Brad

Not be negative? Look at yourself, all you do is post links throwing dirt on the NDP. All Campbell and his acolytes did for the 1990's was launch court cases against the government and attack them every single day in the media.

What you don't want is the Left to do the same thing as the Right always does because you're unable to bear criticism of your party.

who has the balls to stand up to big business?

what's the point of having a government if they're not going to redistribute wealth from rich to poor, and make sure peoples' vital needs are addressed. all people. if they don't spend my tax money on housing and health care and education and maintaining the commons, they're just thieves. and if that's not their priority, there's no point in endorsing them or the system that enables them.

what?

i only posted my comment once .... honest.

Prediction

At the current rate of decline Brad (Luke) should be the last card carrying Liberal in BC by April.

Geez, losing 85% of your membership must really put a strain on things eh? How do you decide who gets to be a candidate? Draw short straws?

Maybe Seth is right, maybe your party is ripe for a takeover.

sludge and coyote

Let's say 80% of you don't vote, what happens?

I say nothing except pundits shake their heads and think you're all too busy watching American Idol and its the NDP's fault.

Stop the Insanity

You must understand that elections are not won, they are lost. The NDP has only assumed power in BC because the Socreds made mistakes. The NDP always fail to realize that most BC voters are relatively conservative in the fiscal and lifestyle sense; they want decent social programs, but they don't want to drive out business or run down the economy to achieve social justice.

Instead, I hear the same tired arguments from the NDP about class warfare and waging war against big business. Private business and jobs go hand in hand. And your voting base is made up of working people trying to raise families. So stop whining about how no one understands your socialist heaven. Adapt to the political reality.

The NDP has to realize that the fight for political power is a battle for the political centre. Occupying your potemkim village of the left may win you cheers down at the union hall but so far it hasn't attracted voters. Such suicidal intransigence! The NDP needs a radical, generational change to reinvent itself as a party of the middle, to triangulate policies that are attractive and to attract sensible candidates- not the Che Guevera fan club members.

So your Bill Tielemans and Glen Clark club dinosaurs should be consigned to the dustbin of history. Steadfastly cling to the far left has turned the NDP into a joke. I'm sure Jimmy Pattison hired Clark in order to prevent him from running BC into the ground again. Clark made a fool of the NDP with his own brand of left wing cronyism, arrogance and incompetence. Ultimately the NDP must destroy the NDP in order to save the NDP.

All of you miss the issues and points completely. The voting public accepts a certain level of corruption and incompetence from govts- right or left wing. After all govts are inefficient machines and policies are blunt instruments.

Everyone finds the left wing diatribes to be tiresome and repetitive. The voters naturally want better lives without the Maoist tinged radical changes. The NDP doesn't have the monopoly on caring for their fellow man. If you can't believe that then the public will treat you the same way they cope with a commute through the Downtown Eastside- they'll plan a route that ignores the entire area.

Sure, it sounds like the NDP will have to sell its soul to win the centre. But what if that soul was misguided and just plain wrong? BC is one of the remaining homes of this fast disappearing species that is even crazy enough to think that Cuba is a workers' paradise.

Big business is not a monolithic entity. It encompasses alot of different people including employees who don't want to lose jobs due to NDP policies. It's that simple. All businesses are part of the solution. It's sad to witness the NDP's collective inabiity to adapt itself; instead it's so plain to see that the inner circle is dominated by stubborn fools who are fighting yesterday's battles.

Something wrong?

Bobby Peru's response is repeated 8 times. Is something wrong with the site?

YES, THERE IS GLITCH AND WE'RE WORKING ON IT. VERY SORRY FOR THE REPEATS! -- TYEE EDITOR

Brad

Shallow?

As for teebird he thinks unions have too much influence in the NDP although they have far less than the amount business has in the Liberals. Nuff said.

Irony.....

Ahh, our shameless self promoter doth speak from the pulpit again. Does it not strike anyone else how this "pundit" has not even one iota of journalistic integrity? He is now using the media in his attempt to take of the presidency of the BC NDP party, much to his own personal gain. His years of shilling for the NDP various media outlets now come to fruition, or at least that is his hope.

Moving the NDP to the left is absurd. The only successful NDP parties in Canada have gotten themselves elected by taking the middle ground. Thirty percent of BC voters are hard lefties and over the years the NDP has managed to attract a significant number of swing voters. Moving left will not keep these voters in the fold. Besides, should this ever happen, the Lefties would spend more time making sure their members are ideologically than actually preparing to govern.

There was much rejoicing in the Liberal Party when Chairman Bill let his real agenda show.

As expected.

Here's Wilfride, Luke and Bobby Peru all saying the NDP must move to the middle. The liberal spin machine is in overdrive trying to protect their privilege. I have never know anyone so desperate to offer advice over and over again even though they know it is ignored. Makes you wonder why they are so desperate. We know why don't we?

Brad the stalker

You're starting to remind me of Polakite and his unrequitted (hopefully) love for Mary Polak.

This lusting after female politicians must be a Liberal thing.

NDP needs a one eyed king to lead the blind

To Tyee editor: Hope you fix your website problem. Whether I use Mac or PC, my posts are replicating through no fault of my own.

Even when I try to help the NDP re-brand themselves, they bite at me. Hoping that the populace will surrender to your wisdom while you howl in the political wilderness about social injustice is a sign of insanity. You gotta go to the voters; the voters won't come to you.

Gary Mason's feature in today's Globe and Mail cogently states the NDP's crux: you guys have a large following of radicals who are living in the past, quoting Tommy Douglas as if he was a prophet- and hence, unable to move on and effectively deal with the 21st century. It's laughably ironic that he says you are as dogmatic as those ideolgues you hate: the far right.

Even your union leaders have been wandering far too long in the political desert. They are yesterday's pathetic leaders. Alot of younger union members don't even see themselves as aligned to the NDP or even socialism- the fire and brimstone parables that the gray haired union leaders love to spout. They offer no strategy for renewal or achieving political victory. They're more like a church (unwavering in its ideology)than a political party that wants to win office.

Yet, we see on this site old school subversives praying for the people to take to the streets, the workers to seize control of the means of production. You guys have been watching too many Communist Party film reruns of "People's Tractor Factory No.45".

Looking around BC, can we at least agree that no one is likely to 'take to the streets'. We live and want to solve our uncivilized problems in a civilized society. It's unacceptable for our streets to be blocked by bike protests or union protests.

But, ultimately it's the big unions that still act as the master puppeteer in the NDP. At some point, a core group of revolutionaries in the NDP is going to have to brave a break with its decaying past. Because the union leadership will never change or adapt it's ways.

Tieleman, in his Globe & Mail interview claims that, "Class is B.C.'s biggest dividing line." It's evident that his ignorance of the political and demographic reality is the biggest dividing line and gulf between the hardcore, old left NDP and achieving political victory.

Great!

I am sure the NDP will really appreciate the support of young Marxists and the this will cause NDP support to surge!

Well said

"They're more like a church (unwavering in its ideology)than a political party that wants to win office."

For the hard left of the NDP, idealogical purity is the most important thing. Winning elections is secondary. For some bizzare reason, they feel moving the party even more left will somehow benefit them.

They are handing the Liberals the 2013 election on a platter doing it. Again, they are devouring themselves from within.

"It's unacceptable for our

"It's unacceptable for our streets to be blocked by bike protests or union protests."

Not according to the police. They've repeatedly recognized the Charter right to freedom of assembly and consider safety for all involved to be more important than isolated traffic delays.

