privacy, they should not be accused of anything the accuser wouldn't say in public. Also I remind you, the Defendant is the person with everything to lose in the situation, they are the one whose rights should be carefully protected.
   Now it has been mentioned, almost ad absurdum but vaguely possible, that it might be that the case regards sexual harassment, and therefore the witness-victim may have legitimate privacy rights. Firstly, this will certainly be the exception, rather than the rule, as it does not resemble the circumstances of 99% of Closed Sessions. Secondly, ASUCD is NOT the appropriate primary forum for addressing such a problem, the Police or at least Student Judicial Affairs (SJA) is. And with that thought in mind, I'd say I could agree to allowing sealed witness testimony IF it is only allowed if the witness has already filed a report¹ on the same subject with SJA or the PD, and minutes of the entire proceeding are made available to that same investigatory body. I believe nothing less than this would prevent sealed witness testimony from being abused.

   And it should be noted that this is being changed in light of the circumstances of Case 34. The closed session that was the subject of Case 34 CERTAINLY would not fall under an allowable circumstance for sealed witness testimony. That situation was entirely political, Peake could have chosen not to participate, and/or the other persons involved would have had just as much a right to say harmful things about him outside of the session as in it, its closure just allowed him, a politician, a venue to subject Savaree-Ruess, a politician, to a political circus without being judged himself (though it should be noted that it wasn't Peake's idea to call it, but he instigated its closure to the public). And furthermore, since the matter was already being discussed at length in public, all the closure allowed was for the Senate to deliberate in private, which is even further from allowable circumstances.

   Anyway, fortunately this idea to vindictively redefine parties was shot down in Internal Affairs Commission, where incidently both Case 34 Plaintiff Kai Savaree-Ruess and Case 34 Defense Counsel Paul Harms are former chairpersons. Sources tell me it devolved into some kind of shouting match.
   Reportedly upon being voted down Harms commented "This isn't the IAC I used to know." Which is ironic because before HE "knew" IAC, Savaree-Ruess was its charismatic chairperson for much longer. Though Harms' brief experience as the chair of IAC (before being shamefully dismissed and left with no position at all by the Senate) was the pinnacle of his ASUCD career, he should have known better than to think he'd have more influence there than Savaree-Ruess.

   And such is the hard-hitting ASUCD commentary I can provide to you when I'm for the first time in four years not under an obligation to remain unbiased. Incidently I have it on good authority that I was originally put on the Court to shut me up. (=
   Though actually I'm still on the Court for another forty minutes. I feel this is a de minimis consideration however.

Coming Soon: The current ASUCD Cold War

Current Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Current Music: Filthy Thieving Bastards - Sealed Confessions

   The Opinion for Case 34 has been published.
   Case revolved around dispute as to whether if a closed session was called on Controller Savaree-Ruess, and Savaree-Ruess motions for it to be open, can then-senate-candidate Peake who was involved in an altercation with Savaree-Ruess, require that it be closed (based on ¶3 of the relevant section, which says all parties to a closed session must ask that it be open).
   We came up with several different ways of coming to the same conclusion on the matter. I will only recite my favourite here:
   ¶1 of that section states that closed sessions can only be called on ASUCD appointees or employees (Savaree-Ruess was an appointee, Peake was neither). ¶2 of that section states that the session can only be made open by the appointee or employee being discussed (again, Peake is neither). It follows, that if Peake did not have a right to ask that it be open, he certainly cannot by NOT asserting a right he DOESN'T have, override the right that someone else DOES have.

   Case 35 appears to have been dropped. Plaintiff Laabs has made several ambiguous statements that he considers the matter settled, and today the court, operating on the principal that People Don't Know What They're Doing, voted unanimously to consider his statement that "the matter is settled" and he "intends to issue a written agreement" to constitute dropping of the case. (Though he can still tell us that oh noes thats not what he meant).

   Decisions on acceptance of Cases 36-39 are due out in the coming days. Tomorrow at Senate Justice Wheat will present the Case 34 findings, and Justice Harney may announce acceptance of other cases.
   Also the rotating Vice Chiefship now goes to Justice Harney.

