Carole the train wreck

Carole says she's not against a bridge. Just this bridge. Whatever that means. She says buy more buses instead. More buses! So they can sit in the same traffic jam puking out diesel exhaust. Thats "progressive" thinking. Even her own Surrey mla's support the Port Mann twinning. They'd have no hope of getting elected if they didn't.
The ndp is losing credibility by the minute. When's Sinclair going to order her to "retire"

While Campbell is urging

While Campbell is urging people to shut off lights and pull the plugs on cellphone chargers, there are literally hundreds of "wealth creating" mine applications and more and more automation plans in the works to get rid of BC's real capital and productive jobs.

The existing and proposed mines alone rely on huge inputs of energy in the forms of electricity, where available, plus masses of Diesel engines to provide power for generators, huge excavators, conveyors and dumptrucks the size of 2 story houses.

Not to mention the long line of ore trucks taking BC's wealth to the seaports, breaking up the roads, to satisfy the profit demands of "our wealth creating foreign investors".

The whole plan is a racket to brainwash people and cover up the real problems.

One can not be "business friendly' and "environmentally friendly" at the same time, because wealth can only be taken and costs only transferred, with climate change being one of the biggest cost transfers and wealth takings.

"So, Ed, should we go back to the Stone Ages, etc.........?"

I hope some of the faithful can come up with a better line of propaganda garbage?

Many of us have worked and lived with very good living standards in many countries, including here in BC, without all this damage to the environment, forced on with the idiotic lies of the GDP, Growth, Productivity, where humanity and the ecology are the first commodities to be destroyed under the fraudulent theories of "wealth creating market economy".

Ed Deak.

Saith the Preacher

There are no stones unturned....

Thanks for that...

:-)

Good questions Jimmy

Jimmy,

Those are all good questions and worthy of debate. My only point in raising them was precisely so people could ask those kinds of questions. The TYEE reporter missed so much of the actual content in the Premiers speech and I was only trying to point out that much more had been said. I am glad to see people like you asking these kinds of questions, and hopefully others can provide input as well. Global warming is a fairly new concept in provincial politics and thus far Campbell seems to be looking to do more than the Federal government has been. What do we thing of that? Should these goals be part of legislation? I think smart meters are a good idea but what does everyone else think? I am just curious that’s all.

switek: Your post

switek:

Your post concerning Campbell's speech was very interesting. However I usually suspend belief when it comes to promises Campbell makes, given his track record. His speech was just that: talk. The Liberals' plans concerning transit and highway infrastructure are guaranteed to dramatically increase emissions in the lower mainland. Regarding the situation in California, the inevitable legal challenges to these emissions standards are (as far as I am aware) yet to come. And these standards haven't even been implemented in BC yet.

The scenario these policies will bring about is a certain increase in emissions (from new highway infrastructure and lack of investment in rapid transit) with a possible offset (from introduction of emissions legislation) later on. If the legislation is even enforced after hypothetically becoming law. The message Campbell sends is really just, to paraphrase Mr. Annandale, "greenhouse gases now - cuts later, maybe".

TILMA and NAFTA

I'm curious, will these standards that are higher than Alberta's represent an unforgiveable barrier according to TILMA? And, if US businesses are allowed to operate a certain way in Alberta under TILMA and NAFTA, will the Americans also be excluded from having to meet BC standards as they could impede business plans? Just curious?

I see in the agreement that matters relating to the environment are not covered, but does not every action, no matter how small, relate to the environment? Will this not be difficult to exclude?

http://www.tilma.ca/agreement/whats_not_covered.asp

Dear Tyee Editor, I hate to

Dear Tyee Editor,

I hate to nitpick, but is IAMC's post really worthy of being in the "Best comments" section. I thought the whole point of having "Best comments" and "All comments" was to separate out the bizarre, off-topic, discursive rants from serious posts. What's the point of even having these two classifications if trolls just get into the "Best comments" section anyway?

Sincerely,

jimmy_laroux

Bridging the divide

Even Carole James wants a new bridge. So she said last week.