Having said that, 99.9% of blocked streets are caused by accidents due to poor driving habits. If traffic jams get you down, I encourage you to barrack for better driver education.

"For the hard left of the NDP, idealogical purity is the most important thing. Winning elections is secondary."

Principles would be a less provocative descriptor. I guess it is old-fashioned to think a politician would stand by the promises and positions they espouse during an election campaign.

Kevin Bell

I was very disappointed when I read the sites you offered above, since I too believe that until the NDP openly advocates Socialism, it doesn't stand a chance against the Liberal's pseudo-Leftism.

However, your sites are in opposition to Capitalism, which is an illusionary goal, since nobody, anywhere, - not even in Cuba - can supplant Capitalism as an economic system, and Capitalism is NOT a political theory.

The modern day methods of managing Capitalism fall into three methodologies. with Fascism on the extreme Right, where what is essentially laissez faire Capitalim is promoted, to Communism, where every major source of Capital is State owned. Socialism strikes a workable balance between the two.

Our fight is against the Fascists, who have cloaked total Capitalist control of the economy in the garb of a false Democracy.

Marx's critique of Capitalism was totally correct
in assuming that the uncontolled Capitalist will become parasitic upon the State, just as we are witnessing with today's "meltdown".

In Marx's time, however, nobody held any hope that governance of the State by the people - today known as Democracy - had the slightest chance of succeeding.

However, since Marx's time Democracy has been shown to be workable, and out of that realisation has grown the political strategem of Socialism, in which the State can take advantege of Capitalistic strategies while at the same time controlling the Capitalist's tendency toward self-serving excess.

The FaScists in the US have been succesful in conflating Socialism with Communism. Many Canadians believe that to be true, and I note that the European press is now promoting that attitude too.

The distinction between Socialism and Communism HAS to be clearly made, as does our fight with the Fascist's interpetation of Capitalism. Until that challenge is taken face on with pride and vigor, we are lost, having abandoned the field to the Fascists.

Wilf stating the obvious

"For the hard left of the NDP, idealogical purity is the most important thing. Winning elections is secondary."

Of course. Which is why we think you guys on the Right have no principles except a love of power.

I have to wonder at people who think politics is only about power, what's the point then unless you're one of the elected with the big salary?

Here's the thing, if parties exist only to provide jobs to their members then politics becomes boring and there's no reason for Palmer, Leyne and Smythe to be employed covering them. And certainly no reason for me to take an interest in it.

Bobby Peru (posting on his Mac with Safari 4.04)

"Even when I try to help the NDP re-brand themselves, they bite at me."

Because we don't wish to be rebranded. We think its your party that needs a housecleaning.

"Hoping that the populace will surrender to your wisdom while you howl in the political wilderness about social injustice is a sign of insanity."

How so? Its something that's important to us. We think that unless you're the 1 in a 1,000 that has no wiring for compassion or empathy its a natural human trait to be concerned for the welfare of others. And we don't try to appeal to the psycho vote, we know it'll go Liberal.

There is no reason to divide people into "past" or "modern" when the issues don't change. You either care or you don't. 23% of us do. Liberals and non-voters don't. Whether you're living under the rule of the Sun King in the 18th century or Gordon the Great in the 21st, a concern for human welfare either motivates you or it doesn't.

"It's laughably ironic that he says you are as dogmatic as those ideolgues you hate: the far right."

Yet you only want out side to change. Why not change your own dogmatic side first?

"But, ultimately it's the big unions that still act as the master puppeteer in the NDP."

You obviously don't pay attention to the list of who pays for the parties. Its your side that is controlled by a single interest group. They provide you with almost all your money. Try to fix that before lobbing stones from your glass house.

"Tieleman, in his Globe & Mail interview claims that, "Class is B.C.'s biggest dividing line." "

That's true.

On a personal note

The reason you, Bobby Peru, get a rough ride here is because you haven't once in your years on the Tyee ever responded to what another person posts. Every single one of your posts is a rant that you shout at others because you think only your opinion has any validity.

The concept of having a conversation where you actually have to take a moment to read and digest other people's posts is lost on you because you don't want to hear their opinions.

Frank...

Hmmmmm ... people in North America are either in, or aspire to be a part of, the middle-class unlike the class structure in Europe.

I'm middle-class like everyone else. Do you define yourself as 'working-class'?

BTW, what about those rumours of the working class proletariat rising up in both Alberta and Ontario and over-throwing the bourgeoisie ... ;)

Brad

What percentage of Lotto 649 players aren't millionaires?

What people aspire to is neither here nor there, its where they are that matters.

That was the "structural deficit" Luke

"Unfortunately that chicanery backfired when the media was all over it." That was the liberal and their "structural deficit" which has since been discredited even on the Tyee. The $2.5 billion deficit left by the socreds was an auditors report back in early 1992 and had nothing to do with Glen Clark. It is in the record. As I recall the press never disclaimed it and the right-wing just ignored the reality wexpecting Moderate Mike to slash and burn like Campbell is doing now. The difference is Campbell owns his problem and Harcourt inherited it.

This is a classic example of how twisted your reasoning gets. You could only come up with that lie if you were being directed by the Premiers PR room. Keep spinning though it is treally fun to watch.

I wonder at the qoute below

"Whether I use Mac or PC, my posts are replicating through no fault of my own."

That is repetition of the spin we're talking about right? You know Liberals are good the NDP is bad doesn't matter if they walk on water.

One more thing Luke

Quite noticeable was that you couldn't find any "copy and paste" item to support your position on the $2.5 billion. Obvious then that you have to fill the space with vacuous mental meanderings.

"I'm allright Jack" syndrome

"people in North America are either in, or aspire to be a part of, the middle-class unlike the class structure in Europe."
You said it!
That is exactly why we have no social services for the multitude who do not manage to get to a middleclass level.

I have no quarrel with a person "making it" as long as he has the decency to care for those less fortunate.
Therein lies the difference between our philosophies.

Skywalker...

Sometimes it's always wise to bite your own tongue! ;)

During the mid-1980's and into 1990, the Socreds recorded surplus budgets. During the 1991 fiscal year two things happened:

1. A recession with the spike in interest rates;

2. Since the Socreds were in election mode and facing/staring at electoral defeat, they were making spending announcements like crazy, mostly capital improvement projects.

Revenues down - expenditures up in 1991. Voilà, the Socreds first deficit since 1985. That was NOT a structural deficit in 1991.

Those structural deficits came along during the NDP's regime between 1991 - 2000, whereby the NDP had a deficit every single year. With thse deficits piling up, BC's debt doubled from ~$17 billion to $34 billion.

Yes, the NDP was the first BC government in history to have STRUCTURAL deficits during the 1990's.

Going back to the topic at hand - the 1991 deficit which the NDP deliberately "padded" by $600 million. (It's wasn't $1 billion - my bad).

None other than Will McMartin here on the Tyee confirms that:

http://thetyee.ca/Views/2005/05/14/RememberNDPStructuralDeficit/index.html?commentsfilter=0

And there's your cut and paste! :D

Since we're attacking party records

Median incomes in BC declined between 2000 and 2005 by 3.4%. Worse than any province in Canada. In fact every other province except BC and Quebec saw median incomes rise.

But then BC under the Liberals is used to leading the country in bad things.

2008

Saw GDP and GDP per capita in BC fall by 1.9%. We haven't seen a fall by more than 1% since Bill Bennett. Way to go Mr Premier.

Then again I'm betting that the stats for 2009 will be even worse.

