NDP: Slithering to Slitherman

In anycase, no way for the NDP to take away McConnell's membership in the NDP for openly advocating for a candidate who wants to break the garbage workers union by subcontracting out their jobs to companies that will sign "No strike" clauses in their contracts? I mean, is there a limit to what people can advocate for and still be in the NDP?

I am pointing out that these affiliations exist. Buzz Hargrove was nothing but a notable member of the party when he advised CAW workers to vote strategically for the Liberals or the NDP. He neither was running for office, or an employee of the NDP. He was an ordinary member of the party, just like McConnell, and she like Buzz is a notable figure in politics in Canada. Surely, advocating for a candidate that promises to take away collective bargaining rights and busting unions is enough to get an ordinary party member busted out of the party on principle?

By which you mean to say that you actually have no argument to the above point, except to say that you really don't give a fuck if Smitherman manages to enact policies aimed at attacking unions, or undermining their right to collectively bargain. And yet, on another thread you are trying to convince me that somehow the NDP has changed under Hampton and that it is substantively different than the ONDP of 1990.

Yeah. Right.

I pointed out that the real problem was not what McConnell has said, but what others are not saying. Let's see how it all works out, shall we? That is one "left" councillor who has stated their preference, lets see what the others do in the coming weeks.

Hopefully this thread can be kept to a mere 22 posts.

Here is a hint: the popularity of a position is not in and of itself proof of its validity. Nor does being openly ridiculed ad hominem by a lot of people with baseless mudslinging amount to an argument. Your response to my point about the silence on endorsements of other NDP aligned councilors, was met with a derisive yawn.

NDP councilors supporting Pantalone: 0

NDP councilors supporting Smitherman: 1

Very strange in that very few are in tough races at all. Indeed most incumbents will be re-elected, as they always are. So, in the light of that fact, the concern is almost certainly where they will place in a future Smitherman executive, if they openly oppose him now.

In anycase, I had thought of opening up a new "mobilizing support for Pantalone thread", but really couldn't bring myself to do so, since they always seemed to oppotunities for people to start running him down because he isn't cute like Adam Giambrone, or a fast talker like Smitherman. It was pretty demobilizing.

I had thought with some commitment we might pull the rabbit out of the hat, but now I think we will lose, so I decided I will spend the next three weeks counting rats. With friends like these... etc. I thought it would be better just to start a thread that was more thematically in tune with NDPr's running down the only progressive candidate in the civic election.

This thread seemed more apropos to that theme.

I appreciate the idea that without party status in municipal politics there is no real control. However, as I pointed out, the fact that Buzz Hargrove had no official relationship with the NDP that bound him to an ethical standard except for the fact that he was a member, the party had no problem taking away his party card for endorsing Liberal candidates in a federal election. The issue is not that Smitherman is a Liberal, the issue is that Smitherman's platform includes this:

Quote:

Garbage Collection: Putting Service First

We all remember last year's unnecessary garbage strike-with George Smitherman as Toronto Mayor, that will not happen again. As part of his commitment to Service First, George Smitherman will consider the contracting out of solid waste and recycling collection services on an area-by-area basis, where service levels can be enhanced at similar or lower cost. It is up to Torontonians to say whether the service is good or needs improvement. Citizen panels would be involved in advising on service levels or evaluating bids. Any outside contractors bidding or hired would be subject to a new No Strike rule.

In essence, what we have is an prominent NDP member of political note, advocating in support of a candidate who is actively pursuing a union busting agenda up to and including abrogating the right to collective bargaining.

Certainly the NDP's position on the rights of collective bargaining are unequivocal are they not?

Surely, if Buzz Hargrove (private citizen) can be banned from the party for using his political influence to get people to vote strategically, against the NDP, certainly the NDP should be able to ban Pam McConnell (private citizen) for using her political influence to support a candidate that want to bust the garbage workers union and take away collective bargaining rights from workers..

That really wasn't the way I read Stockholm's reaction. The way I read it was that it was just fine for Mehvic and McConnell to back Smitherman and look out for positions on the executive -- in fact it was a good thing, because they would be protecting our interests. It's hard to see how one clearly distinguishes between McConnell and Mehvic protecting "our" interests, and protecting their own. These are not necessarily one in the same.

Quote:

Anyways, IF Smitherman does become mayor - I would rather have people like McConnell and Mihevc having some share of the power as "token lefties" on the executive than not to have them. I try to imagine who Ford would name to the executive - and all i can think of is a rogues gallery of Mike Del Grande, Mammoliti, Nunziata, Holyday and Stintz etc...

Indeed, Stockholm's response was pretty much an affirmation of the point I was making about securing positions on the executive, except to say that was acceptable, because Stocky knows some people he respects who are backing Smitherman. In other words, the whole thing was just a reiteration of one more "Mobilizing support for George Smitherman" (the lesser of two evils) moment, since he would hire some "lefty" tokens for the sake of appearances.

Sorry that you feel that way. I guess I just kind of feel I have put some effort into this thing, and then there is this creepy guy on this board who basically never misses an opportunity to come up with reasons to support Smitherman, while saying he is supporting Pantalone, and then he's in with this group of people who are so obviously just trying to hang onto their little bit of political turf by cozying up the Smitherman, and that is AoK with him, and I realize that this is the kind unprincipled shenangins that is driving the Ford movement. And then I have to think that really I am putting my name on the line to support these assholes in the NDP?

Pam McConnell: "Screw the garbage collectors. Up the salary of the council members!"

Makes me sick to death really. Nothing personal about you.

I just made a mistake getting involved in it at all. Wish I hadn't. I am just angry because I am personally embarassed.

You are a massive moral boost for right wing Canada. Indeed. They even quote you, and your opinions regarding your support for Smitherman because you don't believe Pantalone can win. Or so that is how they interpret your political "analysis" of how Pantalone does not have the "mojo" to win.

Lacking Mojo being the latest in what has been a series of attacks on his abilities.

A good way to protect ourselves from the right is to do things like provoke a fight with CUPE over some absurd pension plan benefit system, as Miller proved when he tried to "look tough" with "organized labour" last year. In doing so, he triggered a strike that was totally pointless and could have been negotiated around, and once again gave the right a casus beli for reform. Had Miller not done that, its almost certain that most Torontonians would have thought everything was fine at city hall. But caving into their platform points in an effort to appease them by going after CUPE was a great set up for the assent of the Ford/Smitherman axis that has now arrived.

Nothing like a little union bashing to help us defend ourselves from the right? Right? The fact that the unions are essential institutions that protect our city services and democracy does not enter into the equation.

With Smitherman we can expect more of the same union bashing and turmoil and there is nothing like turmoil to foment fascist reaction. Even better when the turmoil is artificially created by the so called left, when it is bending over backwards to appease the right.

Indeed, Rae did an excelent job being the patsy for big business and setting us up for the Harris era reaction. So no, I don't buy your line that the corrupt and incompetent Smitherman is somehow going to ward off fascist reaction. Not in the slightest.