Everyone is on side now.

BC goes super-green and everyone's happy.

r'man

That's not accurate.

Your penchant for selective quotation is getting the better of you. As for super-green - is that another iteration of 'super' natural.

It sounds equally phony and disingenuous to me.

Jimmy - the best comments / all comments dichotomy is a phony one - likely about as selective and subjective as Campbell's speech: Just stick to "ALL COMMENTS" and ignore the score keeping – I suspect it will eventually be dropped.

James wants bridge after transit

Realisticman, you're a bit behind...Read the following about what James has said:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/09/27/bc-gateway.html

SIG

I was thinking the same thing myself. Will the government fine itself for unfair TILMA practices or will a firm from Alberta, anxious to move into the low to no royalty Gas business here in BC, have to bring an action challenging rules that aren't fair to Albertan roughnecks fleeing the high-royalty oil biz in the province to the east in their V8 gas guzzling pick-ups an 4WDs?

I think Campbell's promises should be evaluated in light of the fact that he also said the government would cooperated fully and in a timely way with the BASI/VIRK investigation.

Haven't seen many iterations of that promise of late, have we?

Nevertheless, there is some interesting information about the Campbell team over at Mary's place:http://bctrialofbasi-virk.blogspot.com/

Stuff you won't read elsewhere either. Very interesting group of appointments made via Order in Council 558 - the folks who formed the foot soldiers in the earliest version of team Campbell.

You should have a look too r'man.

Who's on First?

SharingisGood

I'm afraid you are a bit behind. Your reference is from Thursday, on Friday Carole James said repeatedly that she supports twinning of the Port Mann Bridge. As does Mike Harcourt. You can listen to her on CKNW's archives.

Sep, 28 2007 - 11:20 AM

VANCOUVER/CKNW(AM980) - NDP leader, Carole James has taken to the airwaves to try and clarify her stance against the Liberal plan to twin the Port Mann Bridge.

"Getting around isn't good enough that has to be the first priority, put those in place then, make sure you've got the transit in place and then when you build the bridge you're basing it on transit line."

* "My constituents believe the twinning of the bridge is part of the solution [to traffic congestion]."
Harry Bains, NDP MLA, Surrey Newton (Surrey Leader, Sept 14, 2007).

Support for the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge is overwhelming.

* Dianne Watts, the Mayor of Surrey, supports twinning the Port Mann Bridge.
* Former NDP premiers and highways ministers supported twinning the Port Mann Bridge.
* NDP MLAs, such as Harry Bains and Mike Farnworth, have spoken in favour of twinning the Port Mann Bridge.

r'man - read your own quote, please

pls note bold material.

PAYG insurance

> The rate per km in Chilliwack could be lower than in Vancouver.

...which will make it more expensive for a Vancouverite than a Chilliwacker to take the family on a roadtrip to Disneyland. Great.

Dave2

In other words the idea adds red tape for no reason, won't fix any current problem and although at first glance seems neat is actually a giant screwup disguised as an environmental plan? Funnily enough I find that to be the case with all of Cycling Commuter's ideas.

I welcome you to my world.

Now sit back and wait, soon he'll declare the NDP and unions to be the cause of global warming before he jets off to New York.

Just updating

I read my quotes and I listened. Carole James is, currently, for a new bridge. On Thursday maybe CBC was right, she wasn't but on Friday she was. Sure, transit on the bridge. That's never been a question. It takes much longer to span a river with a bridge than to buy a few buses and first the bridge has to be built.

Just read the damn quote r'man

Just read your own words. The fact is that this government is more concerned with rewarding its friends than anything else – has been from the very beginning and will be until they are either thrown from power or thrown into gaol. There is no plan for real convenient, affordable and efficient rapid transit. Even Toronto had enough sense to turn down more freeways when their provincial government (Tories at the time) tried to foist another one on them.

The problem is too many British Columbians don't realize it's all been done before and they're going to have to suffer through it now themselves.

