Premier Gordon Campbell promised to help kids - but broke his word with Canada's highest child poverty rates and more. That's Premier Campbell's legacy after resigning. Just compare his words to his deeds.
Bill Tieleman's 24 hours/The Tyee column
Tuesday November 9, 2010
By Bill Tieleman
"My words fly up, my thoughts remain below.
Words without thoughts never to heaven go."
- King Claudius, Hamlet by William Shakespeare
Nine years of unmitigated hypocrisy.
That's the sad legacy left by B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell after he announced plans to resign when the BC Liberal Party chooses a successor.
Campbell deserves credit for serving many years as an elected official, no question.
But Gordon Campbell's record is a massive contradiction between the good intentions he claimed and the actual road to hell he paved for so many unfortunate British Columbians while his friends and backers waved from the steamroller.
Take Campbell's words and compare them to his deeds.
In the July 2001 Speech from the Throne, Campbell's newly elected government outlined its values and objectives:
"There are 10 overarching priorities: (1) a top-notch education system for students of all ages," the speech read.
But in his televised address of October 27, 2010, Campbell admitted that after nine years in power: "Right now in British Columbia, one out of five Grade 4 students don't read, write, or have the math skills at the Grade 4 level. That's really not good enough for any of us."
And Campbell went on to confess: "It's always surprising to me when I hear that one out of three children are not prepared for kindergarten or Grade 1. We can and we will do better."
Surprising? Not good enough? You're the damn premier of the province! And you have failed those children.
That doesn't even include extensive cuts to education, including school closures, elimination of school librarian and teacher aide positions or ongoing battles with school boards, teachers and staff.
It gets even worse.
Campbell's other 2001 goals included: "(5) better services for children, families and first nations."
But in June 2010, Statistics Canada reported that British Columbia had the worst child poverty rate in the country -- for the seventh straight year.
Not a surprise if you consider the numerous attacks Campbell launched on social assistance recipients, like taking away their earnings exemptions so that every penny they made working was clawed back.
And perhaps the "better services" Campbell promised had nothing to do with his government, because as child advocacy group First Call remarked: "In 2009 alone over 80 per cent of B.C.'s food banks saw an increase in people needing food, and one-third of B.C. food bank users are children."
Of course, when you refuse to increase the pathetic $8 minimum wage over nine years while introducing an even lower $6 "training wage" for workers with less than 500 hours experience, you condemn those workers to poverty too.
Then there was Campbell's commitment to ensuring that politics are kept out of public service.
The 2001 Throne Speech promised that: "My government will act in this session to make good on its commitment to initiate merit employment legislation to ensure that British Columbians are being served by a professional, non-partisan public service appointed strictly on merit."
But last month Campbell's chief of staff Martyn Brown, who has been the premier's top political advisor for 13 years, was appointed deputy minister of tourism.
Brown was paid $170,544 in the last fiscal year and while we don't yet know his new salary, we do know that former tourism deputy minister Lorne Brownsey was paid $230,664 and that the average salary for deputy ministers in 2008 was $217,758.
It means that Brown -- Campbell's highly partisan political fixer -- likely got a $47,000 to $60,000 raise while the premier merely got the satisfaction of thumbing his nose at his own past principles.
But then, who's even counting the contradictions? Campbell also promised not to impose a Harmonized Sales Tax, swore that the B.C. deficit for 2010 was only $495 million, pledged not to sell B.C. Rail or privatize B.C. Hydro or rip up unionized hospital workers' contracts, and boasted he would lead the most open and accountable government ever and much more -- all broken vows.
Finally, Campbell's 2001 Throne Speech accurately sums up why Campbell ended up forced out of office as the most unpopular premier not just in B.C. history but that of the entire country, with a nine per cent approval rating that's lower than U.S presidents Richard Nixon's during Watergate or Lyndon Johnson's during the Vietnam War.
"Public trust and confidence in government must be earned, not through words but through deeds," the BC Liberals solemnly intoned.
Campbell's legacy is the jarring discrepancy between his lofty words and his damning deeds, the culmination of nine years of hypocrisy.
.
33 comments:
Nice redeeming piece,Bill.
You must feel better after all the apologist drivel you have been floating..
Where does leave you know though?
We know you like leaders so let me guess.....
1) Gregor - your in on the circle to have him lead the province, deosnt matter which party
2) you have found an unsung hero in the NDP you are secretly backing to replace Carole
3) You have kissed and made up with Carole and apologized for that axe the tax thing and actually kinda like the sustainable BC stuff...
lol
Not bad.