Since We Are Having A Cold Beer...

GDP Per Capita - Chained to 2002 Dollars

1991: $30,112
1992: $30,004 (NDP government)
2001: $32,727 (NDP leaves government 10 years later
2008: $37,446

Personal Income Per Capita - Chained to 2002 Dollars

1991: $27,365
1992: $27,075 (NDP government)
2001: $27,742 (NDP leaves government 10 year later)
2008: $33,263

Disposable Income Per Capita - Chained to 2002 Dollars

1991: $21,212
1992: $20,853 (NDP government)
2001: $21,449 (NDP leaves government 10 year later)
2008: $26,110

http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/bus_stat/bcea/tab1.asp

GDP chained to 2002 dollars

1991 101,593
2001 133,403 a 31% increase under the NDP
2008 164,161 a 23% increase under the Liberals

The NDP also created more jobs and the median income was higher.

The trend is down down down

And of course, 2009 has obviously not been a good year under Campbell's leadership so his GDP figures will look even worse in a few months.

Falling incomes

Could the fact that BC is leading the country in falling incomes be part of the reaon for leading the country in child poverty?

Or would BC government taxation policies which switch more and more of the burden from business and the wealthy to the poor and average joe's also be part of the problem of child poverty?

Obviously I think so.

Frank...

In this case, you look at financial matters on a"per capita" basis. That's the real measurement.

Good one though! Can I offer you another shot of rye? :D

Inquiring minds want to know

What is the reason the Liberals don't have conversations with their supporters about what policies they should champion?

Is it because 85% of their supporters have quit the party or is it because the business sector, which controls and bankrolls the party, won't allow it?

Now about that renewal

"..the gray haired union leaders love to spout. They offer no strategy for renewal or achieving political victory."

Renewal yes, political 'victory', no. And why should it be otherwise? In the early days, the party and the unions supported each other. Now, the unions can stand on their own and do so, while the party is in need of restructuring big time. The unions in a competitive work market have been forced to be innovative or die. Besides, the credibility of big boss management has completely been gutted, as we have all seen how small and scared the big bosses really are, close up. We as a community have won ground in understanding of minds and how they work, and we know now that the 'us and them' paradigm needs to be tackled in ways completely different from the traditional fire-with-fire that is still being thrown around in the tired old rhetoric.

Truth is, union leaders today have no time for politics. And politicians cannot expect help from unions. They have met, like ships in the night, and now they have sailed past each other. Next chapter.

dorothy

Unfortunately business leaders pay very close attention to politics. Donations of course, third party advertising of course, and also buying tables at luncheons.

But also owning the media and filling it with writers that toe the line.

Costs them a fortune no doubt but they seem to have decided its worth it.

Well the article sure

Well the article sure brought out a lot of supporters and no supporters as well. Next time around I sure hope they all vote and bring their friends along to the voteing places. a heck of a lot of NDP supporters stayed home, which begs the question WHY

NICE TRY Luke.

That means the inherited deficit for the NDP was ONLY $1.9 billion. That proves your point? You must be joking? Now compare this to the surplus budget the Liberals inherited. That one was confirmed by the Premiers own chosen panel and the Auditor. Then consider the complete dishonesty in the liberals "structural" deficit claim which the very same article blows away. You are out of ammo. but then that is the usual.

BCNDP 09 election effort could been better, no argument there!

It was an organizational failure on several levels. Of course many dissatisfied NDPers blame the loss on the centrist vs. a more left leaning bent. But BCNDP standings now still show it wasn't about a lack of support.

I think the veteran political organizer & journalist, Zack Exley, who also worked on Obama's campaign would agree.

BCNDP could have won or lost the election on 100 or more issues, but it still was a reasonably close race that they could have easily won. The party needs to reorganize with a coherent strategic plan and they don't need to alienate anyone. Quite the contrary, they need to be more inclusive and reach out to connect with more people.

That's what I'm talking about

"Unfortunately business leaders pay very close attention to politics. Donations of course, third party advertising of course, and also buying tables at luncheons."

You're describing exactly that miserable symbiosis or maybe rather mutual parasitic, if that's not an oxymoron, relationship there is between politics and some business. And you think unions would figure as intelligently led by hopping on that stupid bandwagon? This is where the making of a new model that makes the old one obsolete really can shine. Somebody was mentioning innovation as an uncultivated field. There you have it. What should unions do? I think they should educate everyone and anyone they can get hold of till they're blue in the face. Never let up on the vigilance for a teachable moment, in any context, place, time whatsoever. This is something that will walk a big circle around the sad symbionts and hit them from behind. Some unions are already investing heavily in all sorts of teaching that is community-directed, as well as doing studies in varying fields. Many unions are on the way to developing into well-run businesses in their own right and will be ready to outshine the tired old boys clubs standing in line for government hand-outs, the former proud and high-nosed entrepreneurial class. All they do these days is whine. I'm not talking about small busineses here. They often have some of the same grit as many skilled tradespeople, and the same kind of resourcefulness. I'm talking about the bloated corporate giants who have all but forgotten how it feels when one's feet touches the ground. 'Business' is not a monolith, as Ed Deak has often enough pointed out. And some of them actually work instead of scouting the horizon for 'special status'.

Those are the ones unions should pick as allies in innovation. I could see something come of that.

Frankly, Frank

Frank, thanks for your personal note. Yes, I try to moderate my tone, but in this arena we are engaged in intellectual combat where the stakes are the right to govern BC. While all views are entertained, not all views are valid; some are right and some are wrong. That is the basis for lively debate.

Yes, I think I address questions and issues posed to me, but I answer them in my own way. I am argueing an agenda.

In the case of the BC NDP, it is obvious that they have to make a major decision on what they have to be. The Liberals have been re-elected enough to be called successful. They too will have to adapt to the changing voters, but that's another story. Actually, not changing (staying hard left) or driving hard left are doable options for the NDP. Indeed, that's what they are more or less doing now. However, there are enough prominent voices in the NDP that are openly saying that's suicide.

In order to be called modern and realistic, the NDP hardcore leftists will have to admit that wealth creation is an important element of a fair and just society. Free markets and capitalism are here to stay. Stop talking about your socialist heaven. Today's markets are regulated- it's just a matter of how much, little and how well. So your monster of unfettered capitalistic evil is a figment of your imaginations. I know that cuts like a knife, but just look around you- beyond your own narrow circles. And those of you waiting for enough social unrest to validate your crusade will be waiting for a long time.

Equating the support of unions as being the same as big business' support of the Liberals is a flawed analogy. Big business doesn't always get its way on the platform- if it did we would be drilling for oil offshore (which I hope for as the money will pay for the homeless). Big and small businesses create jobs. Unions do not. BC Unions demagogery and hard line are a turn off to most voters. Unions don't stand for workers. They only stand for union workers.

Unions stand for everyone

"Unions don't stand for workers. They only stand for union workers."

More soundbites. More falsehoods. Even the most cursory knowledge of history demonstrates that unions have always and continue to advance the cause of workers, regardless of their affiliation.

As for free markets. What a joke. Name a single 'free' market that isn't affected by some tariff, or gov't subsidy, or some other mechanism that tilts the playing field.

Straw man

"the NDP hardcore leftists will have to admit that wealth creation is an important element of a fair and just society"

No one on the left has EVER been against wealth creation. We are just against the wealth ending up in the hands of a tiny minority. As for "free markets", they don't exist. They never have and never will under capitalism. How can there be a free market when you have privileges such as limited liability, the corporation as fictitious person, patents, trillions of dollars of corporate welfare etc and etc. Capitalism is the state socialism of the rich! See http://www.mutualist.org/

Bill Tieleman weighs in at last

Thanks for the many stimulating comments and arguments here in response to my column - I appreciate the debate.