Your facile attempt to pretend Campbell’s absurd pander to real estate and commercial interests is any kind of a solution to urban gridlock is actually quite quaint, especially since you seem more fascinated by trying to embarrass a political leader who is more than capable of embarrassing herself instead of looking critically at what Campbell is actually DOING to this place.

I don't think you did listen, by the way. Carole James was quite specific about the twinning and the transit needing to go forward together.

Buses are never going to solve this mess - never. In fact, they will simply make it worse.

Wrong GWest

I did listen. Carole James said; "...A bridge will be needed. ... Nobody disputes that there needs to be a bridge. ... A crossing is needed. ... Our MLAs have been very clear they support a crossing on that river as I do..."

Clear enough for you?

I support immediate construction of the Evergreen Line too.

SharingIsGood referred to a CBC story saying that Carole James was against building a second bridge. The following day Carole James utterly contradicted that story when said the words I quoted above.

West, your constant negative references regarding the Liberal government and rhetoric like, "concerned with rewarding its friends", is diversionary, as usual, and not relevant to the facts that stand for themselves. The Canada Line and a new crossing on Highway 1 that will accommodate transit is needed and the Liberals are doing it. Whether you like it not not the fast-ferries are the clear gleaming tragedy when contemplating the NDP mismanagement of our money and our transit.

I stand by the facts in my previous post.

realisticman: Quote:The

realisticman:

Wow. Where to begin? First, is the Canada line needed? Rail into Port Moody and Coquitlam was supposed to be a priority, according to Translink planners ten years ago, not the Canada line. Second, is transit part of the plan to twin the Port Mann? And I don't mean a bus route, I mean high speed commuter rail or something actually meaningful and effective like that. I am not aware of any such plans. Are you? Third, the money wasted on the Canada line is equivalent to at least two fast-ferry scandals, if not more.

Well done. You attack NDP mismanagement and defend Liberal mismanagement in the very same paragraph. Your post positively drips with hypocrisy.

Fast Ferries?

What do the Fast Ferries have to do with urban transit?

And since we're stepping so far back into the past, how much were the cost overruns on the Coq and how much did that screw up our current transit system?

Why don't we look at the current budget? I wonder how much transit could have been built with the dollars from cost overruns on the Convention Centre? The Liberals waste more money on a long weekend than the NDP did in their entire decade.

Yes, it's needed.

Any international airport and particularly one with 16 million passengers a year, needs a rapid transit line into it's city centre. Richmond is growing fast and they will use it too. That's not mismanagement. A fast rail link out to north Surrey and Langley might be practical but is the density there? I say build it and if it's a two-car train, like one sees in parts of Europe, then utlize it that way. A fast rail link to Coquitlam would probably be a good idea and I say build it.

What don't you like about the Canada Line, Jimmy?

Diversionary, Frank

The Convention Centre will pay for itself. It's well understood that the financial benefits from large convention 'tourists' pump huge money into the the local economy.

Ferries were mentioned because the NDP are now going all over the map, no pun intended re: the twinning of the Port Mann. As though they can crow about their transit record. How about their courageous decision to not widen the Stanley Park Causeway and Lion's Gate Bridge (built 1938) to four lanes. To save a few trees was it? Then mother nature swoops in and fells thousands of trees in one night. Meanwhile, they guarantee a high rate of accidents on a three lane road and they ensure increased pollution from idling vehicles at both ends and through the park. Brilliant!

realisticman: Quote:What

realisticman:

The fact that it is such a huge waste of money, obviously. Wasting huge sums of money is mismanagement, even when the Liberals do it.

The Northeast corridor was a priority. Richmond was not. So no, the Vancouver airport did not, according to Translink, need a rapid transit line. And there are larger cities out there without rapid transit to their airports.

Since you did not answer the question I asked in my previous post, I'll ask again. Are you aware of plans to use the Port Mann for rail service?

realisticman: Quote:How

realisticman:

The bridge cannot be widened. Increasing capacity would require building a new bridge. And the bridge is the bottleneck, not the causeway.

realisticman: Quote:The

realisticman:

I'd like to see a source for that statement. And not one from someone working in the BC tourism industry. Or a PR firm paid to represent the industry.

