Former NPA adversaries bury the hatchet & focus on 2011

Post by Daniel Fontaine in

40 comments

Well, it certainly wasn't MY idea of burying the hatchet after the election!

In some ways the NPA dinner last Wednesday evening was like a high school reunion. Many faces, young and not so young gathered to show their support for change in Vancouver's government. The concept of bringing together some of the NPA's legacy candidates and a former mayor was an interesting one that was surprisingly effective at dealing with old grievances that the NPA must put aside to move forward. The only painful part was having to listen through all those speeches.

In the room at the Italian Cultural Centre were many business reps, developers, law firms, Conservatives, Liberals, east siders, west siders, community representatives and several longstanding friends of Vancouver's NPA. The NPA caucus was joined by a handful of past elected officials, a few prospective candidates, and even Vision's Jim Green tagged along to witness the spectacle as guest of developer Rob Macdonald.

Also seated in the room were several of my media/blogger colleagues. They were three true media veterans who've covered all things City Hall for the past two decades – Vancouver Sun's Jeff Lee, The Courier's Allen Garr and the Globe and Mail/State of Vancouver's Frances Bula, as well as a reporter from CKNW News. You have to wonder how many rubber chicken dinners these guys have covered.

By the way, another good reason to follow @CityCaucus on Twitter is that we were live tweeting all evening from the event.

The elephant in the room on Wednesday evening was how would the two former adversaries of the last council greet each other. Former mayoral candidate Peter Ladner was upbeat and gracious, giving praise to former Mayor Sam Sullivan, the recent recipient of an honorary membership from the College of Family Physicians of Canada.

You have to give Peter a lot of credit. Despite the fact every member of the former NPA council caucus who attended (Kim Capri was notably absent) sat at Sam Sullivan's table, he was a true statesman in his remarks. He could have been coy or avoided making eye contact with them, but he didn't. As reported by Frances Bula, Ladner said:

I learned in 2008 that leadership means working with a united party.

The occasion was really about burying the hatchet, with former NPA adversaries coming together and making nice in front of a room that wishes they would form a strong alternative to Vision Vancouver next year. Which is why the one person stood out during the evening, NPA Park Board commissioner Ian Robertson.

Robertson as the sole NPA representative on the Vancouver Park Board has had his work cut out for him. He's been good on a number of issues, including defending the Bloedel Conservatory and protecting the independence of the Park Board from City Hall. To date we've never seen Robertson be particularly political, with the exception of his release last summer on the cuts to summer youth programs.

Robertson was the first of only two members of the entire NPA caucus to come out against the leader during 2008's divisive fight between Ladner and Sullivan that nearly killed the NPA. It's a fact that many in the room probably hadn't forgotten. From that perspective then, Robertson's number one goal should have been to show that he was back onside, and ready to work cohesively with the entire NPA team.

However, it would not be so.

Members of the caucus spoke after Jonathon Baker (Dunbar's perhaps loudest voice for single-family living who spoke about an HBO TV show he loves), Jennifer Clarke, Ladner and Sullivan (who gave a shout out to CityCaucus.com, garnering us a nice cheer from the room). Then Ken Denike and Carol Gibson both gave thanks for the support of their challenging work on the Vision/COPE dominated School Board.

Robertson's speech channeled some angry feelings toward Vision Vancouver. His remarks such as "this is an extremist, heavily partisan mayor ... leading a council with a radical agenda" were simply over the top and completely unnecessary in my opinion. That tone may be a successful recipe for some in the blogosphere, but it went over like a lead balloon with most of the rank and file in the room. If this was Robertson's attempt at positioning himself as a leading contender for the NPA mayoral ticket, he may want to rethink his strategy and focus more on the positive along with bringing forward some new ideas.

The Vancouver Sun's Jeff Lee noted Robertson's obvious snub of former Mayor Sam Sullivan who sat only feet away from him as he delivered his address. Not once, but twice, Robertson painstakingly mentioned how we need to go back to the good old days when Philip Owen was mayor. Robertson contends that Owen was the last "consensus builder" mayor we've seen in Vancouver.

Given the theme of the night was "leadership", Robertson's pointless snub only helps to indicate he remains in a very small coterie of individuals who truly have no interest in burying the hatchet. My advice to Robertson is to review Ladner's speech – because that one was actually classy.

