Back to "journalism" now Bill?

Wow, Bill you really do have chutzpah. Now that you've succesfully led the campaign to sabotage Carole's leadership (remember, we were 25 points ahead in the polls when you started your orchestrated attack), I guess you're back to being a journalist again. Kind of like Glenn Beck (a comparison which I fear will only feed your giant ego). And I'm sure Carole appreciates your kind words...nothing nicer than being complimented by someone who has devoted so much energy to destroying one's career. You've done great damage to the party, Bill. Best of luck working with your 13 co-conspirators in caucus.

"James is a decent person"

[OFFENSIVE COMMENT DIRECTED AT THE WRITER OF THE ARTICLE REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]

She Had to Go

You're nothing more than a stirrer Bill. You, Williams, likely Wickstrom, possibly even Jimmy's right hand man (there's a true NDPer for you) and the whole gang who did Harcourt in as well. I've worked for the NDP for a long time, but if you and Williams remain around, I'm out.
You have nothing positive to contribute. Your entire mission in life is to destroy

STV might have contributed to that....

Sorry, typo

Now there is an interesting coalition.

Bobby Peru agreeing with archer, ferncrest, and Frank. But Bill is right and unfortunately it took this long. We lived with it for the last two so the rest is up to others. Besides Bobby that is...he was never a supporter of anything but the liberals.

MichaelT

Get over what?

Your attacks?

Time for you people to get back what you've been shovelling for the last 5 years.

Lawrence

You were tired of polling at 47% and want to go back to the good old days of 35% because you didn't like that other 12%

We need a new party.

MichaelT

"Please do renew and please do not let backroom dealing give us another weak unresponsive non-politician as leader."

Shove it

@ Skywalker

That's baloney and you know it - truth is you don't write with any clarity...but, just for you I'll post the whole of the comment I upbraided you for:

Bobby Peru agreeing with archer, ferncrest, and Frank. But Bill is right and unfortunately it took this long. We lived with it for the last two so the rest is up to others. Besides Bobby that is...he was never a supporter of anything but the liberals.

I'll stick with my original interpretation of that piece of incomprehensible verbiage AND I'll still keep poking you for an answer to all the other questions you've avoided.

I think I may have once said that people of a certain age sometimes pass their best before date - now I'm sure of it.

I think you're just a cranky old man who can't stand the idea of a competent, intelligent woman doing a job better than any previous NDP leader has ever done it.

And I think that's sad.

ohh Please

G West said: "I think you're just a cranky old man who can't stand the idea of a competent, intelligent woman doing a job better than any previous NDP leader has ever done it."

Such a sad statement coming from you, nobody were upset with Joy Mc Phail, so quit that sexist angle, please.

If you want to talk about that angle, it was Carole who introduced sexism when she started the rule about only replacing females with females, regardless of any other qualification.

Stewart...you're joking right

Three new members - from a bunch of malcontents who see the light of day as commenters (most of them anonymous) at a mildly amusing sort of small ‘l’ liberal news site - now that is something. You should be really proud.

I had calls from roughly 30 people I've worked with in this constituency over campaigns going back into the 1980s since Sunday. Trust me, they're not renewing THEIR memberships.

So, don't get your hopes up - in fact, you'd do the cause a lot more good if you just got the hell out of the faces of the 84% of the party who supported Carole James.

Not to mention all the professional women who now feel utterly betrayed by what has happened to a woman leader - someone with guts and intelligence who dared to try and make politics into something that wasn't about bullshit and back slapping. And, for Christ’s sake – don’t try to pretend you took the high road.

keep posting alive

Every time you do, you prove my point far more eloquently than I can.

Maybe we could talk about your theories of psychology and corrective criminology next.

By the way, alive, you maybe missed it - but I was actually talking to someone else - still, if the hat fits, wear it.

@ GWest

I'm not cranky at all. I see hope but like everyone else here I can sense that the NDP might not be the party worth supporting. That my friend is on you and the other people who have no other arguments to advance their opinion than name calling.

After Carole's last election loss she has had about two years to prove worthy. Nothings changed, now it is up to others.

As for professional women feeling utterly betrayed. it is unfortunate that they feel support as long as the membership props up other women not up to the task. No matter how you spin the outcome to suit your argument, this was about a lack of confidence in the leadership. Some stated it openly others remained quiet because they want to maintain their reputations until the dust settles, still other remained loyal. All you arguments are baloney because there was no secret ballot so we (all of us) don't really know.

Hey but to you I'm just a cranky old man, unlike you, I guess.

She may have had the support of the party

G West, Carole may have had the support of the Party but she didn't have the support of the people of BC.

Tell me, what would have been different in 2013, or sooner, that would have made her the Premiere? She couldn't do it twice, against a hated, God awful Liberal Party so what makes you think she would've fared any better this time around?

Do you honestly think she was the best NDP leader ever? If she was the best don't you think she should've at least formed a Government?

On me? Fuck that. There are no powder burns on my hands.

I'm not the one who has spent the last several weeks (months?) grumbling and grousing about the NDP and their leader.

I've been trying to attack the real enemy - which is, in my view, neocon BC Liberal corporatist thinking and the Campbell record.

I have lots of confidence in women and their ability to do everything men can do and probably do it a little better - you and your old fashioned politics notwithstanding.

I happy to have a lot of female professional colleagues who feel attacked, diminished and betrayed this morning.

As for me calling you on what you seem to be - you need to get over it - I have no idea how old you are, I just know how you act.

I've tried time and again to engage you in a friendly way with a view toward understanding the hateful animosity of your attack on both the democratic system, the party constitution and the leader of the BC New Democrats.

You've managed to dissemble and avoid pointed questions with little more than nominal generalities like 'it's up to others' and suggestions that you've somehow been suffering 'quietly' while Carole James has frittered away a sure thing in the 2009 election.

You and I should be allies – but instead you refuse to recognize what you’ve been up to and you support your case with little more than: ‘Who had ever heard of Carole James before she became leader?’