   In other news, you should all add the Head of State Update to your daily blogreading.

The ASUCD Gulag
   After a 2+ hour debate in which two people cried, the ASUCD Senate finally came to an agreement: they would fork out $1,000 to send the controversial Steven Ostrowski to do hard labour in another country.

Indictment Act
   Judicial Proposal 7 was finally passed (12-0-0) as Senate Bill 35. To have the ASUCD Senate consider the removal of a Justice:
   Formerly required a motion by a Senator (no need for a 2nd even), Justice would be told 24 hours in advance that they were being considered for removal (they need not be told (and usually weren't) anything more specific about the charges than that it is a "personnel matter") & that they have a right to make the closed session on them open;
   Henceforth (assuming President Holloway signs the Bill) a motioning Senator will have to write up charges citing (i) the specific bylaw or subsection of the judicial code of ethics allegedly violated, (ii) the specific action or inaction the Defendant Justice allegedly committed and the specific time and place if applicable, (iii) the general evidence or witnesses who would be able to attest that it is reasonable to believe these allegations, and (iv) an argument or explanation that if believed these allegations would render the Defendant Justice unfit for their position; and the validity of these charges must be confirmed by the Internal Affairs Commission; if approved by the IAC, the motioning Senator then may proceed as before (24 hour notice etc), but the defendant Justice shall of course be given the approved charge sheet and may only be charged in accordance with such.
   Unfortunately, when I think about the spurious charges made against ASUC Berkeley Chief Justice Sonya Banerjee earlier this quarter, they might have slipped through even the new indictment process here,* but at least for example the spurious "just to talk' impeachment hearing Sen Birdsall called against Justice Harney & myself last year would have been right out.

   Anyway, needless to say the passage of SB35(2006) should actually make a huge improvement in the independance of the ASUCD Judiciary. It was a very positive note for my last ASUCD meeting, ever.

Using E
   Every time Sen Alexandra Frick's name is called I think my name is being called since "Frick" is a very very common mispronouncement of "Fricke." In fact, our names are in all probability etymologically linked and we share a 16th century Prussian ancestor. I am rather disappointed, however, that Alex's ancestors gave up the fight to explain that the "e" is not silent. (Though my own ancestors missplaced an accent mark that was over the "e" somewhere in Brazil)

Advising Advisor: Rein in Reign or Resign
   The Aggie ran an editorial yesterday supporting Elections Chairman Leathers' call for ASUCD Advisor Tucker to change his behaviour or resign. This comes a day after a front page article reporting on the situation, which was initiated the day previous by a livejournal post on the subject by Leathers.
   Article ends with "Tucker has little ASUCD experience and would do well to pay some respect to those students who have been active members of the association longer than he has."
   On any account, rumour I'm hearing is that Tucker was never planning on being the advisor for more than two years, before scampering off to law school. I think its kind of silly to hire an advisor for so short a period of time that they'll never have more experience than the senior student leaders (previous advisor Eric Sanchez was around less than a year). I have a brilliant idea for our next advisor though: former Sen Lamar Heystek.
   I'd be available to take the job presumably, but I'm in no need for such a demotion ;) (For Heystek though it would be an appropriate "day job" to support him while on city council (which does not pay I believe)). But really I plan on not being around here for the rest of eternity ... though on the plus side it would be the ultimate last laugh on Vicki Swett if I ended up with her job.

Quote of the Day: "I bet you never thought I'd be contemplating filing two back-to-back cases!" - Kai "No Need for a Judiciary" Savaree-Ruess.

Year Ago Today: Unqualified Candidates Scandal Breaks - News of the Unqualified Candidates Scandal first breaks. Also, I'm quoted in a student government court opinion in Texas.

   The Case 34, Savaree-Ruess vs. Carnes et Al, Hearing has been postponed until Wednesday next week pursuant to a motion by the Defence.