Train too

I'm not sure that a final design for the new bridge has been decided on. I recommend rail on it too.

The Lion's Gate could, perhaps have been double-decked. COPE and the NDP didn't want that. A tunnel was also rejected by them.

Do you think the Millennium Line was also a waste of money?

realisticman -

I said C. James wants the bridge after transit. I didn't say one excluded the other. James just wants to make sure that development of transit moves ahead of twinning the bridge.

realisticman: Quote:I'm not

realisticman:

I didn't ask what you recommend. I asked whether there are plans to use the bridge for rail.

No, not without building a new bridge.

Commuter rail. Commuter rail. Density is obviously irrelevant here.

I think a cheaper, more flexible system could have been built. Same with the Expo Line.

Overruns

Lots of things pay for themselves if given enough time. The Fast Ferries would have too if they hadn't been sold off by Campbell for peanuts.

And unlike the Convention Centre which adds "spin-off benefits" to make its numbers look better, its pretty easy to tell when ferries have paid for themselves. Even the Coq has probably paid for itself by now, 20+ years later.

And for the record, the Fast Ferry overruns were small potatoes compared to RAV and various other projects the Libs have undertaken. Its just no one in the media cares when the Socreds or the Libs run over budget. 50 overruns from now I'm sure they'll still rather talk about the fast ferries.

So you want bridges twinned and roads twinned, as many as possible I assume. Since the Lower Mainland doesn't have room to grow except to the east, just how much of our land should be devoted to roads? And how do all these car-centred projects square with Campbell's "green" future talk? Do you support reducing emissions? How?

Sustantial

tax relief for very small engined vehicles would help. I like rail. I also think that the elevated system was a political, rather than a practical, choice. Expo Line kicked it off and Millennium cemented it.

Where should the fast ferries have run? All I've heard is that they played havoc with their wakes and sucked up logs.

Sharing,
you said I was a bit behind; with all due respect I wasn't, you were.

r'man - diversionary?

I think not.

Campbell’s penchant (this isn’t really a government – it’s a pathetic one man show) for rewarding his friends is at the very centre of what's wrong with this province; what's wrong with Vancouver and what's wrong with Gateway. You know perfectly well that Carole James (in one of the few sensible things she's done since becoming leader of the opposition) has made it very clear that the new Port Mann crossing should be part of an overall transit plan.

We already know from the government's own estimates that GHG contributions WITH Gateway will be greater than WITHOUT and that at least 40% of the total load comes from transportation. If the best we can expect from Campbell is more transit like the Canada Line (an over blown boondoggle financed with legerdemain that will do little of nothing to address real transit needs) and gimmees to the road builders' association like the new highway to Whistler then the criticisms from Ms James' are both sensible and prescient. The question is not whether there will be a recession after 2010, the question is only how deep and attenuated it will be.

Long foolish drunken sprees always leave a serious hangover.

I won't even bother addressing to the insanity of building a convention centre to attract more tourists who are addicted to the crack-cocaine of international air travel. It won't be long before unnecessary air travel - especially for business - will considered as insane as smoking cigarettes in public. As in most things, for some reason British Columbia is usually too stupid to learn from the mistakes of others.

How does it feel to be a dinosaur?

Oh, I forgot

Sorry West, I forgot that every single thing that the Campbell government does is absolutely futile, only for his friends, probably criminal and that the end is neigh. Seems to sum up every discussion you have. Silly me.

The truth hurts...

But that's not MY problem...If you really think that Gordon Campbell has had an epiphany on the road to Damascus, show me one one thing he's done that doesn't smack of PR and self-interest.