Carole James was more than up to the task - and she proved it in spades taking the party from 2 seats to almost unseating the Liberals even though she started the last campaign at about a 17 point disadvantage. She did it with a skeleton staff, no money and a considerable debt; she did it against an opponent with the largest newsroom in the country (paid for by the taxpayer) and she did it without the traditional support of big labour.

You might like to talk to the Federal Progressive Conservatives about that - they disappeared entirely after the party was knocked down to 2 seats post Mulroney.

God help up this Maoist revolution hasn't done the same thing to the NDP.

kl - I can't tell the future

Neither can you. By all measures that mean anything Carole James was the odds on favourite to beat whatever cur the Liberals drag out to challenge her...She almost beat them in 2009 - after coming back from a huge polling deficit and, since then, the Liberal brand has suffered a huge degradation in value.

I don't know if she's the best NDP leader ever - but by every measure that means anything - she's certainly the best NDP leader in opposition there has ever been.

We only have elections every 4 years my friend - that's not my fault but the suggestion Carole James hasn't done the job she was picked democratically to do and done it honourably and well is stupid.

I don't know what the people of BC want - I do know that they seem to elect right wing governments about 85% of the time over tha past hundred years...I'd say if she had won the next election she'd have been doing better than that average for the NDP.

But now, my friend, I don't think we'll ever know - because you and your little group decided you could predict the future.

Can I get you to pick 6 numbers for me - I could use a lottery win?

Gwest

You should get checked out, it sounds like you've been bitten by a rabid dog either that or you're off your medication.

Thanks borg

Coming from you, I'd say that's a compliment.

These are crazy times - when a successful democratically elected politician whose party has the support of enough citizens to form the next government - has to walk the plank for the good of a small self-absorbed group with no plan, no program and no prospects, then maybe we all need some medication.

What is that I've written that YOU have a problem with?

Or can you tell the future unerringly too?

Take a deep breath G - it'll be okay

Well G, polls showed that the NDP in 2004 were the odds on favorite to oust the Liberals in May 2005 and how did that work out?

And no, James did not take the party from two seats to 33. It was a combination of voter discontent with the Liberals and all of their broken campaign promises and Joy McPhail's perseverance in the Legislature. James really had nothing to do with it.

G West

I'm just trying to say what's done is done and nobody can change that, that's just the way she goes (no pun intended). Now everyone should just settle down and see what comes out in the wash. Nobody can predict the future we'll just have to see what happens. But I do know one thing, the Liberals are overcome with joy to see NDPers arguing like this about who is right.

So you can't predict the future then kl?

Thanks for that.

Between you and me, I never thought the NDP would win the 2005 election - but that didn't stop me from working as hard as I could to get out the vote either...

Since you now admit you can't predict the future and I know you can't prove a negative I guess we're left with this...the Liberals won in 2001, 2005 and 2009.

I suspect they'll win in 2013 (or 2011 or whenever the Liberals decide to have the vote) and I think there's a very good chance that the British Columbia New Democratic Party is finished as a political force for at least another 10 years...maybe forever.

Borg: Suggesting we should settle down and see what happens 'after' a small group of malcontents about whose intelligence and loyalty I have significant doubts have engineered a Saturday Night Massacre of people I believed in and supported as the best means of making things better is a little rich.

As I said before, I didn't start this knife fight and, frankly, I don't give a shit about what Liberals and Liberal supporters think or what gives them pleasure.

I know the thing that would have really stuck in their craw would be an NDP victory in the next election.

I happen to believe that this little weekend of internecine warfare has made that a near impossibility and, I REFUSE ABSOLUTELY TO ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS MESS.

I'm nothing more than an anonymous presence on a not very important little website.

Your estimate of my influence is wildly out of proportion to reality...like those who rely on Facebook friends and Twitter pals as a way to gauge their popularity the real test comes at the ballot box.

I simply try to point out what I see to be the facts - not my problem if you don't like 'em my friend.

Purity of essence

I think 5 years of name-calling would be healthy. It would get the old creative juices flowing and god knows the party could use some.

Dissent is so under-rated.

"Former deputy premier

"Former deputy premier Christy Clark is entering the race to become B.C.’s next premier Wednesday with a pair of key business backers, including one rallying behind her after planning to initially support the more conservative Solicitor-General Rich Coleman."

Ahem.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/bc--out-christy-clark-as-contender-online/article1828819/

Deputy Premier to Premier -

so logical and she's only spent what the past 4 years or so on the air? on a popular station.

Seriously there was no way, she had to go.

Had to Go/ But did it have to be like that?

Carole James - decent, hard-working, sincere, dedicated, capable, bright. Sadly, just did not have the spark, dynamism, what's-it, to ignite voters. A Joy McPhail firebrand she was not. That it was time for a new leader was a foregone conclusion. But - the timing and method of this dethroning were wrong, harsh and seemingly could not have come at a worse and more strategically inappropriate time.

Moreover, it has given PNG the perfect excuse to place James and the NDP party on the front page of their newspapers - for definitely the first - and now last - time in 7 years and, obviously, for all the wrong reasons. Pathetic. Of PNG - not Ms. James.

It's neither fair nor accurate, to accuse Ms. James of not speaking out often on key, important issues. She DID speak out on fish farms, BC Hydro's private hydro projects, other key and pressing environmental and social issues. I attest it was more the appalling and utter lack of ANY news coverage of any statement she OR the NDP Party have made over the past 7 years that has been the cause of the NDP's zero presence on our governmental front and in voters' minds. So, whether one can fault the lack of NDP profile and election victories in 2005 or 2009 to Ms. James' leadership, or, this total NDP news black-out by the mainstream press and media (Global & PNG) in this province for the past seven years, I feel, is hugely debateable.

With a new leader at the NDP helm, it will remain to be seen whether that leader can forge the totally pro-Liberal/Conservative, monopolistic fortress that is the mainstream press in this province and country at the present time and lead the NDP government into a victory in the next provincial election.

My gosh, I don't need a Leader with a voice so much as ....

I need someone with some vision about returning BC to its social-democratic roots.

This Party in-fighting has been blown out of proportion, imo, but that's what happens when it gets personal.