But I also have to say that some posters want to position this discussion as capitalism versus communism - it is decidedly nowhere near that.

Dawn Steele made good points at my blog - http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2009/11/battle-for-future-of-bc-ndp-is-on-in.html?showComment=1259278953617#c6895564129758431346 - wherein she says the lines drawn are both artificial and disastrous either way.

Let me expand on that - as a small business owner for 12 years, I'm in favour of profits. I'm not anti-busines or anti-capitalism. So those are not the arguments I'm making here.

Contrarily, working more in and with the business community than many others, I understand their complete opposition to anything or anyone who threatens their profitability - things like a higher minimum wage, better workers' compensation, spending more on social programs instead of corporate tax cuts, etc. - these all terrify them.

Far enough it's naked self-interest.

But there are areas where the NDP and businets, and in particular, parts of business, can agree - the HST for some being a good example.

Ironically in the Thursday Globe and Mail I end up "debating" former NDP Premier Mike Harcourt. And yet when he says the NDP has to focus on the economy, I agree - and already did right after the election when I criticize Carole James and the party for avoiding the economy for the while eleciton period - despite it being the No. 1 issue for voters!

There's much more to discuss and it's important - not simplistic.

Bobby Peru

"In the case of the BC NDP, it is obvious that they have to make a major decision on what they have to be."

Not "have to", what we want to be. But with respect, that's for us to decide not you.

"However, there are enough prominent voices in the NDP that are openly saying that's suicide."

Its a democracy, they are free to join or form another party if they don't agree with the majority of us.

"In order to be called modern and realistic, the NDP hardcore leftists will have to admit that wealth creation is an important element of a fair and just society."

If you mean creating wealth (food, goods, services) from labour I can't imagine you can find anybody that says that's wrong. Especially in the NDP of all places. However, perhaps the term "wealth creation" is a code phrase and you mean something else entirely?

"Free markets and capitalism are here to stay."

I doubt it. The world can't afford another 200 years of it.

"Stop talking about your socialist heaven."

Why not take your own advice and quit talking about your capitalist heaven? Because it certainly doesn't exist anywhere on this planet.

"Today's markets are regulated- it's just a matter of how much, little and how well. So your monster of unfettered capitalistic evil is a figment of your imaginations."

Au contraire. Capitalism is becoming less regulated all the time. Perhaps you've missed all the triumphalist language surrounding globalization? All those I've heard seem to be rejoicing over less regulation, not more.

"And those of you waiting for enough social unrest to validate your crusade will be waiting for a long time."

Perhaps, but I'm a Roughrider fan that hopes to see at most two more Grey Cups in his lifetime, waiting is no big deal.

Bobby Peru part 2

"Equating the support of unions as being the same as big business' support of the Liberals is a flawed analogy. Big business doesn't always get its way on the platform-"

Unions do not enjoy half the the power within the NDP that business does within the Liberal Party. Business writes almost every cheque in your party. It vets every candidate and bankrolls only those that pass muster. A potential Liberal leader without the support of business cannot become leader of your party.

Once in power, your party checks with business leaders before introducing any legislation. Business interests then decide whether the legislation stays or is dropped.

And once out of power business takes care of the same politicians with seats at the table.

"if it did we would be drilling for oil offshore"

Business decided there wouldn't be any minimum wage increases, there wouldn't be any increases to welfare and crown corporations would be sold off to investors.

"(which I hope for as the money will pay for the homeless)"

Hope is good, reality is something else entirely. Why hasn't natural gas paid for the homeless? Or hydroelectric? Or mining? The answer is because there already is enough money to pay for the homeless, what there isn't is political will and there won't be no matter how much offshore oil drilling occurs.

"Big and small businesses create jobs. Unions do not."

Businesses do not create wealth, labour does. Business is just a parasite that lives off the labour of others.

Bobby Peru part 3

As I said to Brad earlier, the reason the Liberal Party doesn't have the kind of conferences the NDP does is because your party isn't interested in what members have to say.

There is no reason to have a convention that tries to define who you are because that decision has already been made by business.

The Liberal Party doesn't have to deal with what the NDP party deals with, what the media calls "embarrassing proposals from the floor". And that's because those kinds of ideas are killed by party apparatchiks long before the cameras are turned on.

In the case of the NDP, the leadership can fight proposals they don't like, they can even ignore them, the membership give them some latitude to do so but a price will be paid eventually unless the leadership shows good faith and delivers on other proposals.

Within the Liberals this dynamic doesn't occur, business runs the show, it pays for all the balloons and even the dj hired to crank out something "hip".

The only thing that matters on your side of the fence is power, not principles, and that's because there are no principles except what business interests and the candidates they bankrolled have decided.

Which is why I'm not surprised at all to hear Seth's description of a Liberal meeting.

Right on Frank!

"The Liberal Party doesn't have to deal with what the NDP party deals with, what the media calls "embarrassing proposals from the floor". And that's because those kinds of ideas are killed by party apparatchiks long before the cameras are turned on."

This is called the open and honest government which they promised. Funny thing is that they treat the rest of their constituency the same as they do their party members. For their corporate contributors all they do is give them a private audience and then do as they ask. It keeps the money flowing and die hard liberal/reform sheep just go along.

Only one thing to fear...

“Contrarily, working more in and with the business community than many others, I understand their complete opposition to anything or anyone who threatens their profitability - things like a higher minimum wage, better workers' compensation, spending more on social programs instead of corporate tax cuts, etc. - these all terrify them.”

There is a happy medium to be found, where everyone can meet up and maximize the collective benefit. Many of the things that cost money and cut down on ‘profitability’ will amount to good investment in the longer term. The problem is that it may not exactly come back to the same hands as profit, but more diffusely in the heightened quality of the pool of ‘Human capital’, which is, of course, shared.

This fly-by-night quality of the industrial entrepreneurial setup illustrates one of the things where, in scrapping the last vestiges of the feudal system, we may have thrown out a thriving, healthy baby with the bath water. Imagine that you could count on the same seven people, and if not them, their offspring and further descendants, working in your business for all foreseeable future. Everything you invested in them, their health, education, general well-being, would come back to you in the form of a far better quality and consequently better performance, of your work force.

This was the feudal system when it worked. And it did in some quarters. But, like big business today, it only works when everyone follows the same norms. If some ‘outfits’, Wal-Mart comes to mind, scrape the bottom in the staff management department, treat their workers like dirt, there is a short-term profit and competitive edge to this, and one can simply walk away from the wreckage, having taken the maximum profit there was to be had. So, unless there are some major new social contracts created and bought into by all contenders, we will not see improvement, but will continue to hobble along the same miserable path, our so-called community being in the nature of an ourobouros or Midgaard serpent, circling up and eating itself from the tail-end.

Can Ragnarok be far away? Some think not. Others think the ‘sheeple’ will never get up the guts. As for the business community and their ‘terror’, It brings out again the truth of the observation, that fear is more to be feared than any other single thing in Life. Our greatest need is for real leaders with guts and determination, and that is something I fear, for last time, that call was answered by a Hitler, a Mussolini, a Generalissimo Franco.

