Political lessons learned from the BCNDP - Mable Elmore incident

I agree with your consensus about what will happen during the campaign. And add that people back east sure like to wade in on BC and BC politics, and frame conceptions that are just not real, when it is obvious they know nothing about facts on the ground.

Frankly, I am getting on board with a western seperatist mind set, over it all.

Wow, nice straw man argument.

Keglerdave is not saying that the vetting process failed because it nominated "a lesibian [sic], labour activist of colour who promotes peace activism in the work place" but because it produced a nominee who, while she has many fine characteristics, also has made lots of over-the-top public statements which will generate controversy, and will no doubt prove distracting during the campaign. We might happen to agree with a lot of what Ms. Elmore says, but that does not mean that the mainstream voting public will take kindly to what she has to say. As keglerdave said, the Liberals will be able to put the NDP on the defensive, when it should be the other way around.

Just out of curiosity, what part of B.C. do you live in? 

Canada really is the most slavish and obsequious pro-Israel country in the world. What a disgrace.

No freakin' kidding, hey? Here's what I just heard:

It's all fine and dandy to fight hard for issues of social justice and equality and inclusion in your workplace.  But really, dear, just because you completely out-organize a star candidate doesn't mean you're...ahem, you know...right...to be a public face for our organization.  It's really kind of unfair of you to take her rightful place.

I mean, you're a really wonderful person, don't get me wrong - you're passionate and your heart is in the right place, but we like our candidates a little more...um, how can I put this...er, ahem...you know.  Not so outspoken, you know?  It's not quite what you say, dear, it's how you say it.  I know you're an amazing organizer who has somehow managed to make yourself heard from the margins of your union.  But I think in our party, it would be best if you just kind of...well...went back to the margins.  You're kind of embarrassing us.  Kthxbye.

Mighty big of you, Stockholm, to allow room for one token leftist in the caucus. Just as long as she remains an isolated individual in a hostile caucus and doesn't get too uppity, you'll be happy to see her stick around.

Patronize much? 

And in what way, exactly, does Mabel Elmore represent the "far left"?

Remind, it is entirely irrelevant if the NDP is bound to taking right wing positions and chastising candidates who dare to speak out on matters of conscience in the public media, because the NDP holds those views, or because the media can kick it around like it is a rubber ball. Either way, the result is a party espousing right wing views.

In the youtube video, Carole James' eyes appear glazed over as if she cant believe the idiots have reached back four years ago to tackle Mable Ellmore on something she said then. But certainly there is no expression of anger anywhere on her face that I can see. Why are these idiots bringing this up now? They should be doing their jobs and covering the Campbell scandal with CN Rail and jobs bleeding away from Liberal BC.

I don't know too much about this issue, but it sounds to me like the same kind of "gotcha!" politics we experienced in the last federal election. Trying to dig up dirt on your opponents by taking them down instead of advancing your own ideas. Real classy. I suspect the general public is mighty tired of it.

You mean someone like Svend Robinson?

 The puropose of the vetting process is to screen out candidates with a history of illegal or objectionable beheviour who may bring disrepute to the party, not candidates whom the PTB consider "over-the-top" for taking legiitimate postions on controversial issues. It's entirely up to the membership to decide on the nominee whose positions best represent them.

 What has this party come to.

So it's the job of our elected representatives to avoid 'stirring up controversy' and uphold the status quo? Sounds about right.

 Incidentally, have we come to a conclusion as to why Elmore's comments were offensive?  Carole James doesn't seem to address that in her angry scrum. I agree with Fidel, though:her eyes are definitely glazed over.

Reminds me a little of Olivia Chow.

I've worked with Mable Elmore in Stopwar, and it saddens me to see her repudiate a position for which I've respected her. I've not talked to Mable about the incident, so I don't know her real reasons for the apology (and I doubt she would divulge her real reasons in any case). That said, I would speculate that Mable was told to either apoligize or resign. As disturbing as I find the apology, I doubt it represents at this point a true change of position on Mable's part; however, having taken such a position publicly, it now becomes that much more likely that she will come to accept more and more the underlying assumptions behind the JDL's position.