And it was not nearly as outrageous nor as distracting to me as the Liberal conduct over the last 9 years. We heard pretty much only complaints by the BCNDP about the Liberals, but no significantly alternative direction was proposed. Liberal-lite was the gameplan, and it stank.

Had she spoke as frankly about the proposed fixes to be offered by the NDP as she did in her stepping down speech when she fielded questions -- not off the script itself, which always casts her as uncomfortable, imo -- she'd likely have most the province in her corner. She was guided wrongly, imo, by not playing to her to strength as a compassionate human-being and, instead, was portrayed as a 2nd-rate thinker lacking confidence.

In any event the spectacle continues, and a few with hopes are emerging to support the show. (I won't be one of them.)

Was it only 13?

The 85% support from delegates appointed by the leadership faction now in control of the party is democracy just like Jimmy Hoffa's Teamster union rep system.

In Canada democracy means one man one vote, not the notorious delegate/rep system that the mob uses to run labour unions. James and her handler/programmers knew she would lose by a one man one vote survey by a huge margin.

Rumour has it that James's caucus supporters actually numbered around ten - a small minority.

The outspoken 13 had another 10 or so MLA's on their side that didn't want to be targeted by the thugs that run the party - Sohita and gang. A few of them will want to run to take her place and don't need the baggage.

Given the shit being dumped on them by thugs like Shreck and his pals at the MSM. it's no wonder they chose to go along to get along. This is one of techniques used by third world regimes that want to silence critics. You know Shrek has actually admitted on air that he thinks that the worst of the bunch, the slick, biased, bought and paid for Vaughn Palmer is a great journalist.

Note that Gordo had the same 85% support by party brass and a similar sized group of dissidents. Because unlike James he actually has a brain and some education to go along with it, he realized his goose was cooked and he resigned. With James being too stupid and stubborn (her most noteworthy character traits} to take any hints, the group had to use the nuclear option.

This is the NDP's big chance cuz they have a star waiting to take the reins of power. This is the reason the MSM has released it's wolfpack on the NDP. They are terrified of John Horgan.

Those who have heard him in the leg or on the air, know John will wipe the floor with the Christy Clarks, Kevin Falcons, and Bill Good's of the BC scene - and do it with humor,class and charisma.

You wait and see!!

off-the-radar

”Bill Tieleman has worked long and hard on lots of key issues for socially progressive democrats. He is making a positive difference in this province. He is on our side.”

Bill Tieleman is ‘yon Cassius, with a lean and hungry look’ who has made a career out of fucking over socially-progressive democrats with his uniformly uninformed battle against STV, which, despite its imperfections, would have given those “voters” who have stopped voting reason to start again. If he’s on our side, I’ve yet to see it. He was FOR the Owe-limpics, but ran away to sun himself on the beach in another country while they were on. Meanwhile, I was pushing my homeless shopping-cart disguise up and down False Creek letting the “turrists” know at exactly whose expense this party of billionaires had come about.

Bill’s “brag wall” on his website merely used to make me laugh, but now, in light of current events, I think it’s pretty creepy. What happened, Bill? Carole turn ya down? Gordo spike your ambitions? Mom forget to put out the milk and cookies one night?

I think Bill deserves at least as much heat as the hostage-takers have given David Schreck on that other thread - not because David is right, but because they’re so selfish and short-sighted that they can’t see there was no single right answer. I had a nice pile of rocks to use on the Fiberals in their leadership race, but now that someone’s kind of taken the wind out of the left’s sails while they scratch around to find the next vapid leader in a talent pool bereft of the kind of cheerleader magnetism you all claim is so easy to find out there.... Well, I think I’ll ship these rocks over to Bill’s house instead - he seems to want to tell us that we still have the moral authority to throw them...

Numbers don't lie

Well, I admire the earnest poverty of Stewart MacKenzie and others, but I guess the leadership convention really will be the “proof in the pudding”. Hopefully it will be held more than 90 days from this week so all you “long-time” supporters get to vote.

And there we will see what we will see. Will the membership numbers have risen or fallen? And the finance committee will have to make a report so that the party will know how much money they have to spend going into an election. Will that number be more or less than last year? And will Carole have to wear the blame for that debt too?

Oh, I don’t think this fight’s over for a long time - I’m perfectly comfortable to support pretty much whatever leader comes along, even if some retard wants Marvellous Moe installed in the premier’s chair. I know what side my daily bread is buttered on.

But I think some of the useless idealists among you - skywalker, kl, alive, borg, editing fool, offended, PeteL and MichaelT among you to name only a few, simply have no idea what opportunities you’ve squandered by fighting your particular battle at this exact time when the great Fiberal airship Bilderberg had just gone down in flames and the crew were jumping in flames from the windows, and all the Left had to do was stay out of the way and watch it happen. Then dispose of the trash when it was all over.

Nor do you have any idea just how difficult it will be to recapture any kind of momentum. The media will simply ignore the NDP now, except for their gaffes. Heaven only knows what the unions will do. Ordinary people will simply throw rocks when you come to the door.

There are some among the dissenters who make reasonable arguments, and lord knows Carole was no magnetic personality - that really says something that 47% of British Columbians prefer "vapid" to any other choice doesn't it? - but you're not great enough in number to make a difference to either the party, the convention, or the election, from what I see. You know who you are - I can see that you do.

But you pollyannas? What you idealistic bumpkins need is a church, not a political party. You need to have truth and light and goodness on your side, special dispensation from God, and the moral authority to look down your pinched nose on anyone who doesn't agree that perhaps your revealed Gospel was really written by a bunch of blind hermits in a monastery.

Oh, I’ll vote NDP, because I know what side my bread is buttered on, but I don’t expect a lot of company.

Jeez, seth

...did your water catch fire again? You really need to stop drinking it.

Privilege has its rewards

Skywalker intoned from on high:

"As for professional women feeling utterly betrayed. it is unfortunate that they feel support as long as the membership props up other women not up to the task."

And of course you got to where you are solely on your own merits. Nobody helped you, nobody else held you back, nobody got promoted above you simply because they knew someone, nobody left home and stuck you with the kids and a low-wage job to support them....