But Bill, all political leaders are hyocrites. Harcourt said something along the lines that insiders wouldn't get much from an NDP government, and a lucky few did, such as Marc Eliesen who came back to head BC Hydro for a bit and later on another NDP hack did.
Mulroney and his famous "you had an option sir" tirade against the Liberals when it came to patronage, only to be worse (even more so with Harper) than the federal Liberals.
You also forgot that in 1996, Campbell said he would not sell BC Rail, and went ahead and did anyway.
Even they NDP with their "We're on your side" mantra. But whose exactly we? The union members? The low paid person? Certainly not the person who makes a good salary working in a non union office downtown and goes back home to their condo in New Westminster or Surrey.
Bill, Bill, Bill...
Your examples all start in 2001.
Harken back a few more years to when Gordon Campbell was taking anonymous donations to fund his BC Liberal leadership bid.
The man took secret money (and was elected leader by a grateful membership), then promised an "open and accountable" government (and was elected leader by grateful voters in three general elections) - sometimes we get what we deserve... I'm just trying to figure out what I did to deserve 10 lost years of supply side tryck-0-nomyks.
Those who visit this blog should, in my view, have very little to complain about.
Beats me how a few armchair experts can just show up, throw a few insults at the person doing all the work, and doubtless feel satisfied with themselves for their brilliance.
I hope it doesn't bother you, Bill ... but it bothers me. You deserve better. So does British Columbia.
Surely to Ratzinger, we've got to learn to come together on the issues ... to seek common ground, and get on with the hard work of repairing and restoring this province.
We only had to look at the PacifiCats tied up, denounced and finally gotten rid of, and we knew the lengths to which hatred can take the hard-line losers of BC. Is that kind of loathsome hatred taking hold again?
Bill, I'd like to thank you one more time for the time, effort, and work you have put into explaining the BC Rail Political Corruption Trial story for us here, on this blog. And for your unfailing generosity whenever I sent you a query.
We've learned a lot about these undemocratic visitors, and about how to handle their toxic input. It's just sad to think that this is what democracy means in the province we love. Fight, fight, fight. Sheesh.
.
good piece. that sums up gordo's cv while in power for the last decade. i never voted for him. i really don't know too many that did, personally. regardless, the liberals bamboozled a large enough group of british columbians with phony promises of economic prowess and they sucked their way into power repeatedly....and this is what happened. please, bc, pay attention to this report card. lets not relapse the next election that comes up.
A couple of paragraphs from the pab pimp is enough for me. (10.54 am)
Anyway Bill you are keeping a lot of us informed with what is going on in BC.Yes we have our own opinions and we will never support the corrupt free enterprise system. We're retired, rarely eat out. Last read the Sun and Province in 1960. Will not read the neocons TC either. Bill Good of CKNW is another pro Campbell mouthpiece
My wife and I worked for union companies.House has been paid off for thirty years.Good benefits etc.
Unions are great.
The pab pimp has trouble putting a sentence together.
"Where does leave you know though"". He has to be pretty high up in pab. What a retard. Could be a high school dropout on dope.
Keep up the good work Bill You expose what the neocons news media are covering up
good column and great interview on CBC today (haven't had a chance to hear you speak before!).
Hold on there BC Mary. What does visiting this blog have to do with general complaints? They are independent of each other. Now if you refer to people with complaints ABOUT this blog, then this is the obvious choice of where to go. When Bill's conclusions are worthless the criticisms are justified. I think we can spot the difference between the gratuitous insults and the deserved critique of Bill's flawed analysis.
I'll tell you what bothers me BC Mary, that anyone would defend this charlatan. Bill Tieleman is every bit as detrimental for BC as Gordon Campbell is/was. And that's obviously quite disastrous.
Come together on the issues? Sure, sounds like a plan. Only the Liberals and the NDP aren't the slighest bit interested. Bill has the same attitude and believes in keeping with the status quo. If you're looking to find a concensus view, I suggest you look elsewhere. The only agreement you will get here is that of Bill's opinion. And just what do you think the issues are?
I don't know what democracy you are referring to BC Mary. If you don't like fighting, and by that I mean uncivil behaviour, then stay the hell out of politics in BC. You want to change all that, you certainly have my support but you'd best start by recognizing that Bill Tieleman doesn't want to change a thing other than putting the NDP brand of criminals in charge of screwing us over.
