babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Jian Gomeshi's opening monologue on today's Q focused on Taavel's killing. I thought it was very well done, unfortunately they purged it from the podcast.
The accused has a history of violence and was let out on a day pass from a secure psychiatric facility. Just last summer he was involved in a seven-hour standoff with police, where he confined a woman and sexually assaulted her.
Why was he let out?
THat is a complete stunner, considering it was the lead story on The National last night.
6079... this was the first time I have ever downloaded the Q podcast, I have no idea if it is customary for them to include the opening monologue or not so perhaps my use of the term "purged" may have been a bit strong. Whatever the case, it is most unfortunate that they did so, I was trying to link to it.
"So, if you don't benefit local business, sucks to be you."
And the Buy-Local movement wept.
He who pays the piper calls the tune. The business people only want to fund things that make them money. How surprising.
Obviously I'm not too familiar with the Toronto event, but I have a couple of questions and observations.
Is it really true that the event didn't benefit local businesses, or is that just the opinion of the main sponsor?
How is it that the event let itself be entirely dependent on the whim of one supporter, and what does that say about the organizers' planning, and where to lay blame?
We had a similar situation with the fringe here in Saskatoon. Guess what? the organizers talked with businesses, and for a number of reasons cancelled their own beer gardens so the fringe patrons would go to local businesses.
Finally, it is not true at all that one bad example means that business people only fund things that give them a return. Sure in many cases there is a quid pro quo, but it is not true that we just make decisions based on our own profit.
/drift
Finally it is not true that anyone said that one bad example means that business people only fund things that make them a return. I actually said, "The business people ...". If I had wanted to include other businesses not just the the ones in this story I would have said, "Business people only want to fund ... ". Sorry for the subtle context in the written word but try to keep up.
Now if you want to debate whether or not most business people would only fund things that make them a return like my little joke implied then have at it. I grant you some business people are the exceptions to the norm. You seem to be one of the exceptions to the norm but people like you rarely make up the majority on an executive of something like a Business Improvement group.