Councillor Anton also gave a rousing address with undertones of a mayoralty bid. However as people left the room the general feeling was that the NPA's next mayoralty candidate wasn't anyone who got up to speak that night. Let me re-iterate, Suzanne Anton is a great councillor, but I still think she should declare sooner, rather than later that she has no intention of running for the NPA mayoralty. By doing so, she would provide her political party some room to move as they seek out a mayoral candidate next spring.

I didn't have a lot of expectations for the NPA dinner other than to see some old friends and media colleagues. However, I will say that I left with the feeling that there is some momentum going the NPA's way. Their upcoming early nominations will be an interesting process to watch, but realistically it will be next spring before we really see the NPA show its cards. Only then will we be able to judge whether they'll be a real contender in 2011 or not. Clearly not only is the fat lady not singing, she never even showed up to the party.

- post by Daniel

40 Comments

Gee Daniel, you wouldn't still happen to have some ill feelings to Ian Robertson yourself would ya? You know considering how close you and Sam are?Na, couldn't be now could it?

I have repeatedly referred to the "ghosts of NPA" needing to disappear, and bringing them all back at a fund raising dinner only goes to show the electorate that you're still the same party as before, that looks an awful lot like an aging old man with emphysema, pulling along his oxygen tank for his next breath of air.

In case you folks haven't figured this out yet, which it appears clearly you haven't,the voting public soundly tossed the NPA on their ass in 2002, and 2008. What a GREAT concept to bring everyone back to remind everyone WHY you LOST.

Whether hatchets are buried between all the insiders is really occuring, or not (echhhemmm), really makes to freaking difference because its the electorate that will decide this NPA is the same old NPA, and vote Vision back in.

So whether or not Robertson (Ian) has any intentions of running for mayor, apparently the thing he does understand, and very well I will add, is how toxic the NPA and its current direction is right now.

Daniel, you're absolutely delusional if you think otherwise and frankly by writing such drivel in your post, you're making all the rumours about you and Mike setting up citycaucus to do Sam's dirty work and get back at his detractors seem very plausible. But of course the shout-out by Sam had nothing to do with that now did it?

Apparently Bickerton didn't get the news (referencing Lee's post) that there is a growing contigent of people who don't want him to run because they think he's a terrible candidate. Ahhh the delusions of granduer strike again. I guess he'll need to feel the sting of loss twice. He'll just have to wait and see what some of us have planned for when he declares. If he thinks Vision will hammer him....

And with respect to Peter Ladner, he is one of the biggest persons to blame for having a Vision government in city hall right now. He was a terrible Mayoral candidate and was not only ill-prepared to battle Vision, but he simply never had the fortitude required for a political fight to win a job as mayor of Canada's 3rd largest city. If you're close enough to some of those who backed Peter in 2008, they may just tell you how screwed they felt with the effort he put forth. Yeah, real classy Daniel. Real classy.

The only thing I will agree with you on, is that Suzanne needs to declare she is not running for mayor, AND will not seek a council seat either.

Unfortunately since the NPA isn't willing to do the exorcism required to send the ghosts of losers past away, some others will need to do it for them. it looks as though a vote split on the right will now be inevitable.

@Glen. Flaming city caucus because they don't agree with your view of the world isn't exactly going to help to build the big tent the party needs to move forward, now is it?

Robertson (Ian) may be a perfectly viable candidate to lead the NPA, but isn't it worth pointing out to him that embracing the whole legacy of the party is more important than continuing to diss Sam? Daniel wasn't the only one who noted the snub, it was Jeff Lee who pointed it out first, and Frances who talked about the angry tone of Ian's message.

Perhaps Ian will listen to all these voices and change his tone.

NPA needs to have a diverse slate. Bickerton seems like a good addition to that. Maybe Glen will run to bring a bit more right wing perspective?

Glen you are a bitter man. I think it's time you move on and set up your own personal ultra right wing municipal party. Both you and Alex can be founding members. Don't count on much support though.

I think Jeff Lee, Bula and Fontaine all hit the nail on the head with Ian Robertson's disastrous performance. Were you even in the room to witness it? Or did Ian give you a blow by blow the following day. As for Anton. I think she'd be a great mayor. Just not in 2011.

Mary,

You can talk about this big tent all you want, but you're not getting the message.

The electorate doesn't want the NPA of old back at the helm. If Ian recognizes that, and isn't being heard by the party, then he used an appropriate event to get the message out.

And Mary, really now. You're coming on a site like City Caucus and trumpet what Frances "I love Gregor" Bula had to say with respect to Ian. Everyone knows Frances' agenda with things like this so save everyone the time.