Ill leave the PAB soon to be EI paid persons alone , Campbell out and out lied many times over and the screw over of middle and lower income people will haunt his party for a long long time hes alienated trust for the right so bad the NDP could elect a zombie as leader now and win,
the amount of mud to sling at Liberals in an election campaign is bigger than site C dam flood plain and no spin will change that.
Well, Useless you did pick an appropriate name didn't you?
The suggestion that there is any parallelism between Bill Tieleman and Gordon Campbell is so utterly absurd as to defy description.
Even if one accepted that Bill was a 'force' for evil in the world - which is, on the face of it utterly stupid, the suggestion that he has done 'anything' which compares with Gordon Campbell in respect of screwing with the province is risible.
This is what you wrote: "I'll tell you what bothers me BC Mary, that anyone would defend this charlatan. Bill Tieleman is every bit as detrimental for BC as Gordon Campbell is/was. And that's obviously quite disastrous."
Not only is Bill Tieleman NOT a charlatan, he is someone with the moral courage to actually sign his name to this blog. Someone willing to devote work and dedication (for no remuneration) to the project of ameliorating at least SOME of the harm the real 'CHARLATAN' has been about in this province since he first entered public life.
And he does it openly, freely without the need of a mask of anonymity from which to do his sniping!
Why aren't you willing to put your own name up front the way Bill does?
I don't know why he, or anyone, bothers to post comments from folks without the balls to sign them when they are intent upon making public fools of themselves.
Bill started this column with a quote from Hamlet...with the picture of Campbell which accompanies it, I would have thought he'd have picked a different one:
O villain, villain, smiling, damned villain!
My tables,--meet it is I set it down,
That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain;
At least I'm sure it may be so in Denmark...
Substituting, of course, British Columbia for Denmark at each reader's discretion.
Don't let them get you down Bill - and Mary, ignore 'useless' comments.
Cheers to you both - either one of you would make a better premier than the narcissistic child we have now.
Useless, fitting title I might add, before you put your mouth in motion put your brain in gear. Do some research. While the NDP was in power, they only balanced the budget while the US forest companies were forever blocking lumber sales in the US, commodity prices were in the toilet, restarted the marine industry with the Fastcats and created more well paying long term jobs than this corrupt bunch of wankers have since 2001.
It's people like you who just woke up and fell out of a tree that voted for these Fiberal wankers.
So 2 judges testified today at the Frank Paul Inquiry. And who served as their lawyer? Bill Bernardino. He has lots of time after tanking Basi-Virk. Hunter-Litigation Chambers could get a lot of government work in the near future.
Yee gads there is another Ron!
Henceforth I will be Ron1 as I do not want to associate myself with his opinions.
Another helpful column, Bill.
By the way - are the children in the picture safe from the leering old man?
What Bill Tieleman writes, you can be absolutely certain, he can back up, what he says with proof.
However, we all know, there are none so blind, that will not see.
The BC Liberals, are in the ninth ring, of Dante's inferno.
I cannot understand why people will spend the time to follow folks blogs just to insult the blog owner. The same folks seem to have basically the same name. Anon. Methinks some of the anons are there to stir c**p not to join in intelligent conversation.Tieleman works like heck to get the real news out and many of us are thankful that he doesn't sugar coat the excesses of the Campbell gang Maybe some of the anons should check the political cartoonist in the T/C who has a pretty good understanding of Gordo and his deals
"Tieleman works like heck to get the real news out and many of us are thankful that he doesn't sugar coat the excesses of the Campbell gang Maybe some of the anons should check the political cartoonist in the T/C who has a pretty good understanding of Gordo and his deals"
Indeed Tieleman does, but it is intriguing that he does not provide the same degree of detailed coverage of the NDP to balance things out. There was items written about Simpson's departure from caucus, but that was after the fact.
Face reality. Tieleman writes for the pleasure of the left wing blog contributors, and isn't all that balanced over all. He did a super job on Basi Virk, but there was alot of politicial angles in his writing too.
His coverage of the NDP convention will be interesting, if it does indeed exist.
Reality Check & How Economic Meltdown was NOT an Accident !!
Go to www.cnn.com at the bottom of the Page click on Transcripts – go to last Saturday & or Sunday – Click on Your Money & read more on how FAKE AAA ratings were placed on CDOs ie: They sucked in Pension Funds etc.