There are differences in gender - in talents, opportunity, access, education, background, culture - and all your tears shall not wash away a word of the truth.

But you could make a lot of dissenters real happy right now if you could just motor off back East and enroll Naomi Klein to get herself a boob job and a short skirt and come out here and run for the leadership. Surely then her credentials would be impeccable, and you could forever erase the stain of sexism from your record. Betcha that would get the membership up too, huh?

No... no, there was no pun intended.

samuidave

Is Carole James any different than the kind of person you've said you want to vote for as independents?

She couldn't be nicer and I doubt too many can say she doesn't have a heart in the right place.

She's also knowledgeable about many of the issues facing average people.

Seems to me that if Carole James isn't your cup of tea then I think you will have a long search ahead to find worthy independent candidates unless their only required qualification is that they aren't a member of a political party.

Assumptions

It wasn't the ''bakers dozen''that put an end to CJ.

It was thousands of phone calls and E mails from people like me.

Some people could see the Socred/Liberals were going to put up a lovely dog and poney show to elect their leader, call a snap election and ditch the HST.
Along with lieing their faces off and pouring money into the election they were pretty sure to win the next few election.

This is a tried and true method of wining elections for the right-wing everywhere, I am amazed more people couldn't see it coming.

CJ was a very quiet leader. Even if the lamestream media didn't give her coverage there is always The Tyee.

Did you notice The Tyee is helping the cause by presenting a balanced perspective on BC politics?

The assumption that the NDP will now fade away because they booted CJ is stupid.They would have faded if CJ had lost this next election.

So now the NDP has a clean slate, quit your bitching, and win the next election.

bitching is fine, thanks

"quit your bitching"

It's comments like these that really don't help. Everyone who has a horse in this race is allowed to "bitch," as far as I'm concerned – including the non-insiders who have supported this party and leader for many years.

God knows those opposed to James have been bitching for a long time and they've been free to do so. At least here.

I'm surprised how many in the anti-James crowd don't realize the impact these actions have had on the party. How angry and disillusioned many have become.

It's strikes me as naive to think a few tokken words like, "it's time to pull together" is enough to heal a party this damaged. Had James stuck around and turfed the dissenters (which, btw, I'm glad she didn't) I don't imagine their supporters would be in any mood to get along, either.

Ian Reid has written a post on renewal and trust in which he calls for Jenny Kwan to resign:

http://therealstory.ca/2010-12-07/bc-politics/1954

I'm not saying that's the answer, but I think it demonstrates the kind of gesture that will be needed to start the process of rebuilding the party. Hollow slogans won't cut it.

Ultimately, I think James had no choice but to step down, but like many here I'm pissed at how this went down. I don't believe the dissenters had to go public, it was a reckless move that's killed our chances in the next election.

@ Zalm

If that was a rebuttal, it didn't cut it. So there are differences. The difference between competence and incompetence isn't masked by anything. And, I never intone.

verso

Great post, and I'm not saying that just because I agree with it.

TRUTH is Always Best

The BC Liberals have governed with secrecy and deceit. Every single one of the wannabe-premiers from that camp have lots of baggage, lots to account for. They have lied to their constituents - the people if BC, and lies of ommission are no less evil than the outright lie.

Carole was unelectable; Jenny did what had to be done.

Though I admire your heart for wanting what is best for your party, Verso, this statement of yours: "I don't believe the dissenters had to go public, it was a reckless move that's killed our chances in the next election," cannot be considered as true. The NDP had no chance with Carole James. This is the only way they have a chance.

The public removal of Carole James can be packaged for what it is: a positive move toward open government and public accountability by our elected MLAs. It was Carole James or her handlers who brought out the yellow scarves. She publicly backed those MLAs into a corner. I admire the courage of Jenny and the rest of that 13 for not acquiescing to bullisome methods. They maintained their dignity by not bowing, though it could not have been easy. They maintained their truths as they saw them. They are to be celebrated. They have my support. If they put together a clear vision with a trustworthy leader, they will again have my support, my donations.

The BC Liberals (Christy CLark included) have been petulant liars and secretive truth hiders as MLAs. Democracy cannot exist without truth. It is time that the voters of BC took back what is left of our province. The BC Liberal looting has gone on for far too long. They have corrupted the whole system.

Idealists?

Anyone who thought Carole James ever stood a chance at becoming Premiere was an idealist. Sorry to burst your bubble Seth. The rest of us are realists.

Sharingisgood

"This is the only way they have a chance."

Let's say this true (and I'm not convinced it is), should there be no consequences for going public? What happens the next time a faction is not pleased with party leadership. Should they take their beef to the media? Leak emails to Sean Holman? As a party, is this something that should be condoned or even celebrated?

If there are no consequences, what's to stop an MLA from taking their own pet issues to the media when they don't get their way with the party?

There has to be an answer somewhere between the secretive and iron-fisted rule of Gordon Campbell and dissidents who run to the media when they don't agree with leadership or party policy.

frank...

thanks.

Great post

Well said, SharingIsGood:

"The public removal of Carole James can be packaged for what it is: a positive move toward open government and public accountability by our elected MLAs. It was Carole James or her handlers who brought out the yellow scarves. She publicly backed those MLAs into a corner. I admire the courage of Jenny and the rest of that 13 for not acquiescing to bullisome methods. They maintained their dignity by not bowing, though it could not have been easy. They maintained their truths as they saw them. They are to be celebrated."

Time to Renew / Re-Join the NDP

I'm surprised at the bitterness being expressed by many of the Party's old guard at Carole James's ouster. I'm also astounded at the dire predictions of inevitable defeat being voiced by the likes of David Schreck and Kennedy Stewart--two people who can usually be counted on to provide cool, fact-based analysis. To me, it underscores the gulf that has opened up between the NDP's inner circle and its (dwindling) membership base--to say nothing of its long suffering electorate. Carole James had to go after the 2009 election loss. Her refusal to go quietly forced the hand of MLAs who had the larger interests of the NDP, and the province, at heart.