   I stopped by the Student Government Administrative Office (SGAO) today and found Plaintiff Savaree-Ruess, Defence Counsel Powers, Associate Defence Counsel Harms and ASUCD Advisor Tucker all hanging out. Ruess said that his team (which includes Defence Counsel Greg "Big City Lawyer" Russel) is already working on one-liners to use during the Hearing. Powers vowed to be equally prepared for the battle of wits.
   Powers has also created an "ASUCD Legal Defence Team" facebook group. Clearly, the legal armsrace is on!

   Anyway, during my twenty hours of driving this past week, as I said I had altogether too much time to ponder the deep questions in life ... such as how to make ASUCD even better! I came up with two brilliant insights:

Deliberate Oral Exams
   The actual reason I was lurking around the third floor was to pitch this idea to Tucker.
   Basically, I was pondering how the interviewing process for prospective justices could be made to better highlight the skills one wants justices to be selected based upon. The normal interview process only works if the interviewers ask brilliantly insightful questions, and even then they might get at the mentality of the Justice, which is important, but it leaves utterly no guidance as to whether tehy will be an involved and effective Justice.
   Now the way the US State Department examines prospective foreign service officers is, after making an initial cut in written exams, they put a dozen or so applicants in a room ... and have them fight to the death! Not really but they make them work on some theoretical project in which they'll need to compromise and work together.
   And so I was thinking, what if we get the judicial applicants together in groups of nine provide them with a hypothetical case, and watch them deliberate! The people currently mandated to be on the interviewing committee observe these deliberations and can then make selections on a basis of effectiveness, insightfulness, judicial mentality, and all kinds of other relevant informations!

   I pitched it to Tucker and he thought it was a great idea and could even be implimented for the interviews that are coming up asap. He's still got to pitch it to President Holloway though, who as chair of the interviewing committee is the one who decides. But I'm very excited about it. Time to rustle up a case.

   And hey take note UC Merced, I know you've been stalled for weeks on the judicial interview process!

Fully-Automatic Recall
   Currently, at universities nationwide, there is a problem with elections. That being, that (1) if a candidate gets disqualified, they very frequently sue anyone and everyone until the right people roll over and let them take office, since no one but the candidate themselves cares about it enough to go to court over it; and (2) the candidate invariably cites a misguided interpretation of "democracy" or "will of the people" to support their position. It has been of little avail to advise them that its not "will of the people" if they had an unfair opportunity to influence "the people" or "the people" didn't know critical information about their character. But I came up with a solution that utterly resolves both these problems.
   Keep the system of "campaign violations" or "censures" which are given in various amounts for various severities of violations. BUT where currently a certain number mandate disqualification (three in ASUCD, five at Berkeley I believe), replace disqualification with automatic recall. Basically, the candidate still gets elected into office, but a recall election is immediately scheduled for them the following week.
   In this matter, it can be conclusively determined whether "the People" would overlook their indiscretions, and I can't imagine a lawsuit overcoming this second voicing of the "will of the people."

Current Music: Filthy Theiving Bastards - Bad Afternoon Sun

I am officially back now as far as the Court is concerned, and some noteworthy things have occured in the mean time.

Case 33 Laabs vs the ASUCD Senate has been rejected.

Case 34 Savaree-Ruess vs the ASUCD Senate (Carnes et Al actually) has been accepted.

Case 34 Plaintiff's Brief has been filed. Defence brief will be due tomorrow. The hearing is scheduled for 7:10pm this Wednesday (Nov 29th).

Interviews for court positions were supposed to occur today apparently but were cancelled as not all interview-committee members could make it.

Unexcused Behaviour
   Tuesday's opinion section in the Cal Aggie had some lulz, with a guest opinion from Kai saying the Aggie blew the altercation out of proportion on one side, and an editorial from the Aggie editorial board saying Kai's behaviour was totally inappropriate ("Juvenile Behaviour Unacceptable" specifically) on the other side.
   Incidently, if Kai's editorial was supposed to be the apology he promised the Aggie he'd make, I'm not sure he ever got around to saying he was sorry. I can't double check, because for some reason it isn't on the webpage anymore, but from my recollection it was much more of a justification of his actions and an attack against all who would say otherwise than anything resembling an apology. At the very least, it smacked of attrition (regret that one was caught or punished) rather than contrition (regret because one realizes ones actions were wrong).