From: Steve Dockeray
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 11:47 AM
To: weekendnews@globaltv.com
Subject: Ali Velshi CNN - ie: New Movie " inside Job "
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1011/05/cnr.05.html
MATT DAMON, ACTOR: By the time George W. Bush took office in 2001, the U.S. financial sector was vastly more profitable, concentrated and powerful than ever before. Dominating this industry were five investment banks, two financial conglomerates, three securities and insurance companies, and three rating agencies. And linking them all together was the securitization food chain. A new system which connected trillions of dollars in mortgages and other loans with investors all over the world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
It's being widely released November 12th. Here's part of the story.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAMON: In the old system, when the homeowner paid their mortgage every month, the money went to their local lender. And since mortgages took decades to repay, lenders were careful. In the new system, lenders sold the mortgages to investment banks. The investment banks combined thousands of mortgages and other loans, including car loans, student loans, and credit card debt to create complex derivatives called collateralized debt obligations or CDOs.
The investment banks then sold the CDOs to investors. Now when homeowners paid their mortgages, the money went to investors all over the world. The investment banks paid rating agencies to evaluate the CDOs. And many of them were given a AAA rating which is the highest possible investment grade. This made CDOs popular with retirement funds, which could only purchase highly rated securities. This system was a ticking time bomb.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: I talked with Eliot Spitzer -- Listen in.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: Eliot, you as the attorney general in New York were actually the face of opposition to this. You were a guy who was trying to shine a light on things that were being done in the financial system that were bad for consumers. This seems to even be worse than the stuff that you were dealing with.
ELIOT SPITZER, HOST, "PARKER-SPITZER NOW": Well, it's a continuation of exactly what we were shining a light on. We began, in fact, full disclosure, I appear in the movie and the role I play is to basically say, look, Wall Street is too in many respects a Ponzi scheme. Wall Street is rife with conflicts of interest that the consumer will always get the short end of the stick and brokers and the folks at the top will take away their multimillion dollar bonuses, doing anything they can to pad their own pockets. Don't trust them. When we made those cases years back, the opposition was furious. It was powerful. It's precisely what Charles Ferguson describes in what I think is a spectacular movie. It's a must-see movie for every person in the country to understand what happens. He shines a light on the power of Wall Street and the out right falsehoods and lies emanating from Wall Street and the academics to butcher. It's a corrupt system.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: And you can watch more of that interview and my interview with the director on "YOUR MONEY," Saturday at 1:00 p.m. Eastern, Sunday at 3:00 p.m. Eastern.
I think you should make it a point to see that movie
steve dockeray
milner bc
canada
Pardon me Anon 1:26pm - when did the NDP get back into power?
I hadn't realized the Campbell Liberals were gone and folks like Bill Tieleman were ignoring the new government.
Until there is an NDP government again, should that happen, the people who make the news and deserve the brickbats are the Campbell Liberals.
As to Bill's willingness to criticize the NDP both provincially and federally - he has done it and done it in spades.
You clearly haven't been paying attention.
HST referendum question unveiled
Are you in favour of extinguishing the HST (Harmonized Sales Tax) and reinstating the PST (Provincial Sales Tax) in conjunction with the GST (Goods and Services Tax)?
[Yes] [No]
Nice to hear from my adoring fan base, G West and Ron. What can I say, you have your opinion of Bill and the NDP and I have mine. I'll start with Ron first because there was so little to rebuke.
Speaking of putting brain in gear, obviously Bill is opposed to the Liberals (who isn't really?) but when you conclude that my opposition to Bill means I support the Liberals you show your narrow-minded thinking. If you were capable of thinking this through you would see it is possible to dislike both the Liberals and the NDP. I have never voted for either and I never will. I accept your list of NDP accomplishments but they're hardly impressive. Balanced budget? Liberals managed that for a while also and Fastcats? I seem to recall that one wasn't an NDP selling point.
Now G, what would it take to convince you that Bill has been pulling the wool over your eyes? Or are you too closed-minded to listen to arguments? He smoothly riles people up to demand something new, while invisibly directing us to more of the same because most people can't see what's happening. Trade Liberals for NDP? Why? They are essentially no different, each wanting to increase the overall wealth of their own people and to hell with the other side.
You asked: "Why aren't you willing to put your own name up front the way Bill does?"
Funny story, I used to do so. Then I was censored, on a free speech blog, for calling it the way I see it, just like the other victims of Bill's thin skin. Apparently it was the one thing Bill can't handle, the truth.
