Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 162

Thread: Deborah Drever expelled from NDP caucus

  1. #1

    Default Deborah Drever expelled from NDP caucus

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ucus-1.3084083

    Deborah Drever, the recently elected Alberta member of the legislature for Calgary-Bow, has been suspended from the NDP caucus after another controversial social media post emerged.

    Deborah Drever expresses regret over offensive photo
    The photo, posted on Instagram, features former premier Jim Prentice and interim Alberta PC leader Ric McIver. Underneath the image, a user with the name drevfever posted the comment "Gay boyz."
    Good move by Notley. A no-brainer, but at least she showed leadership early, which hopefully bodes well... Drever was a definite liability.

  2. #2
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,572

    Default

    I think the NDP has some serious questions to answer about how she was ever allowed to stand as a candidate. Five minutes of vetting on Google and a few social media platforms should have turned most of this stuff up quite easily.

  3. #3

    Default

    I assume even they couldn't have imagined she'd actually win at the time of nomination with the NDP sitting at 12% in the polls and her being in Calgary.

    Not that I disagree, BTW. Shouldn't have passed qualifications.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  4. #4
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Below that old white mountain, just a little southeast of Nome
    Posts
    627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    I think the NDP has some serious questions to answer about how she was ever allowed to stand as a candidate. Five minutes of vetting on Google and a few social media platforms should have turned most of this stuff up quite easily.
    To be honest I don't think that the NDP actually believed at the start of the campaign that they would be forming the next government and neither did the PC's or the Wildrose for that matter. This is probably the reason that none of them did any checking. Not a good excuse mind you especially for the NDP.

  5. #5

    Default

    Ya agree. Everyone just needs a bit of a breather. Comments homophobic in nature can not be tolerated, but I think these comments just showed a bit of immaturity on her part, nothing all that much to be hyped about. A new NDP gov't trying to manage their image though can't have her in caucus right now.
    www.decl.org

  6. #6
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,374

    Default

    The bigger question is, why did voters vote for her when they knew nothing about her.

  7. #7
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Below that old white mountain, just a little southeast of Nome
    Posts
    627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sundance View Post
    The bigger question is, why did voters vote for her when they knew nothing about her.
    Exactly. The NDP candidate in my riding did not even bother to show up at the all candidates forum which played a factor in why I did not vote for her as she would not even respond to my email asking her why. The fact that she did not live in my riding also was something that factored into my decision although to be fair neither did the Wildrose candidate but at least he showed up to the forum.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Ya agree. Everyone just needs a bit of a breather. Comments homophobic in nature can not be tolerated, but I think these comments just showed a bit of immaturity on her part, nothing all that much to be hyped about. A new NDP gov't trying to manage their image though can't have her in caucus right now.
    I don't think they can afford to take a risk like her. She probably didn't even herself expect to succeed politically in Alberta, thus didn't take even herself or her actions seriously.

    She'd have to prove herself a stunning political asset in some way to not drag her party down. She doesn't seem to have practiced nor prepared that and would have to play a huge amount of catch-up in a very short time to not be a hindrance to her party. I can't even picture it.

    But then it's the same City that forgave Rob Anders numerous elections and nominations, so what would I know...
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  9. #9
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    I think the NDP has some serious questions to answer about how she was ever allowed to stand as a candidate. Five minutes of vetting on Google and a few social media platforms should have turned most of this stuff up quite easily.
    I don't disagree at all, but it's worth pointing out this this is also a byproduct of living in a one-party state for so long. Opposition parties in Alberta have had to practically beg qualified candidates to run, or either apparently hand out nominations for free outside of a local 7/11 in the case of Drever. Had anyone anticipated an NDP surge, accomplished individuals would have been coming out of the woodwork to contest NDP nominations outside of Edmonton.

    It's definitely not just an NDP problem -- I worked on the Alberta Liberal campaign in '08, and while we did have a number of very good candidates in that election, I can tell you we had some huge duds on our slate (mostly in hopeless districts) as well. None of them were elected and all have been forgotten and long buried under the sands of history.