Bill McCreery likes to use that phrase and I'm not sure what your relationship with Bill is, and why he's not using it himself, but only fools are going to rush into your "tent" to help you put out a fire none of you want to admit is there.

And Ian did embrace the legacy of the party, one that in the mid 90's was quite successful...unlike the NPA this past decade which has been a complete disaster and will be pretty much dead and buried over the next 12 months under its current direction, and with candidates like Sean Bickerton in the wings.

Jay,

You crack me up. Yes the ultra-right wing conspiracy accusations. The name calling, that I'm bitter, angry, etc...

Yes, yes, call me what you think rises yourself above me and makes yourself feel better.

Save it, you have no clue who I am or
what I do or what I believe in.

And for Troy, I have no plans on running as a candidate at this time.


This is a great bit of analysis. I also liked reading Lee and Bula's take. I was in the back of the room at the dinner and a number of eyes rolled when Ian delivered that speech. It was a bit amateurish for a politician who has been around the block a while. The dinner was a lot of fun however

"Save it, you have no clue who I am or
what I do or what I believe in."

Yet you have no problem accusing others....curious that.

One more thing I forgot to mention. The best line of the night at my table was "Ian's speech is something only Alex Tsakumas would love. But then again why shouldn't he cause Alex probably wrote it." We all raised our glasses of wine for a toast and had a belly laugh

Glen, I have to agree with the others: you are a very bitter, nasty man. It's unfortunate that Daniel and Mike allow you to post this kind of hate-filled drivel here.

Your opinion is thankfully not shared by most who want to see the NPA succeed, and who feel that the only thing that is going to make that a reality is a diverse group of candidates who can appeal to more than just the tiny extreme right-wing fringe that you seem to represent.

Candidates like Sean Bickerton and Michael Geller is exactly what the NPA needs. It's too bad that Michael has stated he will not be running, but, it's understandable when you see the vicious personal attacks coming from people like you and Vision. It's completely uncalled for. The kind of candidates you would endorse would never get elected anyway.

I've also seen some of the obnoxious things you've said about Suzanne Anton. While I don't always agree with her take on things, your vicious personal attacks against a woman are repugnant.

I have no idea what sort of internal issues there are in the NPA party, but what stood out for me in the last election was the low voter turnout. I was stunned that Vision won with their number one issue being an end to homelessness. Only in Vancouver could that really happen IMHO. But I remain convinced that there are enough intelligent, caring people living here who would truly appreciate an intelligent, caring, articulate municipal party. That's the opportunity the NPA has in front of it. Bury the hatchets if you will, but I say get on with re-visioning the party or get rid of it.

Only a moron would think I would have anything to do with any candidates speech or do any political work.

I notice too that you are unwilling to use your real name.

If you bothered to notice I have been CRITICAL of Robertson's inability to be tough enough for the top job. He finally located that button and I applaud that.

Daniel's take on said speech is complete nonsense.

The only comment that was of REAL interest to me in any of the speeches is the one which Sam used to laud this blog.

Which only brings us back to questions about city caucus from the beginning.

Who pays for such a fancy site? Is Sam Sullivan paying for city caucus?

If Daniel is allowed to manufacture a smear against Robertson for accurately skipping Sam in his comments (since he apparently was talking about CONSENSUS building Mayors) then let's really have a good ole honesty-time discussion.

If Jonathan Ross is having his bill paid for by FD Element to go to print with Vision positive crap, then is Sam doing the same for city caucus?

Fair ball. Because Sam wouldn't have made that comment otherwise.

And while I don;t agree with everything Glen Hall writes, his post is right on. Anton is dead wood and the problem with the NPA is that is wants characters like her in some death-spiral. We've already seen this twice.

More Lynne Kennedys. More Philp Owens. Yes and yes again. But Suzanne might as well go and run for Vision.

Might be worth letting Ian know that his "consensus building" mayor had his entire caucus abandon him in 2002.

Alex

Funny how you are praising Philip Owen when only a few weeks ago you characterized him as a poster child for "harm seduction". At least be consistent. Is Owen your hero or isn't he?

As for who is paying for the Ross blog or this blog who really cares? It probably costs a few hundred bucks a year for the both of them combined. Kind of a red herring to have us focus on something other than Robertson's bad speech.

Alex don't you have an immensely popular blog that you need to tend to? If so why are you trolling here?

Philip Owen was a good leader for the city, in particular because of his legacy around the Four Pillars and Insite. But city council is more than Shaughnessy today, and citizens don't want to just hand the keys over to the west side elite anymore. It's something Vision has attacked the NPA on in the past, when the reality is the NPA had the first openly gay elected officials, and led the way when it came to embracing ethnic communities. The NPA will win by being positive and forward-looking, not ranting against its opponents.