Unionist, the way I read that quote, Mable is saying that she now believes the term carries an anti-Semitic meaning in the North American context. To me that's a repudiation of her previous position, alluded to in the quote, that the term does not carry an anti-semitic meaning in the North American context.

It is a little bit of a slide, still, but understandable given her position at this moment. But its not a wholsale repudiation of her position on the issues, as you say.

Where to start. I guess I could start with people putting words into my mouth. But why bother, its not going to change, as ideologues are ideologues.  My post had nothing to do with Mabel Elmore's race, gender, sexual preference, or anything of the sort.  Yet again certain people want to sling that crap at me, particularly those who go into a pro worker forum talking about workers rights and start supporting forcing striking workers back to work under essential service legislation, right Michelle? But I digress.

I said it in my post, you have to respect someone like Mabel, who's willing to put it on the line, out there for everyone to see. You can't knock someone's passion and I, in no way shape or form did that. As a matter of fact, I went out of my way in my post to say just that.

Having said that, running for public office, and being that public about your views, you have to expect scrutiny and criticism of those views. No different than if I decided to take a run at the BCNDP presidency. I have a view on a very contentious issue (equity mandate), have been quite public about it, and if I were to decide to run for president, I could fully expect to be held to account for all I have had to say about it. For the record, wouldn't bother me a bit but once again I digress.

Running for public office for the BCNDP involves almost a contractual relationship.  Mabel will attest herself that she's controversial and not exactly "main stream." And once again, all the power to her for that and being there like that.  She has her views and positions and likes to be out there espousing views and positions. I guess that those views and opinions clash with current BCNDP policy. And to those who are attacking Carole James for making Mabel apologize,  its called Damage Control. Once she apologized, miraculously the story went off the front pages, and is left to us to talk about.

This past week or so, the BCNDP had a fun time in the legislature. Making hay of Campbell and his gang, celebrating the defeat of the Gag Law, and starting to ramp up the campaign. They took the focus off of their nominees and back onto where it should have been all along. So attack Carole all you want, you'll find that Mabel isn't that repentent no doubt. So it was a win win. Mabel looked like she ate some humble pie, but hasn't changed her tune, and Carole got an embarrasing situation off the front page, and put the focus back on Campbell.

I'm not sure, but it seems that the alternative would have been worse. As I said, look at Rolley Keith and the Doobie Bros on you tube from the last fed campaign. They walked the plank over their issues, and comparatively it wasn't as controversial as Mabel's history. I think that Carole made lemonade out of lemons on this one, and that Mabel should know realize that she's a candidate for public office, and not just a labour activist anymore.  You have to be electable, and make yourself electable. Whether those on here want to accept it or not, the name of the game is winning. Not looking good while running, but winning. And to do that, you have to have the ability to appeal to the electorate.

Remains to be seen.

During vetting she must say that nothing she has done in the past would reflect poorly upon the party.

Cue, I was referring to the notation you made about contractual agreement, and noting what it could be, not what it was even.

I made no fucking accusations at all. You scream about people putting words in your mouth, how about you stop doing it to other people, eh?

Thanks for the clarification. I guess we can dispose of the notion that Elmore breached any kind protocol regarding embarassing the party by articulating policy views at odds with stated party policy, since there is none.

Not in this thread, but I had to point out to you that Carole James was a woman of colour, as is Ms Simms in another thread about this Michelle. And did so here again.

Fuck fuck fuck I shoulda stayed the hell out of this thread as I said I was going to above, and for the reasons I said it above, plus more.

Fiar enough. I was a low blow anyway, I will retract it.