The election of a new leader presents the opportunity to re-vitalize what has become in many ways a moribund Party--moribund in terms of stagnant membership numbers, falling donations, and a lack of clarity on key policy questions.

Anyone who wants to contribute to the rebuilding of the Party needs to act right now. There is a 90-day probationary period for new members (including those whose membership expired more than a year ago). So, depending on the date set for the leadership vote, there will likely be little time for new members to join and be eligible to cast a ballot. Supporters also need to make donations, by lump sum or monthly contributions, and to get involved with their local riding associations.

One of Carole James's great failings--shared by those in her inner circle--was her inability to generate enthusiasm for the NDP among the very people whose support (and votes) the Party needed to win two very close elections. The record number of voters who didn't show up at the polls in 2009 arguably cost the NDP the election since non-voters are disproportionately low-income people and youth. The re-building of the NDP, and the entry of a strong field of candidates, may convince those voters that the NDP does indeed offer them a real and attractive alternative. That was evidently not going to happen under CJ.

@verso

Do you "pro-James" people not realize that she went public first? What with the stupid yellow scarves and constant commands for people to "stop being childish" and "fall into line"? Her supporters could've avoided a public display like that by sticking to the scrip that the dissidents had of, "There are problems, but we aren't going to comment to the media about them" ... i.e., "No comment." We didn't "start" this war, but you can't expect people not to respond to constant provocations.

Not to mention how ludicrous it was for her to avoid a OMOV leadership review after loosing two-elections. It was reasonable to expect her to avoid the review after loosing in 2005, because the party was clearly more united then. After 2009 it was the height of arrogance to just announce that she'd be leading the party in 2013 period, end of discussion. Had she been smart about it, she would've realized people were displeased and insisted on a OMOV leadership review ASAP after that election. She would've then presented an argument as to why she was going to lead us to the promised land. What was with all the delays?

What your "side" of the argument is engaging in is revisionist history. You ratcheted up the ante by going public first, and you don't like that "our side" won. Fair enough, no one likes to loose, and I don't expect the "pro James" side to fall into line any time soon. It would be hypocritical of me to think those who truly believed in her, above the party's principles, would. I think there will be more people attracted to the party than the party will loose, assuming it gets some spine, but I'm not going to claim there won't be people who are pissed off and tell the party it can fuck off. We can all have our own opinions, but we can't all have our own facts - and your side seems to forget that.

When donating....

to the NDP always remeber to be sure your local constituency gets as much as possible - historically once the party HQ gets hold of it, less flows out to the local level.
There used to be "windows" every so often when the constituency gets to keep more of the donations.
So, better we do the minimum donation when signing up, and ignore most of the funding pleas from HQ and ensure local campaigns are as well funded as possible.

Remember, the same folks who have been running the party are going to be deciding where all our money goes unless we are careful to make sure the local constituency gets the maximum possible.

Ad Hominem lives and breathes here

GeeWest:
I remember that you hate to lose an argument, how convenient that you bring up the issue where you claimed that you own opinion trumped science and personal observations.
How can anyone argue against such claims?

You also were kind enough at one time to explain to poor uneducated me the definition of Ad Hominem, and lately you demonstrated that art when you belittled me for pointing out that James herself engaged in sexism when she introduced the rule about gender replacements.

It is really an eye-opener to see you and Frank get so angry that you forget who the enemy is.

You are right about one thing alive

That rule about gender replacements has got to go.

Gustav:

Truth has been a casualty of this whole exercise. The elitists and their supporters have never been prepared to answer the real concerns of the "dissidents" but pursued a strategy based on discrediting personally anyone who agrees with them. They have been all over the map in their assertions, have misrepresented what we have said and then projected their own illusions onto us so as to have a target for their venom. There is no reasoning with them and we need to get past trying to convince them of anything. It is not possible to argue rationally against irrational positions nor those who hold them.

Tom Berger, Bob Skelly and Mike Harcourt were all shafted and backstabbed by powers in the party who never saw anything wrong with undermining a leader, even when that leader had not gone through even one election, or had won one. Many of us believe the 1969 and 1986 elections were gifts handed to the Socreds by Dave Barrett supporters who would not stand behind a leader they didn't like.
I wasn't aware of the '69 dynamics until much later, but in February 1986 I witnessed Dave Barrett's radio talk show being used to stir up the anti-Skelly movement. Barrett wasn't the instigator, but allowed the trashing by his listeners to go on without any contradiction nor defence of Skelly's leadership.
We all know how Harcourt was the one who paid for the sins of Barrett, Williams and Stupich!

So - it has always been OK for those people to undermine a leader, even a sitting premier, but when the push comes from the grassroots and from non-SEIC members then it is an outrage!

alive

I'm glad your eyes are open now.

Hopefully it allows you to see the fact I papered over all your attacks on the NDP until now when your side forced Carole out the door. Back then I figured you would eventually put aside your petty differences and concentrate on the real enemy.

In your case, I believe you did vote NDP in 2009, although you still weren't 100% onside, others here didn't even do that much. Wore the "non-voter" label like a badge of honour.

The people that hurt the party were the ones complaining about the NDP leadership right through the election of 2009. Attacking the NDP in every second post and ignoring the Liberals.

The same ones now declaring we should all unite and go after the Liberals.

Bullshit to that. I've been going after the Liberals for my entire history on this forum, time to turn the guns inward on the traitors I put up with over the last 5 years.

David

"What your "side" of the argument is engaging in is revisionist history. "

David, I don't consider myself on any "side," though I've been more supportive James than not. I never said the dissidents didn't have legitimate concerns I question their methods and some who believe the party will easily recover form this.

I'm about as far from the inside as you can get but I do know this started before the yellow scarves. You only have to read Holman's site to know that. I've been a life long NDP supporter and voter, and can only say how it feels to see all the gains made in party support in jeopardy.

"Fair enough, no one likes to loose, and I don't expect the "pro James" side to fall into line any time soon."

We agree on that, at least.