Major semantic problem

"NDP needs a one eyed king to lead the blind"

I believe the saying is that among the blind, the one-eyed man is king. However, you say you are looking for a one-eyed already a king. There would be only one qualified applicant for that post, and he ain't a social democrat, but rather a rugged individualist:

54.
Wise in measure let each man be;
but let him not wax too wise;
for never the happiest of men is he
who knows much of many things.

55.
Wise in measure should each man be;
but let him not wax too wise;
seldom a heart will sing with joy
if the owner be all too wise.

56.
Wise in measure should each man be,
but ne'er let him wax too wise:
who looks not forward to learn his fate
unburdened heart will bear.

(The Havamal)

http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/havamal.html

This goes quite against the democratic principle that no one should lay claim to be 'wiser' than others, as we're all equal, dammit.

So, you will have to find a solid egalitarian-minded bloke and poke on eye out on him, somebody who, asked who did this to him, will answer: NO ONE did this to me...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphemus

...and, of course you are going to have to identify in advance that guy who can't keep his mouth shut, and eliminate him...

Nothing has really changed in politics since prehistoric times...

Moving beyond the old NDP/Socialiast Guard...

Anarcho writes, "No one on the left has EVER been against wealth creation. We are just against the wealth ending up in the hands of a tiny minority. As for "free markets", they don't exist. They never have and never will under capitalism. How can there be a free market when you have privileges such as limited liability, the corporation as fictitious person, patents, trillions of dollars of corporate welfare etc and etc. Capitalism is the state socialism of the rich! See http://www.mutualist.org/"

I might quibble a tad with this re "wealth creation", and agree more with Fait Lux, but nonetheless, I get your point and agree wntirely, comrade. (You got a problem with that, stick it where the sun don't shine. I like it. 'Sides it's gender neutral.)

But earlier upthread, ME2 made a point as well, which I kind of agree with, I think. I'll see how he responds to this.

There is only one economic interface with nature that humankinbd has. What detrermines its "character" however, whether its "capitalist" or otherwise , is, whom owns and controls its means of production and distribution, and determines who gets what share therefrom. Currently that is a small ruling class group called the capitalist class, less than probably 1% of the total population.

Which is what determines the current character of the economy as "capitalist".

You change that, "democratize" the system of ownership and control, and share distribution, into the hands of the working class (NOT THE STATE or a political party) and "the broader community" set of interests, whilst it is still the same "economy", the "character" of it has changed into something "qualitatively" different.

The "old" Communists that followed the older Acarcho-communists, and socialists came to tend to equate "socialism" with "the state" owning and controlling the economy, "State Capitalism". In the end, they changed nothing, except to create a new set of "ruling elites".

That is NOT what such as I and anarcho are talking about here; at least I don't think he is. :-) Now maybe ME 2.

Though, if I am right, what the hell is ME2 doing advocating for the NDP here?

They are the status quo. Just change "the state", or at least who formally "governs" it, presumably themselves, and you are in the new world order. All without challenging who owns and controls the underpinning economy.

I don't think so.

The NDP is about not changing dick... except who is in the formal "government" seats, and who sits on the "other" side of the House. Total hogwash, careerist, stand with the Status Quo.

It's time to move beyond the old Communist "Stateists", ditto the old Socialists, and the NDP status quo defenders, and really goddamn democratize this bullshit show... in a way that qualitatively changes the "character" and "content" of society, the state, and the economy.

Dan the socialist

Dianne Watts is a carbon copy of Gordon Campbell.
I would love to see Glen Clark, very brilliant, likeable man, back but the voters have long memories of the NDP and short memories of the B.C. Liberals aka Socreds.
My suggestion for premier would be Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan
and for him to form a new party.

Running on Empty- Today's NDP

Coyoteman represents the other kind of well meaning BC socialist- the person who seeks 'New Man', the enlightened society where there is only love. It reminds me of a Star Trek TNG line where Patrick Stewart says that in his society man is free to pursue goals that better himself rather than for material gain. Yes, that would surely eliminate all greed, politics and power struggles.

But, the reality is that if you put more than one human together on a desert island you will have a power struggle. A minority of people will always be more successful than the average majority. It's always been. And no matter what political party rules, stability is preserved through a degree of income and wealth redistribution. But, it's impossible to make things absolutely equal.

Now back to this cage match for the life of the BC NDP.

The old guard like Tieleman are engaging in self-defeating behaviour despite the evidence in front of them. Income and class divides do not necessarily determine rigid voting patterns. To say that all middle class and 'rich ' people and businesses will never support the NDP is to mire yourself in circular arguements. By stereotyping your so called opponents you blind yourself the complex voting patterns that are issue, not ideologically based.

Some of you vilify the 'rich', but yet I have yet to hear a definition of what or who is the rich? I know that's another site, but do you think a 'star chamber' is convened to make decisions? It's this kind of ignorance that leads your party to make ill conceived decisions like taking a harder left and hoping class warfare will swell your ranks. Even thinking about that rationale defies logic in the face of evidence that states that voting patterns have become more complex than Tieleman's or any of the other dinosaurs' strange throwback to Lenin's writings.

Then, you call yourself an open and inviting party while at the same time you attack any truly diverse opinions. Sure, you're open right up to the point you don't want to listen to divergent opinions.

BC needs the NDP- a recognizable alternative and brand to replace the Liberals when their ideas and ranks grow stale (as it does in all long ruling political parties). But the voting public isn't going to accept the NDP as long as stalwarts like Tieleman and his buddies continue their obstinate and confrontational doctrine. We'll need to wait another 20 years for time to purge the hard left out of the NDP and for intellectually dynamic and pragmatic leaders to reshape the ranks and image.

And here's the NDP's obituary...

The NDP in BC has always been and will always be a political movement. It's really not a party that can act as a convincing and effective alternative to the government in power.

As a result their good ideas (like national healthcaare) are often stolen or adopted. Then, the NDP followers become bitter and forced to come up with new ideas to retain their faithful followers. And those new ideas need to become less radical, less ideological and more inclusive if the NDP hope to become a party that voters will choose to govern regularly.

Instead, the NDP only isolates itself from voters and ordinary working Canadians by creating radical and ideologically driven policies.

The NDP will have to stop acting as a movement and appeal to more than those voters who the NDP claims are the "ordinary working Canadians"to the exclusion of the rest of us.

so, who is average?

"The NDP will have to stop acting as a movement and appeal to more than those voters who the NDP claims are the "ordinary working Canadians"to the exclusion of the rest of us."

Ordinary Working Canadians comprise the majority!

The problem is that too many lower rank goofers think they are not in that group.

Examine your job and see you will ever be more than working hard to keep a decent living standard, then you will know where you stand.

The goal should be that every working person should be able to afford the basics and save a bit for emergencies, then have a good retirement income as well, reaching that goal does not make you rich but is the standard for "the ordinary working Canadian"

Evidence please

"Instead, the NDP only isolates itself from voters and ordinary working Canadians by creating radical and ideologically driven policies."

Like what? You just can't spout like this - you have to provide concrete evidence for your claims.

Social Darwinist clap-trap

"But, the reality is that if you put more than one human together on a desert island you will have a power struggle. "

A fundamentally fascist or social darwinist view of humanity. How could early humanity have survived if they were at each others throats?
Study some anthropology and paleontology please!

Class illusions about the system and the NDP "solution"...

"The problem is that too many lower rank goofers think they are not in that group." wrote alive, attempting to pin the tail on the donkey.

Ahhhh, actually, it is more likely, or to be gracious, at the very least as likely, that the "higher" up the working class order that you go, toward the true middle class and upper middle class end, the "professionals" and "managers" for the system, that you are more likely to find "illusions" about ones class position.The lower orders, in fact, tend to have fewer illusions than, ohh, let's say, university profs and small business types.