See, I'd find that waaaay more worrying than that one of the candidates said the word 'Zionist'. I'd also start with the premise that journalists like Palmer and Baldrey are going to write nasty things about the party and find out how to talk past, over and against them and not just turtle up in shell. How exactly is it a newsflash that the media is hostile to the NDP regardless of how much it accomodates their biases? Its unfortunate that there haven't been any lessons learned on that front but I suppose weakening the local membership by concentrating more power in the vetting process will fix everything....

That is interesting about Farnworth, he is my least favorite NDP MLA, he was pandering to The Province's Law and Order crowd last year. That's what happens when you keep justifying moving to the right though, you become it.

melovesproles has it right. It has nothing at all to do with the vetting process. The media wants to find things to attack the NDP over and so it always will. The fact that they made such hay over this utterly ludicrous non-issue just shows how desperate they are to do so. They will find something, even if it's nothing.

So the issue here is not preventing this from happening, which can't be done, but the manner in which the party deals with it. There is some merit to keglerdave's position that the faster this is put out of the way, the better. I can see the logic. The problem is that getting it out of the way always means backing down. And backing down. And backing down. Can any voter respect a party like this?

One of the great strengths of the right wing is their tenacity. They back down sometimes, but much more often they stand their ground and people respect them for it even when they disagree with the issue itself. Now there are reasons for this that have to do with the nature of our political landscape, but most voters can't appreciate that. All they see is a party that doesn't crumble under pressure. Hell, I can sympathise. If I didn't know that the Liberals are crooks and saboteurs, I might be tempted to vote for them myself, because frankly, policy statements are fairly meaningless and have very little relation to how a party governs. Much more important is the strength of character to deal with the hard realities of governance. What does it matter what the party would like to do if we know they'll always fold when the going gets rough? None of their policies will get enacted anyways.

Now, I know better. The Liberals are not just a well-meaning group with a more right-wing ideology. They are scum, they are shit, they are filth, and they would sell our children into slavery if they could get away with it. This is not the way most voters think, however. Even many NDP supporters. In the end, if the party can't be seen to take it on the chin and come back swinging, it's not going to matter to many people what they profess to believe in.

I think this was a missed opportunity. An opportunity to say that this party can't be pushed around so easily. That this is much ado about nothing and we stand behind our people and our values, and we will stand up for BC in the same way if you elect us. Instead, backing down, backing down, backing down. Does that look like a leader to you? 

I agree that htis has nothing to do with the "vetting process". There is no comparison at all between these incidents and what happened in the federal election. The party "vetting process" is about making sure that candidates don't have a background of someone doing anything illegal or quasi-illegal (ie: smoking 20 joints at once while driving or having been exposed of indecent exposure etc...) or having said anything truly outrageous (i.e. that Green candidate who got dumped for having written that he was jumping for joy when the WTC collapsed on 9/11).

I really don't care if the NDP candidate in Langley said she was against funding abortion services five years ago. She wasn't an NDP candidate then. I am glad that she has seen the light and changed her ways and now agrees with the NDP policy on this issue. What her views were in the past are irrelevant. I only care about her views NOW.

I guess the only political lesson to be learned from this incident is that people who identify with the radical, militant far left and criticize pro-war Zionists are less welcome in the NDP and have to apologize for their views more often than pro-lifers or those that identify with right-wing ideologies.

Given my experiences three provinces over, I already knew that.

Yes. And other aspertions that persons who propose that they are on the left seem to share with media that they call right wing.

I have no idea what you just said.

And whats the stuff Carole James is made just you wait and see as once she gets a bite of success she is not letting go its what makes her strong slow and steady wins the race as James will be premeir as she to is nobodies fool.  Lets see what happens when James has the numbers to stop the one man show from feeding everybody their lines.   Its going to be exciting for sure as change is on the horizon and its long overdue as James has eight years under her belt and she is going to be using them to her parties advantage and her party is not shabby either with a few household names on board.  I could be wrong but then I'm reading signals wrong and its highly unlikely.

quote I have no idea whay you just said.