This is the man, after all, who held a province-wide referendum on native rights and went to court to try and break the Nisga'a treaty agreement. Or did that happen before you GOT here.

realisticman: The

realisticman:

The Millennium line was a terrible decision and the Canada Line is far, far worse. With regards to the Port Mann, just remember to heed the words of your fearless leader from back when he was mayor of Vancouver:

Skytrains, ferries and taxes

Unfortunately, as we know from what happened with Honda, it will lead to companies wanting to jettison safety in order to improve their mpg rating and qualify for tax reductions. Its an idea that sounds reasonable on paper but it distorts the market due to the fact there will have to be a line drawn somewhere as to what cars qualify and what don't. Perhaps a sliding scale rather a line in the sand?

However, we'd still have the problem of people not owning cars subsidizing with their taxes people who do. This is a time when I think it would be better to raise the tax on gas.

Agreed

"Experts" have said they could have been modified to deal with the design problems and that that would have been far cheaper than throwing them away.

Revenue & Who Pays

Frank

I'm sure no two economists could ever agree to any conclusion as to who pays into the transport system the most but car owners pay tax when they buy, tax for service, parts and labour, tax within the costs of AirCare and ICBC rates and, of course, a big chunk of tax, including; Metro Vancouver tax, BC tax, and Federal tax, at each fill up. What's that figure we hear that the feds take in yearly from the lower mainland, $700 million? The overall provincial take has to be huge. Transit has to be subsidized more.

Density

r'man sez:

A fast rail link out to north Surrey and Langley might be practical but is the density there?

Well, I could make a pretty accurate suggestion about just where the density is, and if the ears of r'man are burning that is because they are close to the DENSITY.

Density and Rail

I believe the West Coast Express has been quite successful. Certainly Mission can't be more dense than Surrey or Langley.

I hear you

Even though my ears are burning and quite red, laddie. Auch, there are so many wee cells crammed in there, koolcoot, you're nay the first to wonder how so many can be packed in so tight.

So, let's tell them to build it.

You're So Dense

You think this song is about you!

HaHaHa, r/man - that's not what most people mean when they say that someone is DENSE. You're so dense you don't even get it. Is English your first language? I hope you kinda learn it someday.

Och laddie you punneth - twice

Very clever. Ya must be a Lowlander. Is ya fave colour orange, too?

Seeing as you brought it up Frank

"Experts" have said they could have been modified to deal with the design problems and that that would have been far cheaper than throwing them away

They were bought by "Experts" in an open auction that was advertized globally. They went for what they were worth - scrap. Not because of workmanship, because they were far too expensive to operate. They were underpowered with high speed diesels that had to operate at near full power to get to thier design speed. Gas turbines might have made the difference, far more reliable and lighter and designed to run at high power 24 hours a day if need be.

So why haven't the "Experts" modified them and sold them for big bucks? Neocon conspiracy to contionue to embarrass the NDP MUST be the only reason to keep them tied up to the dock years later slowly corroding under thier shrink wrap.

Good points, happy

Often wondered myself why those boats just sit there. Looks to me as though they bought a couple of pigs in a poke. Maybe they're waiting for another NDP government and hope to then sell them back.

Or maybe

They could be used as training vessels for the BCFMWU to practice steering without hitting big things...

Actually

They're parked there at Campbell's request - in hopes that folks won't realize the convention centre is burning cash at a far greater rate than the ferries ever did. Leaving them there as a kind of Potemkin village as it were.

As sensible people and businesses (one of the few good ideas in Gordo's bag of tricks is the fact he finally realized there's no more need for public servants to travel back and forth like lemmings in the modern age) recognize that air travel is the moral equivalent of smoking cigarettes in public the convention centre may also need to be shrink-wrapped to preserve it.

In the end, the ferries may well prove to be a much better deal. If only Campbell hadn't been so anxious to let those skills lapse while he transferred good ship-building jobs to German unions in a country with a sensible set of economic policies.

So I was right

Its a neocon conspiracy. Parked there at Campbells request. Please tell us how you know this, did one of your shadowy "friends" tell you. Do you know Gordo personally? Or Dennis Washington? I can't wait to see how you're going to skate all over the place NOT answering my question while taking up tons of space with one of your repetitive holier than thou rants. Just answer the question. What FACT can you provide to back up that pathetic, riculous, even for you, statement

PS they've been parked there long before the convention centre expansion was even being talked about.