    In a sense, if the NDP caucus can limit its duds to Drever and triage accordingly, that's not bad.

  10. #10
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,517

    Default

    I was willing to pass off the first few because they were relatively innocuous and well in the past. This isn't innocuous and was in the last eight or nine months. This woman has some issues with judgment and, at the very least, should learn how to delete/reset her social media accounts.

    The lesson here, for those that ran against her, is google your opponents. The fact this stuff exists is her bad, the fact that her opponents or the media, never found it isn't great either. The PCs likely could have held the riding if they'd just typed a name into a search field.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  11. #11

    Default

    I don't think she should be judged by her previous photo's and actions before being elected as they were just your regular young people going wild moments. This current situation is different. She should have put her big girl panties on the minute she started to run for that seat. Most people are pretty tolerant and have a sense of humour about political missteps, but her homophobic remarks and etchings are plain juvenile. She's 26 and got elected to represent her riding, if she does not take that seriously then she should look for another vocation. I suggest she put a plaque on her desk that says 'Grow Up or Shut Up'. Glad Notley showed her who's boss.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  12. #12
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    The lesson here, for those that ran against her, is google your opponents. The fact this stuff exists is her bad, the fact that her opponents or the media, never found it isn't great either. The PCs likely could have held the riding if they'd just typed a name into a search field.
    It definitely shows you that the PCs did not know how to wage a competent or modern campaign. This stuff is Elections 101.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    I was willing to pass off the first few because they were relatively innocuous and well in the past. This isn't innocuous and was in the last eight or nine months. This woman has some issues with judgment and, at the very least, should learn how to delete/reset her social media accounts.

    The lesson here, for those that ran against her, is google your opponents. The fact this stuff exists is her bad, the fact that her opponents or the media, never found it isn't great either. The PCs likely could have held the riding if they'd just typed a name into a search field.
    I'm not sure she would have lost even if she had of been googled. People were just so sick and tired of the PC's that if a gorilla had of ran it still would have beat out the PC candidate. If the public slogan for this election was 'ABC' then it appears that just 'anybody' could (and did) win.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  14. #14

    Default

    I thougt long and hard about posting the following, especially under my real name, but in the end... here goes:

    There is nothing particularly obnoxious about her comments. Whether she should or should not have been suspended is between Notley and Notley's conscience. However, worse and more damaging things are said every day about people by stuffed shirts using supposedly polite phrasing, knowing that nothing will happen.

    The homophobia angle, like every other form of taking offence, will continue to be played up most by those who have the least concern about being actually humane and truly considerate, but who want the cheapest points to core.

    I look for those people who make a point of telling others "just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" to be the first to defend Drever. If they do not, they are the most contemptible hypocrites. If they do, they deserve the highest respect.

  15. #15

    Default

    We know people get offended everyday in every way. What Drever did was childish and posted so anyone could see. Some people may not be offended by what she said but recognize how totally immature she is acting. People make mistakes all the time even as adults, but when adults show that kind of immaturity one has to wonder what other jackassery is going to happen next. I think people were prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt at first but it seems now she is elected the Bozo Alert memo came to late.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  16. #16

    Default

    Good enough.

    That her postings are silly above all else and unworthy of an MLA is obvious.

    That people screaming "the horror, the horror" loudest are doing so for the crassest of all political reasons is even more obvious.

    And that goes double for all the humorless demands that the NDP have a lot to answer for.

    The only thing to answer for is what they are about to do in power. Which they receive two days from now.
    Last edited by AShetsen; 22-05-2015 at 05:24 PM.

  17. #17

    Default

    Drever is not the whole NDP party, in fact she is no longer a member of the party. I am sure the 'party' will chug along very well without her.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  18. #18

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by sundance View Post
    The bigger question is, why did voters vote for her when they knew nothing about her.
    Because the stench from the PCs was so bad people realized they needed to be swept from power now, the Wildrose is still laying in the public perception bed they made a long time ago and haven't changed (the treacherous floor-crossers probably stymied plans to do more work on the party image) the Libs just imploded, and Notley made a favourable impression.