Bev I couldn't have said it better myself. Alex and Ian should pack up their right wing talk and start up their own party . Lets see how good they do. The npa will only win the next election if it appeals to middle road voters like me. Calling people radicals was just plain dumb and they should admit it. Come on folks. We need to work together to beat vision. Enough sniping at each other allready.

"The NPA will win by being positive and forward-looking, not ranting against its opponents."

Hahahaha! thank you so much for starting my weekend off with such a laugh.

How many political parties have said that before an election? How many have stayed true?

lol, good stuff...thanks!

@boohoo They say a strong positive vision is what got Neshi elected in Calgary. He may not deliver but at least he's got a shot at it.

That said it's not hard to understand the cynicism.

Yes, I have to agree: Peter Ladner was the most gracious speaker at the dinner.

Got the most applause, too. Must be that good, centerist stuff he believes in. You know, good civic projects, built on a strong foundation of fiscal responsibility.

Apparently, many that attended that evening like that approach.

Ian's speech was passionate. As he fully supported Peter in the last election---who after all, was elected by party members to run as leader for the mayoralty --I am sure that if he decides to run for council, he will fully develop his "voice" and messages, along with other party candidates.

His loyalty to whomever is the leader of the NPA party is, is unquestioned in my mind.

I look forward to seeing if a new and revitalized NPA comes to the table as one voice, with a solid set of values to share with those voters on the soft left, the soft right, and for those decidely in the middle.

Count me in as one of those mushy middle of the road voters who is looking for a change at city hall. If what I read about Mr Robertson's speech is accurate he would not get my vote. He sounds way too angry and negative. Did he have anything positive to say about what he'd do if he was mayor? If so what was it?

Gotta say Daniel... Your comments about Ian Robertson are not very helpful. If I recall you're an NPA supporter (clearly by writing on this blog) and there's no reason for an NPA supporter to bash one of their own in public.

This is how Vision will win again. It's because the NPA will let them win by fighting within the ranks. Each nasty comment about a sitting NPA board member is basically giving the Vision dogs a day off. Why attack when the party is self destructing anyway?

I'm not saying Ian Robertson is flawless and I'm certainly not saying I'm anti-Sam Sullivan. Fact of the matter is, Sam was a sitting NPA Mayor. A position that we need to respect. And Ian IS a sitting NPA Park Board member. Another position that deserves respect.

Let's stop fighting amongst ourselves folks. Ian's not the problem. Sam's not the problem. Gregor and Vision are the problem. Let's make sure we remember what we're fighting for.

Yes, Owen is a poster child for harm seduction because he doesn't listen to addictionologists in this province who have told him and Sam, time and again, that harm reduction on its own DOESN'T work.

As for him being my hero, no, all my political heroes are long dead.

But he was indeed the last Mayor you could count on to keep his door open.

As for the comment about Philip's caucus abandoning him, this is an abject LIE. Jennifer's backers both on the board and in caucus manufactured the dissent at a greater volume than it was. I was there.

Instead, Sam's backers manufactured acceptance and look at what happened.

As for Tom's IDIOTIC comments about right wing talk, that's precisely the problem in this town. Right vs left. And it's almost always the looney left that are bitch.

Tom is a case in point. Never content to let his spouse be the one to speak.

Pathetic all the way around. Daniel has taken an otherwise brave speech by a guy who might be able to straighten out this city, and lied about his intent, without speaking to the man, just to boost for who?

Sam Sullivan. The longer people like this remain in the NPA the worse it's going to be for the city.

The NPA needs to purge all those who will not build consensus or consult. Otherwise, it's their last election as a party and will surely break up.

And you can thank people like Daniel Fontaine.

I don't think undertaking witch hunts and "purging" people from the party if they don't agree with you Alex is a recipe for success. We need to broaden the tent not kick people out of it. Look what happened when Sam "purged" De Genova from the caucus. He ended up running for Vision as their mayoral candidate.

Rather than attacking the messengers like Bula, Lee and Daniel, why don't you have a chat with Ian about toning it down instead. A much productive use of your time.

This is so distressing that bloggers attack people who all have good intent. How will we ever develop good leadership if you all shoot at each other?

If you weren't at the dinner this is not the place for you to comment.

If you were at the dinner then it would be good if everyone could just get along and stop bickering. Fighting over tidbits is silly.