Court Today
   Anyway, two Court cases were filed on Monday morning. They have been designated Case 33 & Case 34. But I don't like people to get all in a dither over the very act of filing a case so I'm not going to go into any further detail on the cases until we've decided whether to accept them or not.
   Agenda for tonight's Court meeting (8pm, ASUCD Conference Rm) includes, provisionally in this order: Case 33, Case 34, Judicial Proposal 7, Other Proposal 1*, fieldtrip to Berkeley right after our meeting?, election of an Inter-Collegiate Judicial Federation Liaison, & Judicial Directive 13.
   *OP1 = the proposed change of Senate agenda item "announcement of new ASUCD Court cases and reading of prior week’s verdict(s)" to "announcement of new ASUCD Court cases and reading of prior week’s verdict(s) and Court announcements." Personally I think as long as we don't have "Controller Report & announcement of any new financial decisions" on the agenda we shouldn't have a sentence telling us exactly what to tell the Senate either. But since Internal Affairs Commission Chairman Rivera's question to me about that was only rhetorical he didn't want to hear that from me I guess, jerk. (=
   Tomorrow at Senate I will be making my farewell speech, and the Senate will be discussing JP7 & OP1 (which will both be assigned an SB# by then).

   In other news, the impeachment of Chief Justice Banerjee is scheduled for tonight down in Berkeley. As I mentioned, a bunch of us are thinking about going down. I'd like to laud Beetlebeat's excellent coverage of their Senate's antics: Vice President Gupta claims Senate can use powers constitution reserves for Court; Former Defendant Gupta Denies Conflict of Interest in Chairing Impeachment

In Other News
   After extensive research and testing, I have determined that any kind of soup tastes better with graded cheese added, and the vast majority of them also benefit from the addition of sour cream.
   On that note, my food selection has improved. When I was first released from the dorms to become a feral undergraduate student, I lived on ramen and macaroni & cheese. After like two years of that I settled on a steady diet of salami-sandwiches. Lately, however, I've been getting a selection of canned soups, & chili. Also some hot dogs which I cook in the toaster oven (boiled hotdogs are kind of a travesty). And most shocking of all, I got a big back of lettuce & some italian dressing last time I was at the store and have been devouring salad with my dinner! So long scurvy!!

Picture of the Day

This is one of my favourite pictures. Its not recent, and in fact its buried deep in the 1,069 pictures I have on flickr now. And so, so that thtose pictures I consider "must sees" are easily accessible, I made a album of just my favourite of my pictures. And so, you should check it out asap

Oh and there's an ASUCD election on at the moment. Vote at asucd.ucdavis.edu.

Current Music: Filthy Theiving Bastards - Gods Are Fearing Men

Terrorism, Imprisonment, & Battery - A Typical Week in ASUCD
So the California Aggie ran their story today on last week's ASUCD antics, and I really must congratulate them on upping the drama ante: Apparently last week's ASUCD adventures included terrorist threats, unlawful imprisonment, & battery!!! Either Comptroller Kai (pictured) or Senate Candidate Peake could be subject to up to a year jail time!

The Aggie also had an incredibly short article on the ASUCD Candidates Forum last Wednesday. Interestingly though:

   Rob Roy, an independent candidate, said he would not name all the ASUCD commissions, a question posed to him by the event's moderator.
   "I can name all the commissions that you're asking, but I'm not going to," he said. "Let's talk about what we need on campus."
   For his closing statement, Roy leapt over the table, seized the microphone, and paced back and forth as he decried LEAD and Student Focus slates for being too dominating of the ASUCD elections.

Burritos vs Sandwiches
In other news, the delightful Kristy Heidenberger has brought it to my attention that a Massachusetts Superior Court has found that burritos are not sandwichs. Judge Locke described burritos as "typically made with a single tortilla and stuffed with a choice filling of meat, rice, and beans," (and offered at low low prices!).