    I thought we'd gone over this several times since the election, but some conservatives just need to keep having it explained to them.

    Principally, the public revulsion with the ruling party is what got in the way.
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  19. #19

    Default

    If this has taught me anything its that I will never ever be able to be a politician.

    Ive honestly thought about it many times. But if this girls minor immature actions in the past (these are minor in the grand scheme of things) are going to be used as her crucifixion the average human has no hope. Is Drever a homophobe? Thats laughable. I have been ignorant in my youthful years and used the word "gay" as a slander. Stupid and ignorant yes, homophobic - no.

    We expect moral righteousness and moral absolutism and perfection out of our politicians. What we end up getting is the career political robots who are so groomed, rehearsed and disconnected from the average man its not even funny.

    To end my rant we need many many more politicans who pose in front of pot shirts and for metal albums. We need more human politicians.

    Lets see how she does as an Independent.
    youtube.com/BrothersGrim
    facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    If this has taught me anything its that I will never ever be able to be a politician.

    Ive honestly thought about it many times. But if this girls minor immature actions in the past (these are minor in the grand scheme of things) are going to be used as her crucifixion the average human has no hope. Is Drever a homophobe? Thats laughable. I have been ignorant in my youthful years and used the word "gay" as a slander. Stupid and ignorant yes, homophobic - no.

    We expect moral righteousness and moral absolutism and perfection out of our politicians. What we end up getting is the career political robots who are so groomed, rehearsed and disconnected from the average man its not even funny.

    To end my rant we need many many more politicans who pose in front of pot shirts and for metal albums. We need more human politicians.

    Lets see how she does as an Independent.
    It all comes down to: 'Anything you say or do, WILL be used against you.' She showed poor judgement, but from what I saw, I couldn't judge her to be homophobic. I could imagine people in the gay community using similar language, but I could be wrong as I wouldn't know for certain.

    However, people raised in different environments are shaped in various ways by those around them (who they "hung out" with) and may discover too late that they have been poisoned by the exposure and so won't be able to survive amongst the "establishment".


    "Professor Henry Higgins: Eliza, you are to stay here for the next six months learning to speak beautifully, like a lady in a florist's shop. If you work hard and do as you're told, you shall sleep in a proper bedroom, have lots to eat, and money to buy chocolates and go for rides in taxis. But if you are naughty and idle, you shall sleep in the back kitchen amongst the black beetles, and be wolloped by Mrs. Pearce with a broomstick. At the end of six months you will be taken to Buckingham Palace, in a carriage, beautifully dressed. If the king finds out you are not a lady, you will be taken to the Tower of London, where your head will be cut off as a warning to other presumptuous flower girls! But if you are not found out, you shall have a present... of, ah... seven and six to start life with as a lady in a shop. If you refuse this offer, you will be the most ungrateful, wicked girl, and the angels will weep for you." - My Fair Lady (1964)

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058385/quotes
    Last edited by KC; 23-05-2015 at 04:41 PM.

  21. #21

    Default

    I see it as less representation in Calgary compared to Edmonton. This is good news for us!
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  22. #22
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    Ive honestly thought about it many times. But if this girls minor immature actions in the past (these are minor in the grand scheme of things) are going to be used as her crucifixion the average human has no hope. Is Drever a homophobe? Thats laughable. I have been ignorant in my youthful years and used the word "gay" as a slander. Stupid and ignorant yes, homophobic - no.
    Judging from the photos she was commenting upon, it seems likely that her post was made during or after the Tory leadership race, ie. some time within the last year. So she would have been at least 25 at the time of the posting.

    It seems to me that a party can't argue, on the one hand, that someone in her mid-20s is suitable to hold office, but on the other hand, that they're too immature to know that what they're posting is an offensive slur, and one, incidentally, that directly contradicts the NDP's claim to be the leading party in support of gay and lesbian equality.

    In practical terms, this means that, every time a glbqt issue comes up, and the NDP wants to go after the other parties for being insufficiently supportive or even homophobic, they're gonna have "What about Drever?" chanted at them from across the aisle. That's likely not a position they want to be in.