So you can get as uppity as you like, I have no problem speaking my mind, with or without a name and with or without your approval. You think I'm not interested in public condemnation of Bill? Feel free to hang out with me sometime. Or maybe we'll run into each other at some anti-HST rally. Until he ceases his own hypocritical dialogue, I'm of the opinion that he deserves every bit of vitriol that's thrown at him. And if you're lucky, you can read it all here.
It is good to have a record of the paid PAB spin. History will record how many PAB's were paid to say what during this damaging regime.
It is called propaganda. We need to hold those responsible for their attacks on democracy.
We haven't even talked about Liberals' expanded gambling issue, just watch, there will be lots of social problems to follow. Real sad.
The question: "Are you in favour of extinguishing the HST (Harmonized Sales Tax) and reinstating the PST (Provincial Sales Tax) in conjunction with the GST (Goods and Services Tax)? Yes/No?"
If you read this question carefully it actually says we would be extinguishing the HST, to be replaced with the PST in conjunction with the GST. Would that be on the items currently covered by the HST? In other words, no change? Or would it go back to the way it was before July 1st?
We all know how crafty the Liberals are with words and interpretation. I, for one, do not agree that this is a simple and straightforward question. I do not trust them at all.
"Pardon me Anon 1:26pm - when did the NDP get back into power?"
Not a question of when the NDP gets back into power, it's a matter of when. Tieleman should be balanced in covering the NDP as he does with the BC Liberals. Lets be fair and balanced. Otherwise this becomes just another anemic "let's hate the BC Liberals" blog of which there are many.
"I hadn't realized the Campbell Liberals were gone and folks like Bill Tieleman were ignoring the new government."
There isn't any new government. There will be a new Premier, but hardly a new government.
"Until there is an NDP government again, should that happen, the people who make the news and deserve the brickbats are the Campbell Liberals."
Wrong. If the NDP is shown to be inept as a party where they can't handle their own affairs properly, that too should be reported. In other words, why would anyone want to elect the NDP if they are shown to be inept and divisely divided internally?? What about union inflience? Polices?? The NDP needs to be observed and taken apart and examined just as the BC Liberals under a new leader need to be too.
"As to Bill's willingness to criticize the NDP both provincially and federally - he has done it and done it in spades."
Not as much as he could have and it doesn't equate the critical commentary regarding the BC Liberals. The two are different, but Bil has just essentinally given a light hand smack to the NDP not much more.
"You clearly haven't been paying attention.
Obviously you haven't. Exactly what is it that you don't like about how the NDP handles its affiars? The part about Moe getting paid by the Steelworkers? No decisiveness on the HST issue?
Lame environmental policies?
We'd love to hear it.
The election lie, the BCR wasn't for sale. The election lie, the HST wasn't on Campbell and Hansen's radar. The HST radar papers, were sitting on Hansen's desk, before the election. To lie, deceive and cheat to win, has only won the BC Liberals a lot of contempt, from the people of this province. There is a place beneath contempt. That place is, the ninth ring of Dante's Inferno, that is where Campbell and the BC Liberals, belong.
"The election lie, the BCR wasn't for sale. The election lie, the HST wasn't on Campbell and Hansen's radar. The HST radar papers, were sitting on Hansen's desk, before the election. To lie, deceive and cheat to win, has only won the BC Liberals a lot of contempt, from the people of this province. There is a place beneath contempt. That place is, the ninth ring of Dante's Inferno, that is where Campbell and the BC Liberals, belong."
Nothing new that hasn't been said before.
Time to move along, folks.
@Anon 1:26//anon 10:19...
Sorry, but this is both redundant and incoherent:
Not a question of when the NDP gets back into power, it's a matter of when.
That, like your previous offering, is meaningless tripe, as it the rest of your answering post.
I should have ignored you - and will in the future.
@Useless:
The fact of the matter is, that if you'd been paying attention, you'd have been aware when and how I disagreed with Bill Tieleman.
I expect you were censored for the way you 'put' your views more than for the fact that you signed your name to those views or because someone disagreed with your views.
Free speech isn't the same thing as license but I expect that concept is a bit beyond your ken.
I'll stand by what I wrote - Tieleman HAS been very critical of the NDP from time to time - the fact he's more often critical of the LIBERAL GOVERNMENT is a commonplace and hardly needs defending.