Related

United States Supreme Court finds that tomatoes are actually vegetables rather than fruit. (When appointed to the US Supreme Court I intend to overturn this ridiculous example of judicial activism!!)

Are hamburgers sandwiches? Are pizzas pies? Emosnail polls!

Current Music: Street Dogs - Strike a Blow

Impeachment of Chief Justice Banerjee
   Last Wednesday we (the ASUCD Supreme Court) had a joint meeting with the ASUCD Elections Committee (don't tell Kristen Birdsall!!*), which also involved pizza thanks to our $33 budget this quarter. Also in attendance was the Academic Affairs Commission Chair Peter Markevich, and Executive Office Events Coordinator Kevin Powers. Next week we are tossing around the idea of having a joint meeting in Berkeley with the ASUC Berkeley Supreme Court (Judicial Council). Incidently, whats up with their name -- the members are Justices, but the presiding officer is the "Judicial Council Chair." For the sake of consistency, they will be referred to as Chief Justice usually here however.

   On that note, the Berkeley Chief Justice has been called before the ASUC Senate for impeachment! This is basically a reprisal against the Judicial Council for enforcing the rules during the Oren Gabriel Scandal we'd noted earlier. An intelligent and concise overview of the charges can be found here (as opposed to the newspaper "overview," which as is so often the case, suffers from an authority bias (towards what the senate says) and a lack of critical thinking in connecting the dots). The impeachment is scheduled for next Wednesday at 10pm. I'm interested in going down there for it, and so far several of our justices have also expressed an interest in doing so. It looks like we might even make quorum down there. How saucy would that be to hold a meeting down there during their senate meeting? (=

Impeachment of Comptroller Savaree-Ruess
   In other news, an impeachment hearing took place for ASUCD Comptroller Kai Savaree-Ruess (pictured, right), whom you may recall as the guy who was pushing for the elimination of the judicial branch last year.
   Savaree initially affiliated himself with the "Focus" campus political party, but after an unsuccessful Senate run, changed his affiliation to Lead and did so convincingly enough to be given the position of Comptroller by the Lead executive office. However, as of late, he has taken to prominantly wearing the mustard colour Focus shirts again and being seen ubiquitously with prominant Focite politician Chris Harold.
   Cause of Action for this impeachment has been generally cited as two things:
   (1) an incident a few days prior when Savaree was spotted wearing the catsup colour of the Lead party. When asked sarcastically if he was "supporting his party" he allegedly responded "I'd rather kill babies with my bare hands than allow any more Lead kids [in ASUCD];"
   (2) Allegedly, during the Candidates Forum in the Coffee House on Wednesday, he was seen laughing while a Lead candidate spoke about LGBT issues. After the forum, allegedly, the candidate came up to Kai and shook his hand, while asking "so Kai, you find something funny about LGBT issues?" At which point, allegedly, Kai pulled his hand away and yelled to Leadite President Darnell Holloway "HEY, get your kid away from me before I punch him!" Allegedly.
   An impeachment was scheduled for the very next day (This last Thursday). The impeachment closed session took more than two hours, after which Kai emerged and made some vague references like (someone) "so are you still controller?" (Kai) "for now." To note all the noteworthy things that occured durign this time would warrant an entry all its own, and that just might occur, but I thought one of the funniest things was when a Point of Order was made from the hallway during closed session, by writing it on a piece of paper, sliding it under teh door, and then knocking. It was asking if the session could be open now that the witness who had requested it closed had departed. It was answered by Senator Higgens opening the door real quick and telling us "no!" and closing it again.

   Reportedly, there is now "a race on who can send the first ASUCD Court lawsuit" regarding the closed session. I just hope THIS time the Recorder isn't forced to flee the country and/or doesn't wind up hanging in a closet in Sproul! )= They should be assigned an ASUCD Bodyguard.

Indictment of Mr Lubanga Dyilo, Alleged Congolese War Criminal
   Also on Thursday, the International Criminal Court had their first hearing ever, on the confirmation of charges for Mr Lubanga Dyilo.