    And, when all is said and done, this isn't some draconian punishment being meted out, as she is being offered that chance to re-enter the caucus in a year.

  23. #23
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    She is also still an MLA. It's a good job and a great learning opportunity for her if she chooses to take advantage of it.

    I agree with many here that this latest stunt is what is deciding. It clearly happened during a time that she knew she was going to run for public office. I'm still curious when in fact this was posted. She may or may not have known that she had a chance.

    But in any case, the post was juvenile. On the level of a junior high student trying to appear cool. She appears to be a not very insightful person and I believe she gave Rachel Notley no choice.

    Eve

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    If this has taught me anything its that I will never ever be able to be a politician.

    Ive honestly thought about it many times. But if this girls minor immature actions in the past (these are minor in the grand scheme of things) are going to be used as her crucifixion the average human has no hope. Is Drever a homophobe? Thats laughable. I have been ignorant in my youthful years and used the word "gay" as a slander. Stupid and ignorant yes, homophobic - no.

    We expect moral righteousness and moral absolutism and perfection out of our politicians. What we end up getting is the career political robots who are so groomed, rehearsed and disconnected from the average man its not even funny.

    To end my rant we need many many more politicans who pose in front of pot shirts and for metal albums. We need more human politicians.

    Lets see how she does as an Independent.
    Oh my.

    "Moral absolutism"? This individual has now shown through multiple instances that she is unfit for office. Minimally no party would continue to have her at this point.

    Heres the deal. When the other inappropriate social media pictures came out she stated categorically: "This happened when I was young, it does not represent who I am now"

    So the matter is dealt with so easily and appears that the focus would go away. She politically survived the controversy.

    EXCEPT this person, would also, (or should also) be aware they made other juvenile and inappropriate comments on social media much more recently and that indicate that this is still who this individual is. Or does she make inappropriate comment so commonly maybe she doesn't even remember what she's posted.

    Really its on Drever, and nobody else, that she never deleted the original social media posts even though she was advised to. Then she used the excuse saying she's all different now, except that she failed to even do a sweep of her social media profiles and scan what harmful depiction might be left. Surely a sensible person would realize that this recently found picture would bring the whole controversy back only now much worse because its clearly recent. Is this laziness? Not even caring enough to have any due diligence in checking her social media. Should somebody else do it for her? How can somebody that can't look after even their own salient and pressing matters be trusted to govern?

    This person was, and continues to be a blatant liability for the NDP caucus. She's also misleading at best as per her statement weeks ago. Although its quite possible she doesn't even get it. Doesn't even realize what the latest released picture said about her. Credibility gone.

    By the foolish inaction she actually screwed up the excuse that she had. By her own fault of compromising details remaining in social media she screwed herself. She compromised herself. Repeatedly.

    But continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for. She's even given the option of 1 year to exhibit some nature of maturity befitting her position and demonstrating that she's even remotely capable of representing a party, and particularly a governing party. In anycase she collects close to half a million over her term in office if she can do as much as keep to the simple script and stop discrediting herself in social media.
    Last edited by Replacement; 23-05-2015 at 10:21 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  25. #25

    Default

    I have to say I like the tone and substance of Komrade's post much more than Replacement's.
    Last edited by AShetsen; 23-05-2015 at 10:23 PM.

  26. #26

    Default

    "Priggish formalism"

    You might want to expand on exactly what you disagree with.

    Because its kind of difficult to respond to such a nebulous post.

    Edit: Oh you edited. Good thing as the original version didn't make much sense.

    So anyway how do you disagree with what I stated?

    I think my post is somewhat harsh but fair given the circumstances. Understand as well I was prepared to forget about the previous social media and had accepted her explanation. But I don't accept that she continued in that inappropriate vein and that she should know that discrediting information remained in her social media profiles. Foolhardy at best.
    Last edited by Replacement; 23-05-2015 at 10:30 PM. Reason: edited
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  27. #27

    Default

    I disagree that she is necessarily unfit for office. She will surely never be given one, for better or worse, but fitness cannot be judged a priori.