"I think there will be more people attracted to the party than the party will loose, assuming it gets some spine, but I'm not going to claim there won't be people who are pissed off and tell the party it can fuck off. "

I hope your right on that score. For the time being, I'm not going anywhere. The last thing I want to see is the BC Liberals form another government. However if the divisions of this party cannot be overcome for the first time in my life I'll consider voting for another party.

Carole James and camp

Carole James and camp handled this in a very unprofessional way. Do you think we'd ever hear the BC Liberal leader in the same position say in a news conference the party is being split apart?

The heavy handed language used against the 13 MLA's and the contemplation of ousting 13 MLA's shows an amazing lack of judgement and professionalism.

And, the resignation speech from CJ was also made with seemingly disregard for her party.

She could have called a leadership convention and ran! She could have listened to their concerns. She could have met with them with a mediator. As Corky said, she could have said, thank for the feedback. I'm staying on. She had options, but she took the most dramatic, codependent stance. That usually is it's own reward. And, in this case it backfired.

The whole thing reminded me of the grade seven girls playground. It truly did. And, that just isn't going to cut it for the NDP.

What worries me is that the CJ's camp don't seem to understand the public did not feel CJ could do it. When GC resigned, my friends, all professional women, said yay, but, Carole James... They aren't really paying that much attention right now, but they are voters and will closer to the election. I hope we get it together soon.

Sue Hammell was on Bill Good's show today, using terms such as 'devastated', used sad intonations and sounded very inexperienced as well. Of course, Bill Good brought up the gender equality policy and whether gender was an issue in the situation with CJ. I felt quite disheartened listening to her.
(I hope they drop that policy because it is a PR liability. I'm a feminist. I believe more women benefit when a progressive party holds power and implements good policy.)

Just because the media asks a personal question about what is going on internally, does not mean it has to be answered in a deep process oriented way! Accentuate the positive!

I hope some professionalism appears soon or we really are doomed.

@alive

You clearly haven't understood the definition of 'ad hominem' or - more like, you're still more than happy to use it when it 'feels' good.

And, you shouldn't have to look up the definition of 'sexist' - it seems to come pretty naturally to you.

As for that argument about castration as an effect method of dealing with criminal behavior - you may think you 'won' that buddy - I assure you I'm more than prepared to stand by what I wrote on that occasion.

In the meantime, you might want to look up a guy called Lothrop Stoddard and see where he got his 'bright' ideas.

Stewart

What exactly are the 'real' concerns of the dissidents (the Maoist 13)?

I've read that spiel of Ms Kwan's a dozen times and I can't figure out what she's talking about.

This is a party in opposition - with little or no money in the bank and a hostile media - did she expect the job of getting elected was going to be easy?

Tell me, please, exactly WHAT are you and she talking about?

Something clear and specific - I'm tired of trying to get Jenny Kwan’s Jello to hang on this nail.

And don't tell me you or anyone 'knows' exactly what the public 'thinks' - because the best judge of that showed that the NDP was winning this dance contest until a month ago.

Please, I'd like to go back to work on the project of getting rid of the Campbell Liberals - but right now I find all my supposed allies are standing around with blood on their hands and silly grins on their faces.

I believe in motherhood too - but I don't think it'll win many elections.

the NDP's wider circle

Count me as one of the concerned former party members, looking on with dismay.

I was active during the '80s, then stepped back during the '90s while I was in the regular public service. I let my membership lapse after Clark’s attack on the Agricultural Land Reserve during the Six Mile Ranch fiasco. (The many fans of Corky Evans should remember that he was Agriculture Minister then, and despite public displays of angst, didn't have the decency to resign on principle.)

It was fascinating to be a ground-level bureaucrat during the NDP government years -- and disappointing to see so many missed opportunities. In my Ministry, we had a rogue ADM who actively subverted a key environmental policy. The Cabinet seemed to have been captured by senior bureaucrats, and had no clue about what was really going on, even though there were many party supporters in lower-level positions who could have told them.

So that experience gave me pretty modest expectations for how much change we could expect from electoral politics and working through the machinery of government. But at the end of the day, it still is the main game in town. Bad governments have so many ways of making people's lives worse. Better ones need relentless pressure from below to make sure that they don't lose their nerve.

I've never been a purist leftist. I just don't believe that there are tens of thousands of secret socialists who will magically mobilize if the NDP adopts the right manifesto. And I don't get dismayed at public displays of consultation with business. This wasn't my main reservation about Carole James. It's just one of the things that NDP leaders have to do to neutralize one line of editorial attack. But it's delusional to think that we'll ever win over the Chambers of Commerce.

Where the NDP under James really went astray was its sheer laziness in going along with faux populist anti-tax campaigns, reinforcing messages that will only make it harder for a more progressive government to govern. It was so demoralizing to see such a lack of imagination.

In my own circle, I know that there is a large constituency of party supporters and sympathizers who want the NDP to do and be better. Many of us were more active in the past, but got burned by manipulated convention agendas, rent-a-crowd nomination campaigns etc. There still is a reserve of goodwill, providing that an interim leader strikes the right notes -- soon -- and that former MLAs quickly button it on their unhelpful commentaries.

I'm willing to rejoin, and to urge others to do the same. But this willingness will quickly wilt if we don't have the clear sense that the necessary lessons have been learned. If the leadership circle is content to keep tight control of the shrunken rump that the party has become, well, the rest of us have much more fun and interesting things to do with our time. Which would be a great pity for the province.

grass roots?

"So - it has always been OK for those people to undermine a leader, even a sitting premier, but when the push comes from the grassroots and from non-SEIC members then it is an outrage!" I can find no evidence what so ever that this dissension comes from the 'grass roots' of the party: certainly not in my constituency. I'd be willing to hear whatever evidence there is...

The provincial council, however, does represent the membership in constituencies, and provincial council delegates are elected. I am perfectly willing to grant that the system of representation is imperfect, never the less, the 84% support for James cannot be construed as anything but democratic, unlike the actions of the dissidents.