What is needed is a new strong community leader to be encouraged to step forward and lead the NPA without the nonsense expressed here. I live in hope.

I think there is really only one person ranting and raving and calling people liars here. And that's just his MO. Just ignore him like the rest of us and we can all have a civil discussion. Eventually he goes home to his own blog and things calm down.

An NPA implosion, lovely. Two years since the last rout and this is where you have managed to get to, wow. Maybe time for a few of the right leaning creative types to start fresh, cut loose the NPA boat anchor while you still have some time.

"and there's no reason for an NPA supporter to bash one of their own in public."

This is exactly what's sickening about these petty little parties in vancouver politics. Scrap them all! Let these clowns stand on their own, not be supported through these ridiculous parties.

"Bill McCreery likes to use that phrase and I'm not sure what your relationship with Bill is, and why he's not using it himself, but only fools are going to rush into your "tent" to help you put out a fire none of you want to admit is there."

I assure you Glen I don't know Mary but, i'd like to meet her. I tend to enjoy interesting people with opinions. Sorry to be so slow, if you blink these days, you're out if the loop. Can you pls clarify which "that phrase" is.

There you go Bill. It's below.

It appears as though, your Liberal supporters are telling "who they think" are some conservatives, that they are not welcome.

I think you have a problem that many don't quite understand. A vote split on the right is turning very inevitable with this path. When the fingers start pointing, don't say I didn't warn you - I've been trying to for some time now.


@Glen. Flaming city caucus because they don't agree with your view of the world isn't exactly going to help to build the big tent the party needs to move forward, now is it?

The Thought of The Day

“So, let me recap…Lady de Winter aka Milady, was hired by Cardinal Richelieu to get into D’Artagnan pants, not because he was angry at King Louis for getting in bed with one of his choir boys, but because he was pissed off at Porthos, who had arranged a number of secret rendezvous between Queen Anne and the Duke of Buckingham (keep in mind that Anne refused Cardinal’s previous advances and made it clear to him that she will never put out, not in 500 years!), and by knowing that Porthos was Milady’s estranged, first husband, and presently very good friends with D’Artagnan, and by knowing that Milady was a vicious tramp, he kind of counted on her – as a sure thing, that she would most definitely, try to get back at him by making him jealous. Religious Figures mixed with Aristocratic Adulterers, Easy Dames and Drunken Musketeers. That’s what I call a sociopath-o-political drama needed to cheer up our apathetic Vancouver voter. The Classics, eh!? “

Its how Alexandre Dumas wrote it, so it must be true. To us. That’s how I see it too!
I hate to say it right before an allegedly rainy weekend, but I suspect the Vision boys are down with blisters from the many High-Fives they must have given each other after reading about the NPA’s in-fights over… nothing.

Boy, it feels so good to be an Independent Thinker, away from of all this ‘party’ flavoured crap. Tell you what, Alex, if I ever was able to take orders or mere suggestions from others, or kiss up and genuflect daily as my morning routine, I did not show it. I could have been a contender’ and most probably part of some sorry ass party, association, collective, committee, ensemble, gathering…

Take it from me; this is what NPA should concentrate on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3jdbFOidds

And promptly react to Vision’s negative press in a smart manner. Failing to do so will make NPA’s effort to recapture the public’s attention, hope and imagination just another exercise in futility.

NPA, COPE, VISION – concubines? That may look like a very sophisticated Menage-a-Troise, to the untrained eye. But in reality, all there is, could be summed up in one word…Menagerie.

We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

Glen Hall: "You folks like to bash Vision for their council votes, already predetermined in their caucus meetings, and now because someone doesn't hold the same views as a choice few, everyone is out to hang the guy? Yeah...thats a direction the citizens of Vancouver will vote for again - NOT!"

Hahahahaha!!! That's pretty funny coming from the guy who keeps ragging on and on about how Anton, Geller and Bickerton should all run for Vision and should not be welcomed in the NPA.

You can't have it both ways Glen. Either **** or get off the pot already. If you aren't open to a diverse slate of candidates within the NPA without publicly trashing and making veiled threats, then **** already and go start your own municipal party. The NPA has always had candidates from both the left and right political spectrum, you are living in some kind of idiotic dream world if you think that a slate of only rightwing candidates will get the NPA elected.

You keep putting your food in your mouth every time you post one of your insane diatribes. The only people you are helping is Vision. You and your sidekick Alex. Just look at the Vancouver Observer. They didn't even bother writing a scathing article about the NPA dinner because Alex did it for them. All they had to do was quote Alex's article in their own. You and Alex are the ones giving Vision a hand and yet you think people should be listening to the two of you and taking your advice???