Current Mood: Speaking Ex Cathedra
Current Music: Street Dogs - Back to the World

As before, I'm having the Vice Chiefs pretty much run things. At today's meeting: Justice Aguilera: "Hey how are you?" Me: "I don't have my laptop, I don't have an agenda, I don't have anything, its great not having to stress about that anymore!" ... a few minutes later Vice Chief Wheat comes in and asks me how I'm doing as well "I have no idea what we're going to talk about today, I'm not stressing about any of it.. I feel like I should be wearing a hawaiian shirt!" ... a few minutes later after some fidgeting "okay guys it actually freaks me the hell out, & thats why I keep talking about it!!"
( Mainly Ratto v Vakil )

Anyway, so the Mock Election is still on. Vote if you have not yet. The Judicial Dictatorship in ASUCD! party is recommending you vote Kris Fricke #1, Mark Champagne #2, Brent Laabs #3, & Paul "Will never be forgiven for putting five justices off at an IAC meeting until the very very end, after a ten minute 'icecream break'" Harms #11.

In other ASUCD news, a prominant Lead senator, Jon Sanders, has defected from the Lead party and declared himself independant. Lead senator Christine Rogers called for a closed session to discuss removing Sanders from the position of Senate President Pro Tempore immediately after his announcement, though she says it is unrelated.

Quote of the Day
[00:11:28] Darth Laabs: the problem is that everyone running in this election is more qualified to be a senator than anyone on the current senate
[00:11:36] Darth Laabs: except Kai [Kai being a candidate]

Picture of the Day
totally unrelated to the Court Meeting

A close up of my Clockwork Orange makeup Tuesday, because I thought it was novel.

Current Music: Against Me! - Walking is Still Honest

   Saturday evening there was a party at the house off Duke in the house inhabited by Chris "C-Bunch" Bunch, Olivia Pisano, & Dave Carlson -- which I'm going to refer to as The Foyer House until its formally named because it has a huge foyer and its too unwieldy to name all the occupants every time it comes up.
   My roommate Jason came with me. Fun was had by all - see pictures.

   Sunday Morning my former roommate and good friend Ben came up to visit. We hung out a bit and ate at Plutos. Sunday Evening I went and played poker at the Foyer House again. I was doing well for myself for a bit, but then this guy Jeremy who was almost out of chips kept getting good hands, and I figured he must be getting desperate and can't KEEP getting good hands so I thought he was bluffing .. but he wasn't )=

   Also, C-Bunch & Candice have joined the livejournal revolution.

Picture of the Day

This is what the party looked like from my perspective. (=
See the rest of the pictures HERE, but note they are in reverse order there -- the first ones are in the bottem right

Quote of the Day
"[Kai Savaree-Ruess] keeps talking about what a waste of time congress is, when he had a blood alcohol content of about .13 half of the time." -Anonymous, regarding the UC Student Assn congress.
Despite having UC Davis student Brent Laabs as the Chairman of the UCSA Board of Directors, relations remain extremely strained between UCD & UCSA.

Current Music: Tiger Army - Rose in the Devil's Garden

   Davis, CA - Could there be a Slovak conspiracy in ASUCD? Consider the striking resemblence between the flag on the right (the flag of Slovakia), and the flag on the left, (the ASUCD Christian Democrat Party)!

   When approached for comment, Christian Democrat leader Subcommandant Ostrowski noted that he was sure "presiel som veverichkoo" could be a good slogan.
   "First the destruction of Czechoslovakia, now ASUCD!!" bemoaned ASUCD Director of External Affairs, James Schwab, when approached on the subject.
   Emosnail correspondants (seen here standing on top of a tank in Slovakia*) report that "presiel som veverichkoo" is Slovak for "I just ran over a squirrel."

   Emosnail's main Slovak correspondant, Branislav Ciberej, could not be reached for comment, but he is probably making an extensive report on the subject in this video.