The need for balance is important only when one is dealing with relatively 'equal' parties. In the case of the Opposition and the Government - balance simply isn't a part of the equation until the Opposition has more or less the same resources available to it as the government.
I assume, if you're a fan of 'BALANCE', that you'd be in favour of restrictions upon the government's use of advertising and the facilities and personnel of the Public Affairs Bureau.
Unless you accede to that codicil I'd say you haven't got much to complain about - and neither does Campbell and his gang.
They set the game up, tilted the table in their own favour and now they've lost control of the ball.
I think they deserve everything that's thrown at them and I think apologists who scream for balance at this stage of the game are, frankly, idiots.
Campbell made his bed - now he and his party are going to have to lie in it.
I must object, Campbell deserves no credit for serving the BC People and this province. The BCR wasn't for sale, that was an election lie...He deserves credit for that? The HST wasn't on, Campbell and Hansen's radar? Another election lie along with. BC came out of the recession, with only a small deficit, when the rest of the world crashed? He deserves credit for that? Campbell lied, deceived and cheated to win. Well, I refuse to give one lick of credit, to that monster.
PAB.
Does anyone believe this 200+ strong crew simply "gets out the BC Liberal message"?
The PAB, a government service, blatantly lies in the service of corporate interests. It is an assault on democracy. It is illegal. It has been going on for 17 years.
It is called propaganda.
Institutionalized torture within residential schools and Japanese internment camps is still alive within peoples hearts today.
Frank Paul might argue that it still exists if he could.
The plight of the poor in BC and those currently in government care might have something to say about cruel conditions.
G West, you have some good points there but I may not have entirely followed your train of thought so forgive me if I err in my reply.
I can't say I hang on your every word but I honestly don't see the significance of your disagreements with Bill.
"Free speech isn't the same thing as license." Fair enough but there was no vulgarity or otherwise gratuitous language involved. The comment, like several others, that was considered offensive was printed on other occasions. Bill simply lost his cool and decided he wasn't going to be "insulted" by the truth anymore. Wish I could reprint it here so you could judge for yourself.
I wasn't clear where you were at on this "balance" issue. 100% agree about government advertising and Public Affairs Bureau and yes, the Liberals have lost control and deserve everything thrown at them but I don't see the comment about "apologists who scream for balance" referring to anything that I wrote.
You're talking about balance in Tieleman's reporting? NDP vs Liberal? Who cares? It's like arguing Pepsi vs Coke. Not exactly the same but close enough not to make a hoot of difference to most people.
I'm not interested in promoting either party over the other. What I want is to see this monopolistic "coalition" of power broken up. They both have to go without simply being replaced by the same party under a new name, such as the Conservatives in place of the Liberals.
Perhaps BC First can split the NDP and if we're lucky we can be manhandled by a 10-15% majority. I'm in favor of that, but only if it breaks this hypnotic spell that voters are under, thinking we have a wonderful system of governance.
Useless:
THIS...Until he (Tieleman) ceases his own hypocritical dialogue,...
AND THIS ...you'd best start by recognizing that Bill Tieleman doesn't want to change a thing other than putting the NDP brand of criminals in charge of screwing us over.
Sounds kinda 'unbalanced' to me!
Get my drift?
You might not agree with Tieleman - sometimes I don't either - but questioning his bona fides in that fashion makes him look good while it makes YOU look stupid.
As for the differences between this government and ANY ONE of the three NDP administrations in this province's history...YOU CAN'T be serious!
The NDP administrations left real measurable positive contributions that are still extant today - All Campbell will have left behind is a lot of vitriol and a huge suppurating carbuncle.
Cheers.
lol, thanks G West. So your previous criticism was that MY posts lacked balance. I'm equally offended by both Liberal and NDP. How much more balanced do you want?
Here's what you had to say about 'balance' :
"The need for balance is important only when one is dealing with relatively 'equal' parties. . . . - balance simply isn't a part of the equation until . . . the same resources available . . .
. . .be in favour of restrictions upon the government's use of advertising and the facilities and personnel of the Public Affairs Bureau."
(last paragraph I said yes, 100%)
So it seems to me like I am approaching all this in a 'balanced' manner and that YOU in your random ramblings are not satisfied and are yourself insisting on more balance from me. One last quote from you.
"I think apologists who scream for balance at this stage of the game are, frankly, idiots."
And all along, I thought you had some valid point to make. My bad.
Post a Comment