The thing is, those of us on the lower orders of the working class also have fewer illusions about the ndp, than do. let's say this time, the petite bourgeois small business person or doctors and lawyers etc., or again, academics. They tend to still believe that you can "change the system from within" by capturing formal "governance" alone, without dealing with, for example, who has the real underpinning managements and executive control and distribution of share power in the economy and its enterprises. (Trade union leaders also often labour, no pun intended, under the same set of illusions. They really think that they are in on and share power within the system, whereas they are really just, more often, lackeys viewed with hostility and contempt.)

Then the NDP get into government, only to find that the real ruling class that controls the economy, even if the intention of the social democratic government is presumably "honourable", and has the power to limit what it is they can and cannot do. And if they insist over much on doing it their way, the ruling class simply turn their media on them, pull their investments offshore, and otherwise pull the plug on them. The NDP retreats to back to doing what they are told to do, behaving like every other party to capitalism pretty much. Maybe a few more minor "tweaks" here and there which the ruling class will tolerate., how e'er begrudging.

No, we in the lower orders actually have fewer illusions about capitalism, and yourselves, than your naive, living in lala land "professional and educated" selves, i.e. the higher and more privileged stratas of the working class.

That's where it goes wrong!

"The goal should be that every working person should be able to afford the basics and save a bit for emergencies, then have a good retirement income as well.."

Are you listening to yourself? This is precisely that grossly-callous-to-the-welfare-of-the-next-generation NDP Drivel that make ordinary working people with a couple of kids shake their heads, hold their noses, and vote liberal. Simply because whatever they are saying, at least they're not saying 'screw the next generation'. Their policies may well be doing it, but seeing this province knowingly elects a drunk driver who
philanders, not once, but twice, obviously it's words not action that determines the choice of the voters.

The rosy perception of the minimum standard presupposes that the next generation numbers so many, that between them they can economically carry the older generation who do not work, but are 'retired'. Below replacement rate, this isn't happening. When will people understand that? We will become that old generation that must earn its keep. Our children and grandchildren will then at least have a chance of balancing out their way of living in a world that will not ever again be easy street because we can rely on numbers of children to look after us. The alternative is untenable, an insurmountable bill written up for the next generation to try to pay. This expectation must be ditched. Yes, those who fall ill must be looked after, but there is no reason why healthy oldsters cannot earn a living, and many have done so. Some old Canadians have never asked for a penny from their kids and grandkids, and I'm not talking about those with an investment income, but those, such as Ed Deak, who will no doubt put in a day's work in some fashion till he falls down on the job. Were there more Canadians and BC'ers of his caliber, we would be doing famously.

And I'm not saying this from the comfortable distance of being in the 40's or some such place.

..more

The more

"The problem is that too many lower rank goofers think they are not in that group."

This is loser's talk. You want to try to think on how to win minds and hearts of the voting population? Then don't call any of them 'goofers'. In politics, your basics should tell you that whatever the problem is, it is NEVER THE VOTERS. The voters can be as misguided, as unfair, as 'wrongheaded' as they wish. It's their sacred privilege. It's what there is to work with, and starting to blame them is guaranteed to send every good intention you may have down the toilet.

Just as, according to Bobby Peru, the voting pattern has become more 'complex', so has the notion of class. To me, for instance, class is closely connected to standards of behavior. If the grace and decorum shown falls apart when it suddenly ain't easy any more, I consider that person to be of low class, regardless of by how many multiples they make more than I do. So, by my definition, the woman who sleeps in the store entrances down the commercial strip a block away is of higher class than some of my neighbors, who behaved like egotistical thugs regarding the parking situation during last winter's snows.

Yes!

I can totally back up Coyote's insight on the futility of 'getting active in politics and change the system from inside'.

Change such as we are looking for does not happen through siding with the status quo. It remains a cheap shot to think we can maneuver our way to it in a short term. It happens one person at a time,
through being the change we want to see happen, and gain the respect of our compadres on that basis. One must certainly be explicit and articulate and, perhaps even 'vocal', but the path of a career politician only allows one to effect such change for which the groundwork has already been laid by people on the fringes of political life or even in completely different context. It all works together and is, indeed, as 'complex' as Bobby would have it. It is up to each of us who have some vision to find a place within that complexity, where we can be heard and seen as innovators. There are no quick fixes or turning of the tables that will happen in a cataclysmic way. Would we want that? not likely. There's always blood spilled in the arena after those spectacular showdowns in the OK Corral style. Not terribly sustainable or humane.

I think it is important not to overrate to what extent the 'ruling class' controls the economy. If we won't buy their widgets, they can't sell their widgets. The desperate plea now issued from that same ruling class for all of us to shop till we drop should serve the very real dependency on us. If you have a bit of turf, a bit of space, and are good with a needle and thread as well as a hammer and saw, and if you're not sheepishly hung up on getting 'a new one in a box' of everything, you can to quite an extent withdraw support from unworthy producers of a lot of things. I'm into boycotting even second-hand goods made in China. Serves the bandits right that their stuff produced by child labor can't even sell 'pre-owned'. The idea is free...

Acouple of ugly typos, my apologies...

1) I don't know why I hit the 'enter' button in line 4 of the second paragraph. Sorry if it confuses.

2)It should read:

'The desperate plea now issued from that same ruling class for all of us to shop till we drop should serve to demonstrate the very real
dependency on us.'

I shall endeavor to repent, reform, and live a cleaner life at the keyboard - or maybe condescend to proofreading for a change...

Bobby Peru

"Running on Empty- Today's NDP"

Actually, we're running 12% ahead. As Vaughn Palmer said, we're doing better than we've done in 20 years. You should ask yourself why that is.

"To say that all middle class and 'rich ' people and businesses will never support the NDP is to mire yourself in circular arguements."

I think the word "circular" doesn't mean what you think it means. The NDP is not trying to win the votes of the corporate sector so there is nothing circular about it. Its just a simple fact like saying the sun will come up tomorrow.

"By stereotyping your so called opponents you blind yourself the complex voting patterns that are issue, not ideologically based."

Think back over your long history on this website and then tell me again not to stereotype your opponents. You and I both know I can spend 10 minutes on here and list 20 quotes of yours that would make you look a mite hypocritical for that statement.

"Some of you vilify the 'rich', but yet I have yet to hear a definition of what or who is the rich?"

Why is that relevant? Do I ask you to define "poor"? To define "normal thinking"? To define "mental health problems"? And whatever other catchphrase you tend to use?

Bobby Peru part 2

"It's this kind of ignorance that leads your party to make ill conceived decisions like taking a harder left and hoping class warfare will swell your ranks."

This is where the ignorance light on your dashboard should start going off. Look at the last election and try to understand the dynamics of it. You want to tell yourself the people of BC rejected the NDP and embraced Campbell. You couldn't be more wrong. Liberal voters stayed away in droves. NDP voters stayed away in droves although the NDP popular vote percentage increased. In other words, the Liberals didn't win in the manner you think they did. The NDP lost by turning off the people who will never vote Liberal.

That's a very big issue which few on here seem to grasp. Those voters are in many cases low-hanging fruit for the NDP. They don't have to make a big show of moving to the centre or convincing Palmer and Smythe they're almost as right-wing as the Liberals. Those are people who want left-wing policies and are quite prepared to vote the NDP brand as they did in the election just 4 years previously or other elections prior to that one.