Balancing the Force in ASUCD
   Originally, there was Darth Lloyd, whose dark intentions for ASUCD were clearly evident. Somehow he even managed to finagle his way onto the liberal Lead party despite being an obvious republican. Darth Lloyd brought us his apprentices, Justice Raff, who wasn't quite evil enough, and then Darth Laabs. In fact, the exact moment Laabs crossed over to the Dark Side has been documented.
   "I learned a lot from him. I learned about the power of the bylaws, and his knowledge of the bylaws was strong. However, he was dispatched ... to Berkeley, where they have cookies that make people have feelings of dread," related Laabs on the subject of Lloyd.
   More recently, after being deposed from the self-proclaimed position of ASUCD Pope, and left for politically dead, Darth Harms has reemerged as a new member of hte ASUCD sith by several accounts. Laabs reports "his current plans involve more duct tape, and I believe, the popeship of SGAO." Harms rolemodel in ASUCD however, Comptroller Kai "Cromwell" Savaree-Ruess has not generally had the Sith title applied to him.
   And finally, most recently, Ostrowski of the ~~Slovak~~ Christian party has declared his sithship. This brings currently identified ASUCD sith to 3. Ostrowski speculated that are are probably actually about five, noting that there are both liberal and conservative ones. Though many assume there can only be two Sith present at a time, Sith expert Sean Wallitch informs us that there in fact can be many, vying with eachother for power.
   Ostrowski reports that since he thinks a sith name should describe the person, he is going to take on the sith name of "Darth Steve."
   When asked to speculate as to who else might be Sith, both "Darth Steve" & Darth Laabs noted that Senator Molnar, whose ascension to the Senate was regarded with tremendous dread a year ago, has turned out to be "too good natured." Savaree-Ruess's name was mentioned but "he just hangs out with Chris Harold all the time" according to Ostrowski.

Completely Unrelated Picture of the Day

I added a whole bunch of pictures of Bailey, including pictures of him hanging out with his best friend Orca the Bunny, and also pictures of our cat Pele hanging out atop a cactus.

Current Music: Rancid - Arrested in Shanghai

   At our Court meeting last Tuesday I was giving a history lesson on the follies of "The Reverend" Tiqula "My Friends Call Me Half-Man Half-Amazing" Bledsoe. When I happened to mention that I too am a reverend, since the Universal Life Church will ordain anyone, several other Court members immediately went to the website (we had multiple laptops present, since we're a particularly advanced body) and got ordained during our meeting. I think we're going to form our own church.

   Anyway, the Administrative Office (SGAO) does not yet have the minutes from the IAC meeting last week where Kai-romwell made the original presentation on how ASUCD doesn't need a Court. But thats okay, because I have the minutes anway.
   The relevant portion is only a page, I shall reproduce it here, with my own commentary in bracketed nonitallics.

IAC Minutes, 06-05-15
( You're never alone when minutes are being taken )

And I still think it was a serious breach of good faith that Kai came to IAC with the intention of making this presentation without notifying the Court.

Round III will take place at the IAC meeting next week, on Tuesday, 5pm, De Carli Room. Should be interesting to all those interested in ASUCD, law, or philosophy...

Director of External Affairs James Schwab reads the IAC minutes during a Court meeting.
He thinks they're kind of ridiculous.
Justice Harney holds a copy of the Federalist Papers in the foreground.
And thats newly appointed Justice Kevin Powers on the left.

Current Location: The Trees Apartments
Current Music: Flogging Molly - Tobacco Island

ASUCD: Not a Government?
   So I went to the ASUCD Internal Affairs Commission meeting yesterday, to counteract the arguments made last week about how ASUCD does not need a Court.
   It is unclear whether the discussion last week was pre-planned, or just kind of happened. IAC commissioners first said "we were just kind of getting ideas out there to see how we felt about it and then we were going to talk to you if we wanted to do something," implying a planned discussion, but later other commissioners said it just randomly came up and bristled at the implication that they couldn't randomly bring up whatever they want. The minutes are unclear, since they indicate a jump from talking about something completely different to an in depth discussion about why we don't need a court with no transition at all.

