Castanet

Cactusflower wrote:Looks like you're on your own in your defense of the indefensible now, rustled. Well, cxcept for that little angry 'Benedict Arnold' comment prior to yours. Andrew Weaver was right when he said the BC Liberals acted extremely childish today. He was talking about the ones in the Legislature, though. I suppose it is passed on to the BC Liberal peons.......Benedict Arnold? Get real! That's the height of self-aggrandizement.

I wonder how long it will take the rest of the BC Liberal fan club to recover enough to weigh in on the opening of the Legislature.

On my own in what, noting the lack of integrity shown in the legislature?

Well, now, you may be right. It seems to me that any time the lack of integrity being shown by our elected representatives benefits the NDP, a certain faction here gets awfully quiet in their anti-corruption dialogue. Isn't that interesting?

Personally, I'm not sure I agree with much Weaver says, particularly when it comes to his standards of ethics and his descriptions of the ethics of others. Sure, I get why Weaver sold his own party out when the price was right. That's between him and his conscience, and of course the people who voted for the Green party.

But I am a bit old school, thinking the Speaker ought to be someone who not only the house (all parties), but also the electorate, can count on to do the right thing. You know, the honourable and respectful thing, the way Plecas described it:

He repeatedly turned down offers from the NDP to take on the role of Speaker in the wake of the spring election, saying in one media interview it would be "disrespectful" and "dishonourable" to accept the position.

Nope, not someone I'd put in a position of trust. As I said before, if the guy will do it with you, you can be pretty sure he'll do it to you. Not sure what his price is, but I guess for some of you that's of no consequence as long as it's to the NDP's advantage.

Please remind me, what is it that I'm defending here?

^But you seem to be ok with the NDP or Greens putting up a Speaker. But then that suggests you think someone from the Greens or the NDP would have more integrity and be more nonpartisan, eh?

flamingfingers wrote:^But you seem to be ok with the NDP or Greens putting up a Speaker. But then that suggests you think someone from the Greens or the NDP would have more integrity and be more nonpartisan, eh?

You mean as past traditions dictate? I think almost anyone has more integrity that this Judas, now. You can have him, he'll fit right in with your party.

Please remind me, what is it that I'm defending here?

you defended gordon flip wilson who did it twice

^^Plecas has NOT changed his party affiliation. He is still a Liberal MLA!

flamingfingers wrote:^^Plecas has NOT changed his party affiliation. He is still a Liberal MLA!

Obviously in name only. The Libs don't want him. Actions speak a lot louder than words.

^^Why were you not this upset when Steve Thompson (also a Liberal MLA) stood for Speaker early this past summer?

flamingfingers wrote:^But you seem to be ok with the NDP or Greens putting up a Speaker. But then that suggests you think someone from the Greens or the NDP would have more integrity and be more nonpartisan, eh?

Of course. Any party could have put up someone who had Plecas' reputation prior to this stunt as speaker, and I would have been fine with it.

If that person wasn't a member of the non-coalition coalition, I wouldn't have been fine with them doing it behind their party's back. The honourable thing to do is to be open and transparent, and to let people know why you've chosen to do what you're about to do when they are so clearly expecting you to do something else.

What absolutely isn't fine is someone saying it would be both dishonest and dishonourable for him to accept the job, and continually assuring his party's interim leader (and his constituents, via the media) that he had absolutely no intention of letting his name stand, and then showing up and doing something completely different.

Anyone who does feel this was an honourable way for Plecas to behave, that it was ethical, that it showed integrity, would get along just fine with my ex.

So I have to wonder: why were so many of you so vocal in holding Clark to a much higher standard than you're prepared to hold Plecas? Or Weaver? Or Horgan?

Is this how little integrity and honour you expect from our MLAs during the upcoming sitting?

flamingfingers wrote:^^Why were you not this upset when Steve Thompson (also a Liberal MLA) stood for Speaker early this past summer?

Because at that time Liberals had won the election. A speaker from the winning party was appointed, the confidence tested, and when the confidence test failed Mr Thompson stepped down.

exactly what should have happened IMO

The shock must have been greater than I thought, O.T. I don't know why you're so worried that Plecas isn't up to the job. After all, Linda Reid and Bill Barisoff before her set the bar pretty low.

Reading between the lines has never been your strong suit, but sour grapes is your specialty. The legislative assembly sits again on Monday, so I'm expecting to attend your whine and cheese party when they adjourn.

You're defending the bad behaviour of the BC Liberals, as usual, rustled. I'll bet Ben Stewart doesn't use half as many sour grapes in his Quail's Gate winery as there have been on this thread since Plecas became Speaker. I thought both Horgan and Weaver were very gracious in congratulating him on his taking on the role, and I wasn't in the least surprised to hear Coleman's bitter statements. He's always been a sore loser just like his pal Christy. I applaud Plecas for finally admitting he had been backing the wrong horse all along. He must have known what the reaction of those Faux-Liberals would be.

It's allowed. It isn't strategic for his party but allowed.

But he also appears to have lied to his party. Also allowed but not nice.

Cactusflower wrote:The shock must have been greater than I thought, O.T. I don't know why you're so worried that Plecas isn't up to the job. After all, Linda Reid and Bill Barisoff before her set the bar pretty low.

Reading between the lines has never been your strong suit, but sour grapes is your specialty. The legislative assembly sits again on Monday, so I'm expecting to attend your whine and cheese party when they adjourn.

You're defending the bad behaviour of the BC Liberals, as usual, rustled. I'll bet Ben Stewart doesn't use half as many sour grapes in his Quail's Gate winery as there have been on this thread since Plecas became Speaker. I thought both Horgan and Weaver were very gracious in congratulating him on his taking on the role, and I wasn't in the least surprised to hear Coleman's bitter statements. He's always been a sore loser just like his pal Christy. I applaud Plecas for finally admitting he had been backing the wrong horse all along. He must have known what the reaction of those Faux-Liberals would be.

i'm not disagree with this but at the end of the day his riding voted in a liberal. It was partially him and partially the party. If a politician in any ridings leaves or changes their party that should be a by election. Period.

LordEd wrote:It's allowed. It isn't strategic for his party but allowed.

But he also appears to have lied to his party. Also allowed but not nice.

the bclibs lied to bc many times, not nice to use your words