Could you imagine the chances of the Liberals winning an election if a few hundred thousand right-wing voters didn't show up? Well, that happened this election to them too. And the only reason it didn't cost them is because the NDP suffered from the same dynamic. But it bothers the Libs as much as it should bother the NDP. Their answer is that a new leader will take over from Campbell, there'll be a big party and all the sins of the past will be forgotten and all those voters will return.

That's naive. Because the part of the Liberal base that reads the Western Standard is quickly coming to the realization that they need a real conservative party to represent them in future. Just as many who have voted NDP in the past have decided they need a Green party and just as many are thinking they need a new left-wing party.

Bobby Peru part 3

"Then, you call yourself an open and inviting party while at the same time you attack any truly diverse opinions."

Not as much as you. You come to a left-wing website to attack our opinions. I don't go to right-wing websites to attack yours. Ergo, if we're having a pissing contest to see who likes to attack opinions he doesn't like more, you win.

"We'll need to wait another 20 years for time to purge the hard left out of the NDP and for intellectually dynamic and pragmatic leaders to reshape the ranks and image."

This is the same thinking I've been seeing on here from you guys on the Right for years and you just don't get it. People on the Left don't just sit and take it when a party doesn't represent them. They find new political vehicles or they stay home.

If the NDP moves to the centre and purges the "hard Left" then what happens will be the same as what happened when they didn't bend to every request the Greens made. They will lose those voters and any chance of being elected and they might even see a competitor created.

Again, the simplicity of the world you perceive makes your arguments lacking. Although often Luke and Wilf's grasp of these issues are just as bad so you're not alone.

Campaigns are the time for that sort of thinking. That's when people like Palmer and Smythe reach new levels of mediocrity and report on politics as if they were calling a horserace at the PNE.

"As a result their good ideas (like national healthcaare) are often stolen or adopted. Then, the NDP followers become bitter and forced to come up with new ideas to retain their faithful followers."

Not at all. Dippers see it as a point of pride to see their policies adopted by other parties. There's no bitterness whatsoever. As for "faithful followers", again, you're demonstrating an ignorance of the political dynamic. That's where those people are in their beliefs. Their beliefs don't change based on the party.

"Instead, the NDP only isolates itself from voters and ordinary working Canadians by creating radical and ideologically driven policies."

Again, no. The NDP puts forward, or should put forward, policies that appeal to the people that vote for it.

"The NDP will have to stop acting as a movement and appeal to more than those voters who the NDP claims are the "ordinary working Canadians"to the exclusion of the rest of us."

Which entails moving the party's policies to the Right of the spectrum and losing its old voters as it gains new ones. Will it gain more new ones than those it loses? Well, that's the rub isn't it?

Children are slowly dying in poverty

BC children aren't living any kind of life in BC as low income children are on left on their last leg thanks to poor diets and the garbage handed out a food banks. BC children live in a constant state of hunger and food poisioning and malnutrition and rickets are on the rise.

Thats right children don't live in poverty they die in poverty. And children that live through the horrid conditions in BAD CANADA have no future as governments take the food out of the mouths of babes and feed it to the rich. Get used to the BAD CANADA because something tells me its gonna stick in more ways than one.

Drop Dead

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTHEALTHNUTRITIONANDPOPULATION/EXTPAH/0,,contentMDK:20216938~menuPK:460203~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:400476,00.html

Lets be honest here you don't leave people dying on poor diets and unsafe foods and unhealthy conditions and disease ridden streets and still pick up their health care bills, it just isn't going to happen as the best the low income are going to get is street and treat. Hurt, injured, heart attack, need an ambulance well unless you got the cash there is no ride as BC residents are left to drop dead. What an easy way to get rid of people leave them without enough to survive and they will surely perish, ain't it the truth.

Scrambled Eggs and pass the ammunition :-) ..

You and I might disagree re the NDP, Frank, but your handling of the Peru Virus here is exemplary, and nails these rightist attempts to drive the NDP further to the right, right on. That the views of the Peru types finds an echo in some NDP members though, who also want to move more right, doesn't disturb you, sounding a lot like many of the MLA careerists and party leadership as well?

Anyway, I didn't really come in here to attack you per se. More to compliment you. :-)

Hear ya morechatter. And you are correct, of course.

Dorothy?

Just confused and all over the map still. :-) Though once in awhile, despite herself almost, she does manage to nail one. Which is kind of fun when she does, because she'll, predictably, then turn right around and draw the exact "wrong" conclusion.

And she is interesting, in a way, seriously, like trying to unscramble a scrambled egg. :-)

Hang in there, Dorothy. I disagree with you pretty much, but then I don't question your sincerity either.

Lot's of snow in these here hills today, covering all the trees. But which is still better than the muck that's been till now, for my poor penned critters. (And finally got around to passing my PAL test the other day, just to harken back to another discussion. Now I can get some ammo. :-)

Don't Vote! Let the System Stew in Its Own Juices!

Luke's quote

"During the mid-1980's and into 1990, the Socreds recorded surplus budgets. During the 1991 fiscal year two things happened:"

The facts are that the liberal/Socred's balanced only one budget in the 10 years prior to 1992. Look it up my friend. The NDP in their ten years balanced two

Moe Sihota!??!?!?! What the EF?

Really BC, REALLY?

Is it too much to expect a 'leader' in this province not to have a past filled with scandal and malfeasance?

It cracks me up to read these stories postulating the pro's and con's of this persons agenda over that persons supporters and what not WHILE TOTALLY IGNORING THE BACKGROUND OF THIS MAN.

BC seems destined to remain the joke of Canada.

At this rate I expect to see the BC Rail culprits running in the next elections too.

These guys and gals couldn't run a pop stand.

Quote:

"Get used to the BAD CANADA because something tells me its gonna stick in more ways than one."

I hear ya, too, morechatter, and you are right on.

We have the BAD GOVERNMENT..... and the BAD MEDIA who made it all possible. A complicit media who drooled on command, who relentlessly carried the torch, and who rarely reported a thing of substance in the last eight years.

This characterless bunch of wannabees and their fawning media entourage are being mocked by the world.

And after all the endless spin, what did the privateers manage to make in their non-union shop?

What was their "new and improved" product on a once world-respected Canada?

A now world-renowned BAD CANADA.

Made of many sharp-edged parts:

Child poverty.

Largest carbon footprint.

Taser Territory.

Olympic Hush-or-Else Zone.

Human rights gone. Sold down the river.

Ummmmm....do we still have rivers?

Oh, right. Rivers sold down the river, too.

Along with just about everything else.

Think of it -

All this and more

Brought to you by...

The infamous tag team of Gordo and Harpo.....

And their even more infamous handlers off-stage.

Remember the good old days when a Canadian logo on a backpack was met with the warmest of smiles and an invitation to dinner?

coyote

Thank you! and thanks to you too Skywalker!

"That the views of the Peru types finds an echo in some NDP members though, who also want to move more right, doesn't disturb you, sounding a lot like many of the MLA careerists and party leadership as well?"

Well, the NDP is an alliance and I respect that others in the party lie a little more to the Right just as some may lie a little more to the Left.

Its just the way things are.

If the Left would stay on the NDP bandwagon as the party moved to the centre electoral success would follow. To many that would be a good thing and I suppose electing the lesser right-wing party would be if we are forced to endure a first-past-the-post electoral system.

However, one of the reason I pushed for electoral reform was that the two main parties have a lock on the chance to win and its turned a lot of people off as their votes don't matter.