And secondly

They're parked at the facility of the company that bought them. WHERE ELSE would they be parked Mr West? And the ship Repair business is sound in BC. Thats what we do best. Lots of happy Union employees. Whats wrong with that? How many failed Make Work projects will it take to make you happy. On the other hand don't answer that, I don't have time.

The story on the Fast Ferries has been written. They were parked by BC Ferries because they were bleeding the corporation dry for the reasons I've already stated. If you want to debate the technical merits lets go. I don't think you're qualified. End of story

And thirdly

The same company that eventually bought them had made an unsolicited bid of, I believe it was around 60M, for them after they were parked. The NDP, not wanting to admit failure going into an election declined and left it for Gordo-as everyone but the truly deluded knew that the NDP wasn't going to have to deal with them after the election because they weren't going to be re-elected. So the offer was withdrawn, no one else in the entire world was interested and they went to auction eventually for 20M. So the NDP's parting gift to the taxpayers of BC was an extra 40M to pay for in the name of Politics. Thanks Ujal

I seem to have touched a nerve

Interesting.

Also interesting, if you care to check, that I'm not the first person who has suggested that the CEO of the province is very happy to have them moored exactly where they are.

You can check it out!

And I hope you enjoyed that $200G shindig that David Hahn held for the good burghers of Flensberg too. All good union men and women...and such good value for the money.

By the way, have you been at a BC FERRY terminal lately? Try to find a parking spot for 5 minutes when going to pick someone up - it's an interesting experience. You'd never know it was part of our highway system would you?

You should really pick another name happy.

How about 'angry' or 'bitter'. The NDP was in power for 13 years since 1900 and it did more real lasting good for this province in those 13 years than all the Socred administrations combined - including the current one...happy!

You did exactly what I said you would

Not provide anything of substance to back up your pitiful statement other than "Others say the same thing. You can check it out." I challenge you to provide some objective data and you come back with that. A perfect example of why the NDP has only lucked out for 13 years with supporters like you making thier case for them.
Why don't you try again, this time challenge my statements with FACTS rather than turning left and spinning out in circles. Think you're up for it? Based on this comeback we already know the answer.
Just like I said, you're not qaulified.

I'm a regular ferry user Mr West, normally once or twice a week. How often do you take it? Things are slowly improving there. I've noticed a definite improvement in the employees attitude and service since they had thier contract arbitration handed to them. On the other hand I suspect the circumstances surrounding the Queen of the North sinking has also taken some of the wind out of thier sails. Humble pie as it were. Talked to Jackie lately? I thought not, she seems to have gone underground.

And we both know who the angry and bitter people are don't we. Only a lousy 13 in a 107 will do that to you. Its understandable.

No they're not - I use the ferry all the time too

And I frequently have to pick people up there. I find it pretty pathetic to see 80-year olds forced to pay for parking for more than three minutes just to pick up a passenger – frequently after having to walk 100 metres after they’ve parked their car and paid the necessary fee. It’s supposed to be a service – not a bunch of blood suckers. As for the Queen of the North – who knows what happened? I do know that the corporation ignored a whole range of safety issues and had no idea that two people drowned on that ferry and that, without the prompt action of the crew there could have been a lot more.

Yet the NDP did more of lasting value in those 13 years than the total product of all the Socred years including since 2001.

Facts, you can't handle the facts happy. I can't remember where I read that line about the parking spot for the ferries - I think it was in the Sun - I don't read the Sun very often and I certainly don't keep any files of a story like that. I just laugh because Campbell and the people who support him are so predictable - instead of defending the indefensible, they attack the record of a party that hasn't been in power for 7 years - a government that managed to ride out both the federal government's austerity program and a complete collapse in the commodity market. Sure they made some mistakes, who doesn’t? Tell me one thing that Gordon Campbell has handled right since he came to power, one single thing.