Tunny,

I was anticipating your predictable rant.What took you so long?

Actually, my issues with Bickerton and Anton, being in the NPA are based on many factors of which you clearly don't understand.

Read this to COMPREHEND.

NEITHER ARE ELECTABLE BASED ON THEIR ACTIONS AND THE POSITIONS THEY CONTINUE TO TAKE.

What is done is done with them, and there is no turning back. Why on earth would the NPA want to have 2 of 11 candidates in the next election who are already going to lose?

Good job folks. Give Vision 2 assured seats right off the bat. May as well spot them 2 for now and cross our fingers and hope for the best.

As for Geller, I haven't given him a hard time in quite awhile, so unless there's someone else around using my name (which I doubt), claiming I'm "ragging on and on" about Geller is a complete fabrication.

But what else is new with you. In your past ravings, you've claimed I was a right-wing, neo-con nutjob. Why not add to your list of lies and claim I've said something about the man I haven't?

So rather than come to grips with the fact that your zeros for heros in the NPA are the anchor taking your leaking boat to the bottom, you chose to attack those who are trying to point out the problem still existent going back a few years now. Talk about shitting or getting off the pot.

So you don't like what I have to say. Fine. You have your opinion. Somehow you think you have a right to express yours, and I don't have a right to express mine. Keep that up and I guarantee you, the NPA is reduced to ashes after 2011 if not before.

And there are no veiled threats, only real ones some of us know about already. If you want to keep fooling yourself into believing that I'm part of some right wing agenda, you go right ahead....it will be you standing there gobsmacked in the end, asking yourself what went wrong.

I was also thinking the same thing about the Vancouver observer article but you summed it up quite nicely. Why does the observer need to write anything negative about the NPA when Tsakumis and Hall do it for them. I think the only people trying to tear apart the NPA's momentum is them. They are both so negative. Why do they dislike Anton and the fed liberals so much? Shouldn't we all work together? I hope so.

Glissando. The best writer/ thinker in this city. I'm like, Douglas Coupland...Who? This Remmy guy is not a boudoir writer either.
"I suspect the Vision boys are down with blisters from the many High-Fives they must have given each other after reading about the NPA’s in-fights over… nothing."
Emphasis on 'nothing'.
Hey City Caucus & comp. this should be in the 'MUST READ' category.

Glen, agreed, the NPA needs the 'big tent'. I'm not a Federal big or little 'C' or 'L'. I want to elect a fiscally responsible, forward looking government which will serve the citizens of Vancouver well. Period. That government is not Vision. I am working constructively there with a whole lot of dedicated people within the NPA organization. There is no discussion about this big or little 'C' or 'L' phenomenon being discussed. We are just getting on with it.

The sign of a true leader is one that can move on when the battle is over. Mr Ian Robertson you need to move on and show that you truly want to work with your party. Carrying old grudges is not helpful. I'm not sure who is giving you advice? But I would say hire new advisors.

Johnny Mercer says:
'You've got to accentuate the positive
Eliminate the negative
And latch on to the affirmative
Don't mess with Mister In-Between'
Oh, Glissy!
That selection of yours was so moving, it went straight down to my gut. How thoughtful of you. Thanks buddy. So simple.

Point of clarification, Alex - there's only one Tom in my life, and he doesn't post under "Tom" on this or any other blog.

Glen, your response is so predictably juvenile and all over the map. You want to keep denigrating others within the NPA, including the two guys running this blog, but get all huffy if someone calls you on your own ******. You're all bluster and no substance.

As for Geller, I've seen negative remarks you've made about him on Alex's blog. Are you denying that you have? Where have I accused you of being a "right-wing, neo-con nutjob"? Another memory lapse on your part. Fabricating stuff about people based on your misinformed opinion seems to be a hobby for you.

So who's your perfect candidate? Someone who is against bike lanes? Hates cyclists? Doesn't give a shit about the homeless? Is against everything? Wow, what an inspiring candidate. If they don't agree with your positions 100% they are worthless and Vision supporters? That is sheer stupidity.

Admit it, Glen, you hate everyone who's not male, white, straight, rich and conservative. You're even willing to help Vision by badmouthing the NPA, it's caucus and potential candidates on a daily basis. That says a lot about the kind of person you really are.

I hereby have the last word. Go and enjoy your weekends, folks.

Mike

where2beforfree-smallbanner
Check out BCWineLover.com!

Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement



Close