Zoned out as it was all to do with what someone said or how they said it and never came to terms but they were deeply offended over how Zionism was being used or not used and thats right its most likely she didn't have any idea thats what was said, right?

So whats the big TA do about nothing?  And excuse me if I offended anyone as certainly it was not my intent, standard procedure as kids moms made us apologize for everything.  She didn't stick out her tongue after well then its okay she meant it in an apologetic sort of way.

Forced you say?  How did James do that if you don't say your sorry I'll never speak to you again or mabye she said this "What actually happened here have you explained to the offended party you were sorry she took offense and didn't mean anything by it?"  Like what were they supposed to do show their cheeky side?  Or get a life or better yet how about save one as thats what we are trying to do but Campbell's got an agenda no poor kid can live with.

That's not what I read in the interview. Did you read it? It's the voice of a militant trade union activist who is against the war. If that's your idea of "people who identify with the radical, militant far left" (your words) then you have a very different conception of what those words mean than I do.

You were the one who talked about "people who identify with the radical, militant far left". Do you now repudiate those words in respect of Mable Elmore?

Really? Is that the "lesson" Mable Elmore has to learn?

The only view that Elmore holds that isn't accepted in the NDP, to my knowledge, is the view that there is nothing wrong with calling a Zionist a Zionist. Admittedly, I know nothing of her views other than what is in that interview. That's why I asked repeatedly whether Elmore really was the militant left-wing radical that babblers seemed to depict her as. So far, nobody has been able to enlighten me further.

I would be delighted to hear, for example, that she supports the Palestinians in their struggle against the occupation, that she opposes reformist carbon-trading greenwash schemes, that she supports free public transit and free post-secondary education, that she supports collective ownership and democratic control of the economy, etc.   

That's image, not substance. The question is whether Elmore has advocated policies at odds with (or "to the left of" if you want to put it that way) the policies of the provincial or federal NDP. I haven't seen any evidence that she has.

But of course the Asper media are concened with image rather than substance. What else is new.

That was a good read. It's nice to read something like that. Then you don't have to spend any time trying to come up with something that would not be even half as good.

If I were Carole James, I'd be telling Gordon Campbell to go fuck himself, and that it could have been much worse - they could have done something really scummy and life-threatening like DRIVING DRUNK.

It's from the Globe article about the latest NDP candidate to fall prey to the smear machine, and James' spineless caving to it.  It's posted in another thread, I think.

Thanks michelle, never saw it.

Funny, I think the CJC and BB should apologize more than anyone. To Carole James for misleading her, to Mable for defaming and  to BCers for trying to unduly influence BC politics.

It is not as if James has given any of the press an alternate framing of these issues that they can report on. That is in summary what James as leader of the provincial NDP is supposed to be doing, presenting an alternative view for people.

In fact, I would like to see a public letter from non-Zionist Jews, condemning the actions of the CJC et al, in this action of deceit, and political interference against BCers.

Why Jews, remind? To assuage our collective guilt? Oh, and by the way, the CJC and BB, however ugly their politics may be, are not aliens from another planet. They are not "interfering" against BCers.

Disagree completely, not 1 person has taken the CJC et al to task for their role in the deception and the forcing of James to apologize through deception and political interference..

No unionist, because the anti-Zionist Jews, wrote a letter to James condeming her actions, but did not publically condemn those who pressured James through deceit.

Remind, I advise you to retract your comments about Jews right now.

Frankly, you know I did  not make any comments about "Jews", I made  a statement about the anti-Zionist Jews who wrote a letter to Ms James condemning her,  and  I noted  and was critical that they took no public exception to those in the CJC et al , who were deceitful and manipulative  when forcing James to have an apology made to them, for no bloody reason other than to interfer in BC politics.