While I was a member of the NDP for 33 years, I have not been for some time, so I can hardly be called a James supporter or a member of the 'inner circle', though I have worked side by side with many of the players in the drama in the past. But that's precisely the point, you see, that politics is seen as drama and theatre by some...and then of course, there are some that will just go off and find more fun and interesting things to do. Myself, and the thousands of unemployed, under-employed, hungry, and homeless will just have to be patient while the new leader miraculously emerges, and engenders the promised land.We won't be contributing to the party, because many of us aren't even eating regularly.

That is precisely what is vulgar and distasteful about this crisis for the NDP: it is a crisis only the well-fed and well-positioned can indulge in. One might have thought - oh, how naive! - that those professing to the principles of the NDP might have seen that their actions would ensure a continuation of the staus quo. If you are working and fed, I suppose that is not a problem.

Do NDP win the election

And what if the party dosen't 13 will be a very unlucky number indeed. Are the NDP jixned as wishy washy former right winger Liberal MLA turned NDP takes a round out of the NDP leader because the party is not left enough. It is now a party greatly divided and if the party loses the election I wouldn't want to be the 13 that jixned the party as the division will be even greater and will take a very long time to mend.
Not a party I'm interested in.

The Liberals stuck together until the bitter end.

Even when party members are ousted it is kept within the party and members come together even when it hurts the party. Bennett was the exception but he was pissed off but the MLAs still stood up for their leader. What is that all about bringing shame to the NDP? General Motors wouldn't want anyone discussing their business in a public forum or blasted all over the media, now would they? Do you think fellow employees would jump in and join in the company shame? No they wouldn't and the NDP is a business and the rules are the same especially if the party wants to be taken seriously. What's Simpson busy doing but giving his opinion on how the NDP party needs to be run? I guess the Liberals weren't interested in what Simpson had to say? Although no one could have done better for the Liberals and I'm certain the party is grateful Simpson turned on them and choice the NDP.

good people within bad organizations

Frank ~ Seems to me that if Carole James isn't your cup of tea then I think you will have a long search ahead to find worthy independent candidates unless their only required qualification is that they aren't a member of a political party.

First, speculation about my opinion of Carol James is ridiculous. I think she has shown to the public that she is a caring, compassionate person.

Now, to the point. Are you still not seeing the failings of Party politics in today's political arena? How much time and disservice to the public has been directed at what could be a non-existent issue? Every single one of these MLAs should be holding townhalls, not fighting over who is King or Queen of the castle or who is being a naughty boy or girl.

And another advantage with a House full of Independents will be that it helps take the MSMedia largely out of play. The media is not pitting its favourite corporatist sect against the socialist sect of the corporate Party, as there will be no sides, just issues. Knowing how the media cripples investigation disclosure in favour of spin and ommission, it doesn't take much to see how this can alleviate much of the distraction and mis-information we are currently bombarded with.

We need people working for people, not their Party. Carol James appears to be just one more good person devoured by the politiking, needlessly. Except, of course, for the fact she'd rather play the Party game before representing her district, which is the inevitable Party politic objective. Politicians all do this on the whole, and it works against us everyday people in favour of the Party.

Frank ~ In your case, I believe you did vote NDP in 2009, although you still weren't 100% onside, others here didn't even do that much. Wore the "non-voter" label like a badge of honour.

I see, one is either with the Party or against it, is that your point? This sounds too familiar with another failing operation I've heard pounded into our heads by our hegemonic masters from the south.

Boreal ~ I just don't believe that there are tens of thousands of secret socialists who will magically mobilize if the NDP adopts the right manifesto.

I think there are. I bet there are tens of thousands who simply have no idea that, if presented with the facts about socialism, they would agree resoundingly to those ideals of governance. But if you say 'socialism' as a filthy word long enough, or misuse it in speech as it has been for so long, it becomes almost meaningless with first defining it.

samuidave

The NDP is not a prison, its a political party that can be freely joined or left. When in it its always good to realize that there are rules. Like many things in society, those rules are based on what the majority think.

Just as a family won't do very well if there's constant infighting and belittling, neither will a political party.

Assuming there were no political parties and we had a house full of independent MLAs, there would be chaos if they didn't accept rules such as passing legislation based on the will of the majority.

If your independent MLAs refused to abide by rules passed by the majority it wouldn't work, would it?

I suppose we could divide BC up into about 4 million separate countries so we would never have to accept any rules we disagreed with. International relations would be interesting.

Carole names names

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Backroom+boys+forced+James/3944134/story.html

Frank and West: if the NDP had more people like you guys calling the shots my ilk would have a lot less ammo to fire back at you.

Thats my only comment on this ugly family feud.

Cheers

Thanks happy.

Appreciated.

I think the proof of Party politics is front and centre

...and there are reasons independent candidates are effectively excluded from the scene, just as voters are effectively persuaded to dismiss independents as a viable option at this juncture. This will either change within the general perception, or we will continue on our march toward a more totalitarian, non-representative form of government, like Singapore perhaps.

As long as people cling to this false hope of the 'Party doin' them a solid', things are not going to change. Frank, one can preach change but do nothing to effect change. Guys who think like me, rare enough in numbers I admit, are pretty much at the mercy of the lot who are enjoying the meal fed to them by the status quo. Knock yourselves out. Everyone must figure this out for themselves. I'm just not holding my breath for the day when that arrives.

Wow! Thanks for the

Wow! Thanks for the link.

Assuming her words were taken in context, I am further convinced she had to go.

How does it benefit the NDP to refer to it's past in the same lie told by the Liberals? How does it help to say she reached out to business and look what happened to her.

I wish she would just retire.

I wonder what her riding thinks.

Still no self-reflection. Perhaps after she gets some good sleep. Hope so.

Time to move on

Whether you think that Carole James should still be the leader or not is now a moot point. She has resigned, and it is time to move on. Only the NDP caucus really knows what has transpired and created the rift amongst them.

NDP supporters can either continue to rip each other apart or expend their energies in a more constructive manner, which is to find a way to defeat the BC Liberal Party come next election.

Carole James' time as the leader is now history, and it is time to turn the page and begin a new chapter.

crankypants

Why is now the time to move on when the last 5 years wasn't?