   Commissioners insisted at length there was no room for a Court in a "business model," I tried to point out that it says in the first article of the ASUCD Constitution, and in the ASUCD Administrative plan, that ASUCD is explicitly not a business, but the commissioners didn't seem to be very open to seeing ASUCD as anything but a business... and businesses don't have Courts.

   I was also asked "how non-elected officials can serve this purpose." Honestly I wasn't at all prepared for such a complete lack of understanding of the American government system. Next week we are going to be prepared with choice quotes from the Federalist Papers.

   There were also some choice quotes in last week's minutes, such as "I have no respect for their legal opinions" (coming from "The Goodly Kai" himself I think). I'm going to try to get my hands on a copy of those minutes for more in depth review here.

   Next week its Round III at IAC, 5pm Monday in the MU Garrison Rm. Should make for an interesting debate about the very nature of ASUCD.

UCDMUNC 2006
   This weekend we hosted the UCD MUN Conference. I chaired Special Political & Decolonization Committee (SPD), discussing Chechnya & the Spratley Islands. I forgot my camera the first day, so I only got pictures of the clean-up afterwords.

Picture of the Day

Davis City Council candidate Rob Roy speaks during the ASUCD candidates forum. ASUCD president Darnell Holloway looks attentive while actually listening to his Ipod.
I recently pulled some 99 pictures off my camera (all from the last week!), so there's a bunch on flickr already and will be more going up in the coming days as I get a chance to get around to them.

Previously on Emosnail - (Spotlight on Two Years Ago)
( 'The Best Week Ever,' the Shins Show, & UCDMUNC 2004... )

Current Location: The Trees Apartments
Current Music: Muse - Sing For Absolution

   So reportedly newly appointed ASUCD comptroller Kai Savaree-Ruess, having completed his crusade to combine ASUCD's two massive volumes of bylaws into one hulking uber-volume of bylaws*, and having just finished with budget hearings, has now turned his attention to the Court. At the Internal Affairs Commission on Monday he made a presentation revealing his aspiration to eliminate the Court from ASUCD -- he does not believe ASUCD needs a Court.
   We all had a good laugh last year, when Darth Lloyd tried to eliminate the Court because he believed in the absolute supremacy of senate, but it was only funny once. I've got better things to do than fight the same battle against the roundheads every year.
   Sources believe Ruess's presentation Monday was intended to set the foundation for an upcoming constitutional amendment he intends to write to eliminate the Court.

   *The principal effect of combining the Senate's Standing Rules with the Government Codes (other than making it more tedious to find anything) was in forging a bold statement that the rules of order for Legislative Branch meetings are one and the same with the branch-wide guidelines -- that the Senate is the Government.

   On any account, it would have been nice of him to give someone in the Judicial Branch a heads up that he was about to propose radical changes to it.

Picture of the Day

Current Location: In my apartment!
Current Music: Red Army Choir - The Sacred War

Profile

Aggienaut

Bee Aid International

July 2025

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Syndicate

Page Summary

The Ultimate List of Shadiest People in ASUCD
Stinging Commentary
Case 34 Conclusion
ASUCD Senate Votes to Send Ostrowski Out of Country!
ASUCD Jurisprudence
Back in Business
Ongoing Events
Legal Definitions
Impeachment Fever!
ASUCD Wednesday
Foyerparty
The Dark Side of ASUCD
"Same Interests"
Fighting For Justice
Opposing Justice

Style Credit

Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by timeasmymeasure

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Page generated Jul. 19th, 2025 02:48 am

The Agrinautica

Tales of a Beekeeper Errant

Entries tagged with kai savaree-ruess

The Ultimate List of Shadiest People in ASUCD

Stinging Commentary

Case 34 Conclusion

ASUCD Senate Votes to Send Ostrowski Out of Country!

ASUCD Jurisprudence

Back in Business

Ongoing Events

Legal Definitions

Impeachment Fever!

ASUCD Wednesday

Foyerparty

The Dark Side of ASUCD

"Same Interests"

Fighting For Justice

Opposing Justice