This government couldn't have balanced the budget without an increase in commodity prices worldwide and several hundred millions of dollars in Federal equalization payments. Those are facts too happy. A little inconvenient for you I know, but facts none the less.

You're right about it being undstandable - the average voter has to be pretty stupid to cast a ballot for CEO one-man government.

There you go again

"the average voter has to be pretty stupid to cast a ballot for CEO one-man government."

Insulting the MAJORITY of your fellow citizens. We're just "stupid"
Oh yes, and greedy, liars, cheats,and thieves to boot. Tell us, do you have any new material? No? How socialist

Majority?

Not even close happy - only 45.8% of the British Columbians who voted cast votes for the Campbell party. You really need to do your homework.

The turnout was only 62.36% of eligible registered voters so, if you can do some simple math, you'll recognize that about 28.5 % of my fellow citizens support Campbell. You're the one who is insulting the truth by implying anything else.

This material comes from the elections BC site - another prominent socialist resource.

Moreover, when it comes to insulting, happy, I wouldn't presume to try to teach you a thing.

Fun with figures

Just like a Glen Clark budget (joking,couldn't resist old boy) So I suppose that had 100% of voters done so then the NDP would have romped to victory? Or would the percentages on both sides just been higher, but with the same overall result. Sounds like a Majority to me.
And what about the Glen election, when the Libs took a higher percentage of the Popular vote yet still lost due to FPTP. I'm not crying about it, thats the system and I accept the results.
Your thoughts? See, no insults

I'm not crying about it either happy

And I appreciate the fact there are no insults for once - however, you still aren't dealing with the situation on the ground today - you're grousing about imagined insults yesterday and you've never once denied that the NDP, in the few years it was in power, had to address a far more serious economic situation than anything Campbell encountered.

I think that's because you're really a disgruntled working man who feels uncomfortable supporting a man like Campbell and is constantly confronted with the essential contradiction that entails.

Of course there are other possibilities - such as that you spend too much attention to the compromised media in this province and not enough trying to figure out things for yourself.

There is no way, even in 2001, that Campbell had the support of a majority of British Columbians...and of course the same was true of the NDP governments---> which I'd never be so foolish as to deny.

The point, quite simply, is that our democracy is sick and governments - especially this one - pay more attention to their political contributors and lobbyists than they do to the real needs of the MAJORITY of the citizens.

I think if you've taken the time to read what I write here that I've been as brutally critical of Carole James as I have been of Gordon Campbell; for different things, but just as critical.

Campbell will continue to draw most of my fire though because he's the one doing all the damage.

Thats nice

You seem to have a lot of opinions about me. How bout we just drop the personal stuff. I believe the only opinion I've ever made towards you is you're a socialist. Your own words and certainly not an insult to you, no?
So go back to my last post and give a rebuttal on the points I raised. Not who you think I am or why I'm so dispicable.

We don't even have to bring Gordo or Glen into it. Unless you can't help yourself.I think you managed to get through the Hockey thread without blaming Gordo once for all the wrongs there.I was impressed.

IS GORDO RUINING HOCKEY TOO?

My God, why didn't someone tell me.

You don't know how to be anything 'but' personal --- and anyway, I thought you were leaving.

Why the need?

GWest

Several hundred millions of dollars. Wow. I'd always though of BC as a place that was loaded with plentiful natural resources and an educated populace. How on earth did they decline to require several hundred millions of dollars from the federal government? Couldn't have anything to do with lousy management, incompetence, scaring away of investments and generalized shooting-itself-in-the-foot policies from the inept NDP could it? No. Must have been bad luck, eh?

R'man

Yeah, one would think, until one realized that all three of those years were in years wholly governed by the BC Liberals, after their massive tax cuts that benefitted the top 3% of income earners more than the other 97%.

Are you getting the hint yet? Do you want a new calculator, or do you want to use Ron's?

People who aren't earning money can't afford to make the economy go 'round. And we aren't earning money.

http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/bus_stat/econ_stat.asp