For 5 years many in the the NDP thought it was a good idea to attack the leader. Just under half wouldn't even say to a pollster that they liked the leader. They didn't move on in spite of the fact that the majority of NDP supporters supported Carole.

So if it was time to disparage the leader at every opportunity then, why is now the time to move on?

I would think now would be a great time for Carole supporters to attack the minority that wanted her gone.

samuidave

And if people had wanted more independents in the Leg they could have supported electoral reform. With STV they could have selected an independent as their first choice and if he or she didn't get enough votes their second choice could have been for a party guy.

I'm sure under that system we would have seen more votes for independents although I don't know if it would have led to more independents being elected.

But regardless, people decided they wanted status quo, they wanted to keep first-past-the-post and the two party system that entails.

Don't blame me for that, I supported reform. Instead look to your non-voters who could have shown up to support electoral reform but didn't.

Frank, at times I think ...

we are not so far apart despite our bickering.

As you state, the option of STV has been on the table and not taken up by the attending voters. But is that the non-voters doing?

The non-voters are often completely disengaged from politics for good reason. The common person's voice has been effectively shut out for so long the reality is that voting does not make a net difference to them. Or do we think there is room for selective engagement? Unfortunately, to the disengaged, STV alone just seems like more political BS, if they notice it at all. In one light, the STV proposal is BS; in another, it may be a start toward democracy, however lame.

Aside from disengagement, add in the propaganda promoting the accepted 'political story' (i.e., democracy and our 'history'), which is also commonly supported and advanced by many self-proclaimed progressives and/or NDP members as well, and there is the perfect recipe for maintaining the status quo power structure of politics.

So we must look at those who are engaged and do vote, and see if there is some reason they vote against their own interests.

Assuming a fully informed electorate is the solution to an effective peoples democracy, as per John Stuart Mill so long ago, we can conclude that the problem lays with that information. The hardest challenge I see is to get those schooled and holding the 'manufactured' beliefs of politics to re-think a few fundamentals particularly about democracy. To start, 'one man, one vote' and 'of, by and for the people' must be seen without the light of state propaganda illuminating it.

Only then will this parade of Party Politics embedded with corporate fictions -- where the elected members are merely employees of the Party rather than servants of their voters -- be dismantled with the power of our vote. But as long as we cling to this fantasy that the Party will/can do anything against the power structure it has grown out of, there will be nothing more in politics than a rearrangement of the elite deck chairs.

Frank

I am not picking sides, as I am not a member of any political party. As a matter of fact, I don't believe that the party system of governance serves the voter in any way. It forces us to choose the party that serves up the least obnoxious platform whether the candidate is deemed to be the best one in that particular election, knowing full well that the successful candidate's first allegiance will be to the party.

That being said, my last comment was to just state my observation that all the carping between the two sides regarding Carole James' leadership seems to be a waste of energy. It's time for both sides to bury the hatchet and get to work preparing for your party's real enemy, the BC Liberal Party.

Remember, the NDP Party doesn't only have to fight their political enemies, they also have to fight the MSM to get any positive news coverage. They read the blogs and listen to the talk shows, and seem to have no problem highlighting the infighting, which is not a great marketing strategy.

Come next election, I will vote for an independent candidate if I think that he or she is credible, as I did last election, but if there isn't one I would rather vote for the NDP candidate than any other party. If I think that the NDP is still in turmoil, then I guess spoiling my ballot will be the only option left to me, seeing as we don't have "none of the above" as an option.

samuidave

No, in many respects we're not that far apart. We both want an engaged, active citizenry with the power to effect real change.

I don't believe we have an informed and engaged citizenry because they don't take advantage of opportunities when they arise.

Instead, they get quickly turned off by "politics" and debate and switch over to American Idol. If people want better then they have to be better themselves, they have to wade through arguments pro and con and figure out for themselves where their interests lie.

Party politics is not the disease, unengaged citizens are. Political parties allow representative democracy to work because people constantly show they're simply not ready for anything else.

Red vs orange vs blue is about as complex as many demonstrate they can handle.

crankypants

I think a lot of people feel the same way as you do and I have no argument with that.

As you say, the media, for all their criticism of bloggers, do seem to spend a lot of time reading them. Because its in the blogs that all this dissent is happening, not on talk radio or in the streets. Their stance against bloggers is therefore hypocritical in my opinion.

But, the debate has to happen now. We've tried to keep a united front in the face of attacks from within the Left on the leadership of Carole James. And it didn't work, in 2009 left-wing people and environmentalists proudly declared they wouldn't vote NDP.

Well, at some point then we have to decide whether we have any reason to get along or whether it will always be a case of half the supporters refusing to vote.

NDP NEEDS NEW MEMBERS AND DONATIONS

Now that Carole James has stepped down as leader, becoming now
an asset (as a really excellent Cabinet Minister) instead of a liability,
many have expressed new enthusiasm for joining (or rejoining) and
supporting the party.

Now that the NDP leadership contest is underway, another important
issue is sure to be debated: the mandatory 50% female candidate
rule. I can tell you that in our riding many NDP supporters, some of
whom could be described as stalwarts, were quite pissed off when
our preferred nominee was barred from running because he was
the wrong gender. Nothing sexist about this. The last two NDP
MLAs and one NDP MP we elected were all women. Nobody needs
to tell us anything about gender equality.

And don't get me wrong. The candidate we were compelled to
nominate gave it her all and deserves our thanks and respect. It's
just that she was plainly not of the same calibre as the other
candidate who, gender aside, has been the mainspring of our riding
executive for many years, a good and honourable man, who's experienced one contest (a squeaker of a loss that could only be
conceded when the very last poll came in.) It was his experience
(not gender) and her inexperience (not gender.)

The first and foremost task for contenders of the NDP leadership
is to vigorously attack the BC Liberal record of lies and corruption.
There's no appetite for a 50%-rule donnybrook right now.

So now that the NDP renews membership increases. Great!

But I know that, in this riding at least, if one or any candidate for
the NDP leadership promises to sign the papers for whomever
each riding association sends him or her, that's when the cheque-
books will come out.

Just sayin'.