If you can demand what you want from Ms James, and be critical of her,  I can demand what I want from those who  correctly stepped in, but made the situation more obscured, and I have every right to be critical of the fact that they did not also publically  criticize the deceitful manuipulators in the ranks of the CJC et al for their initiating actions.

ETA: Afterall, they were the ones who inserted themselves publically into the situation too, and yet you believe I have no right to be critical because I believe they did not go far enough in their PUBLIC critciism? Pfft.

Another CanWest scribe whacks Mable Elmore for using word Zionist

No need to worry about Mable. She will continue to command respect in the labour and peace movement when her "timid leader" is a long-forgotten footnote in B.C. history.

And with James on her knees, they will never quit.

Hope you find a leader some day.

You religiously defend Israel and Zionists, and now you defend Carole James for doing the same. With support like yours, the NDP is dead. Luckily, your way of thinking is indeed the exception. Carole James doesn't listen to you when she spews her venom against Mable Elmore. She listens to the real powers, the ones she respects and grovels before - the MSM, the CJC, the BB. She knows that progressive people will never support her pandering (they have already said so, in print) - so she has given up hoping to win their favour. Now she needs the blessing of the rich and mighty. What a cringing fool she is.

You like Carole James' condemnation of Mable Elmore, Fidel? Just curious which side of the fence you're on in this world.

Independent Jewish Voices of BC had the courage to stand up in public and defend Mable Elmore against the lies of the CJC, CanWest and Carole James.

Various babblers could learn a lesson from that courage, if they were able to drop their sycophancy for a moment.

You see, supporting the NDP in BC means supporting Mable Elmore's stands and condemning the grovelling of Carole James. It is Carole James who is the traitor to the cause of peace, of the Palestinian people, of speaking truth to power. She should be cleared out before she finishes what Ujjal Dosanjh started.

Someone should think to do a spot interview with one of Dany Williams' team and get their take on the current situation in the Middle East. 

And while theyre at it, I'd really like to know what British Columbia's Green Party stand is on the phony war in Afghanistan, or even Ottawa's role in Haiti. Those provincial level opinions might be considered entirely irrelevant to some, but I'd just like them to drone on about it anyway, especially with tight provincial election campaigns winding down in BC.

You're too lazy to read the threads. Elmore was browbeat into believing that some people find the term Zionists "offensive", so she apologized for not knowing that and causing offence. That highlights Carole James' criminal behaviour even more starkly.

Once again, you're too lazy or forgetful to recall that it was CAROLE JAMES that raised this issue, condemned Elmore, forced her to apologize, and called her truthful comments "unacceptable". She created the scandal - not me, not the Independent Jewish Voice of BC, not Mable Elmore. It was Coward James. The leader of the BC NDP thinks it's important to swear undying allegiance to Israel and the CJC at the outset of an election campaign - and you defend her by saying "get back to provincial politics".

I frankly don't give a shit where Carole James stands on Israel or Zionism. It's irrelevant. But when she suppresses Mable Elmore's 5-year-old opinions and makes a public scene about it, she exposes herself as a cringing coward at best, but with fascist tendencies. You love that? Share the credit.

"The leader of the BC NDP thinks it's important to swear undying allegiance to Israel"

Not at all. I think the point is that people don't have to choose between Israel existing and there being a just solution for the Palestinian people and "Zionism" is not the policies of the current Israeli government anymore than "socialism" is to be equated with Pol Pot.