I'd be quite happy if there were more options and the NDP was just one of 3 or 4 parties on the Left. Then we'd never have to have this discussion.

Martin Campbell

Its a position no one cares about, its party president, which is why no one here is talking about it.

Without googling do you know the Liberal party president? I bet 9 out of 10 don't.

lynn

"remember the good old days when a Canadian logo on a backpack was met with the warmest of smiles and an invitation to dinner?"

And now because of our mining companies Canadians abroad want to be seen as Americans.

"And now because of our

"And now because of our mining companies Canadians abroad want to be seen as Americans."

And don't forget our serving the US Empire cause in Afghanistan, Frank. That's part of the new image reality too. (Though we actually played the same role with the old British Empire as well. Which everyone now forgets. :-)

Unions, the NDP and Class war

Lot of talk here about the relationship between the NDP and Unions.
I think that something needs to be clarified: the only Unions that can be counted on for NDP support are PUBLIC Unions - BCGEU, CUPE, et al.
Or, the "Entitlement Class" as I prefer.
Private Union members - CAW, Steelworkers, et al, by and large, do NOT vote NDP.
They are the real "Working Class" that most of us associate with.

Gee thanks (I think)

Coyote:

You can't know what your praise means to me! You think I'm managing to be funny. Years ago, some newspaper guy told me to 'stay serious, for you ain't cutting it in the funny department'. Now you're telling me I've done it. Thank you so much.

And you cut it right to the core, I really do have this compulsory analytical mind, that has on occasion served to drive fellow jurors and actually all kinds of fellows up the wall. But it fits my job, what can I say? I get paid decently for cutting things into the smallest possible pieces. So, I guess that's who I am, as the Sue Blue eyes song has it.

It would be nice once in a while to have an argument on a specific point rather than these blanket statements as to what kind of bloke I am. But my old man thinks this is a pipe-dream. 'Don't expect it from us linear thinkers, he says', so I guess I'll make do with the friendly interest. Thanks again.

I hope you won't ever call me a 'hack' again. Not that it hurt, but that IS a misnomer, for I'm not trying to push an agenda for anything or anyone, only to share my thoughts and know those of others, which I think this medium is unsurpassed for.

Thanks to Tyee as well.

About the 'class issue: I'm not so bad an unscrambler as some of the people here, who tries to parse out the 'classes' and put everyone in their place...it's just mindboggling how such categorizations never fit reality more than pretty approximately or as near as darn it.

Yes Happy

Lots of talk about the relationship between business and the liberals. They are right the liberals are in bed with the corporations, Completely. But we never talk about that relationship. It is one the relationship between the NDP and Unions, which you thankfully dispute, that is ever at issue in the debates from Luke, Bobby Peru Wilfride, and now that I think of it, you!

Thanks for that..

You crack me up Skywalker

No, we never talk about the Libs and Business relationships on the Tyee. Never.
GE? Plutonic? Alcan? Accucenter? CN? Just to name a few off the top.
I'm sure they all donate to the Libs of course. Allthough they are just pikers when it comes to Political donations. Did you catch how much the BCGEU gave to the NDP last election? About twice as much as the largest donor to the Libs.
So who's in bed with who?

Eeeek!

"You come to a left-wing website to attack our opinions. I don't go to right-wing websites to attack yours."

This is a 'left-wing website?? What's that mean? I can't voice anything that isn't in keeping with 'left-wing' thinking? How do I define that? The left-wing of the refooorm party won't be the same as the left wing of the communist party, will it? the left wing of politics, then? Now I'm really confuesd! I didn't know this was a defined kind of assigment, 'write something left-wing'. Now I don't know, like the little baby-blue dino in the book my kids had many years ago, whether I 'belong here'??

Dave, please tell me - have I been an 'undocumented' with no green card all this time? Or what are the rules? No, the RULES??

Happy go on please

List the corporate donations to the liberal party and then the amount of money they saved on the benefits that followed. You also crack me up because if the unions gave the NDP one dollar and a corporation gave the liberal a million, you would still rail at the relationship between the NDP and unions. Please give us more Happy. This is great!

Skywalker?

Qoute "List the corporate donations to the liberal party and then the amount of money they saved on the benefits that followed."

You'll have to qauntify that, I don't have a clue what you're saying.
But you're missing my point Skywalker. It's about the difference between Private Unions and Public Unions. The NDP always tries to claim they are the natural choice (or should be) of all Union members. But most agree Private company Unions don't. Why?
Just my experience being a former IWA, IOUE, CAW, USA, IAMAW and IBT member at various times over the past 30 years plus. I'm non Union now but still working in a multi Union company.
So, back on track. Are you pro Moe or anti Moe?
Carole looks like she's staying....

NO I am not missiing your point

You attempt to imply that any relationship with the unions is bad for the NDP but a comparable relationship between corporate interests and the liberals is OK. The fact is that the cost to the taxpayer of the incestuous relationship between business and the liberals is very high. But it is rationalized to us, the great unwashed, as trickle-down economic propaganda. You want to preach about the relationship then you explore just how much in taxes were saved by the corporate beneficiaries of Campbell's policies. HST is just one example. The public gets screwed by the liberal/business cabal but if the NDP makes life a little easier for workers all the benefits are shared among the working population.

The right-wing uses "the soft easy ride" the public sector unions get compared to private sector unions to drive a wedge between the two sectors and sometimes it works. It obviously works with you and it is BS.

One foot over the net

I've been reading about those mining companies lately, Frank.

Here's a good link for people who might want to read about that:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/729147--canadian-mining-firms-face-abuse-allegations

I listened to Carole James on the news last night.

This move farther to the center and this alliance with business is a Big Mistake. And that she is willing to do it continues to prove that she doesn't have the vision or the insight to read or act on what is vitally needed for these more-than-difficult times......

Because it is the price-tagging of everything that is destroying this world, an intentional process resulting in the devaluation of real wealth,and one that is proving lethal to life on this planet. (Real wealth meaning health, education, and a pristine environment brimful with natural resources.)

It is only through strong social structure that we will survive these times. They do us no favours by turning more and more towards the values? of business.

A strong social infra-structure must be in place first. Work on that. A healthy economy cannot help but come from that.

What I am about to write will seem off-base but hopefully it will eventually make sense. Then again, maybe not. ;-)....If so, try not to titter too loudly.

Years ago when I was learning to play tennis there was a great book out about the "inner game of tennis".

Now this sounds aerie-faerie but please stay with me.

The best tip of this very good book (that is really about a lot more than tennis) is to be non-judgmental about your game.

Forget win, lose....and good... and bad.

Just enter the court and do what you have to do.

Don't over-think it. Play your game not someone else's. Basically, the old "to thine own self be true".

Right now the NDP are doing just the opposite.

A distracted hesitant state is the present state of the NDP.

They are all mind, anxiously looking to the right and the left, judging themselves instead of just doing what they are there to do. What they were created to do.

All they have to do is turn up.... and serve the strong social system ball back at 'em with the strong political muscle once unique to this party .... firmly and from their own side of the court.

People who identify and respect that kind of serve will vote for it. Those who don't, won't. So be it.

Right now the NDP are nervously straddling the net.

That's an ineffective, not to mention an embarrassing position to play from.

It's more than disappointing, and equally embarrassing to watch.

(And for the BS Liberals reading this, don't think you've won the game - your arrogance and your inability to ever criticize yourselves or dearest Gordo - and the sheer ugliness of your party will trip you up yet....and you will fall.....hard.)

Thanks lynn!

Enough said.