We have been down this road a million times, but I will say it again for those of you with cognitive difficulties. "Zionism" is simply a belief that there should be a place somewhere on the face of the earth where Jews can feel safe. It could be Baffin Island, it could be Israel. What would you say if I said (hypothetically) that I consider myself a "Zionist" and this is what i favour - a single state consisting of all of what is now Israel and the occupied territories, complete equal rights and freedom of religion for all, an open door immigration policy for anyone of Jewish or Palestinian descent who wants to move there and ironclad guarantees in the constitution that minority rights will be protected etc... what's not to like. When people condemn "Zionism" then it no longer has anything to do with Palestinians, it has nothing to do with human rights, it has nothing to do with pursuing any peace process - its just a statement that singles out Jews and Israelis as having no right to a country and it implies that all 6.5 million Jewish Israelis should be deported en masse and stripped of all their belongings. I'm sorry, you may not mean it that way - but when I hear ad hominem attacks on Zionism - to me its a "dog whistle" message that says "we don't really give a damn about Palestinians - we just can't stand the idea that those damn Jews have a country - just when we thought we had them on the run at the end of WW2". Its all counter-productive. Look at us here. No one is talking about SOLUTIONS in the middle east - instead we waate vast amounts of time with these "when did you stop beating your wife" style arguments about whether not attacking Zionism is anti-semitic. Whenever these controversies erupt - the happiest people in Canada are our friends at B'nai Brith and the CJC. They LOVE it when their adversaries start using incindiary language about Zionism - because it deflects all attention away from legitimate criticism of Israel (which they don't want to discuss at all) and on to what is or is not anti-semitism (which they LOVE to talk about.

Keep squawking about "Zionism" all you want - just keep in mind that every time you do so you are playing into the hands of the very people you loathe.

Cute. Do you want to win elections? Are you even from BC?

Supporting Mable Elmore's self-proclaimed far left "radical" and "militant" stands in BC will land the NDP into a 4th place finish after the Libs, Greens, and Cons. I've already written off her riding, Vancouver-Kensington, as a Lib win. And that should never have been.

Edited. 

Really, I wouldn't put a limit on how low they'd stoop especially now that they know they have an NDP leader who will enthusiastically come down on her own candidates everytime they pull a new smear job.  I think there are shades of Dosanjh here, it isn't exactly rocket science that checking your backbone at the door is a shitty idea if you actually want to win elections.

I think James and the BCNDP should write a platform plank on Arctic sovereignty while there's still time and memories iffy as to what they said several years ago in opposition. You never know with tarp as shacks newsies working for Campbell and his corporate stooges in government.

The problem is not with ever using the word "zionist" its all in the context in which it is used. For example using as a derisive term for anyone who supported the invasion of Iraq (which is absurd), or when it is used as an obvious "code" to mean Jews in general. Obviously, if you blatantly say "death to Jews" you get in trouble. But if you use "coded" language and say - "Oh I don't want to annhiliate all Jews - just "zionists"" then people think they can get away with it. Its like in Russia right now, apparently anti-semites avoid using the word "Jew" instead they say they they hate "cosmopolitans" - now some of us of all religions are proud to be cosmopolitan people - we travel we like food and music of different ethnicities, we are well read etc...we may even (god forbid) read Cosmopolitan magazine - but if some racist skinheads in Moscow along with neo-fascist politicians like Zhirinovsky start talking about "cosmopolitans" in a derisive way...I don't take it as a complement - I take it for what it is talking in coded language to express racist sentiments.

What a load. Now you are saying that Elmore is an out and out bigot. There is nothing in her statement that suggests such. Basically you are saying that you can not say the word Zionist, except in a positive context. Go fuck yourself.

"Now you are saying that Elmore is an out and out bigot."

No, actually I don't believe she's a bigot at all. I've never met her, but I'm confidenct that she doesn't have a racist bone in her body. I think she made an honest mistake and used language that is typically used by people who actually ARE bigots and she didn't realize what she was doing. Now she has been educated about how misuse of the word "zionist" can be interpreted and she now knows better. Good for her.

My point is not about Mabel Elmore. I'm trying to explain why and how the use of the word "zionist" in certain contexts can be INTERPRETED as being anti-semitic.

Oh boy a new word to add to the Oxford dictionary - "fuckoffedness" - let's pop the champagne corks to celebrate the creation of a brand new word!!

Why, would you look at the post count.  Closing for length!