    I disagree that her posts were necessarily inappropriate. To say worse things in polite language -- continuous character assassination of political enemies comes to mind -- though rather more acceptable is less appropriate.

    I disagree that she necessarily compromised herself. (1) Political figures wear the endorsements of their supporters. Rightists attack the manhood and imply rude things about the queerness of the panty-waisted longhair pinkos at will. Let them have the same treatment, in spades -- they deserve it. (2) The flag has far more desecrated by what the right wing has done to this country and in our name abroad than a million middle fingers held up.

    I despise the absolutism you show in your post.

    I question your morals directly. You are far too conventionally disapproving to be convincing.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I disagree that she is necessarily unfit for office. She will surely never be given one, for better or worse, but fitness cannot be judged a priori.

    I disagree that her posts were necessarily inappropriate. To say worse things in polite language -- continuous character assassination of political enemies comes to mind -- though rather more acceptable is less appropriate.

    I disagree that she necessarily compromised herself. (1) Political figures wear the endorsements of their supporters. Rightists attack the manhood and imply rude things about the queerness of the panty-waisted longhair pinkos at will. Let them have the same treatment, in spades -- they deserve it. (2) The flag has far more desecrated by what the right wing has done to this country and in our name abroad than a million middle fingers held up.

    I despise the absolutism you show in your post.

    I question your morals directly. You are far too conventionally disapproving to be convincing.
    I hope that was intended as irony. Appears so. But not comparable illustration.

    Unfit for office I can accept was strongly worded. The question I have the most is why this individual didn't realize that her own excuse was negated by this more recent depiction. In otherwords that she continued to make inappropriate comments on social media. I would expect she'd be able to connect the dots and realize that she compromised her own excuse. She inferred that she would not make those posts now and that they did not represent who she is now. But apparently she continued to make inappropriate social media comments.

    I doubt right now she would even have a credible or even plausible explanation.
    Last edited by Replacement; 23-05-2015 at 10:53 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    We expect moral righteousness and moral absolutism and perfection out of our politicians. What we end up getting is the career political robots who are so groomed, rehearsed and disconnected from the average man its not even funny.

    To end my rant we need many many more politicans who pose in front of pot shirts and for metal albums. We need more human politicians.
    Firstly, the first paragraph is beautiful, and to your second point, thank goodness Joshua Semotiuk ran in 2013 to purposefully play The Jester. It was sorely needed.
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  30. #30

    Default

    I doubt right now she would even have a credible or even plausible explanation.
    No explanation would either be helpful or desired.

    By both her supporters and those who condemn her.

    You have made a vacuous point.

  31. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I doubt right now she would even have a credible or even plausible explanation.
    No explanation would either be helpful or desired.

    By both her supporters and those who condemn her.

    You have made a vacuous point.
    I agree it wouldn't be helpful. She's already made misleading claims.

    It is interesting, if not entirely absent of perspective that you entirely absolve an individual that has required weekly damage control on 3 instances now since election and prior to even being sworn in. As I stated this individual has exhibited that she is a liability to her party and has been dealt with accordingly.

    I'll side with Notley on this one and disregard your own selective take.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  32. #32
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,427

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I have to say I like the tone and substance of Komrade's post much more than Replacement's.
    Of course you do. It defends a socialist who screwed up. People are more likely to defend inappropriate or wrong behaviour from people on their team.

  33. #33

    Default

    I don't absolve her entirely. Not at all. I've said already that her behaviour has been silly and unworthy of an MLA. If you read previous post carefully, you'll see that I say she was not necessarily wrong. As you who presumes to argue moral standards ought to know, "not necessarily wrong" does not mean "necessarily right" and is not an absolution. I've given reasons to consider giving her a pass, but they are very far from sating she was good and proper.

    What I do condemn, absolutely and with total distaste, disgust, and contempt, is your vacuous and simplistic absolutism.

    You are scoring cheap political points. That's beneath the pale.

  34. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I have to say I like the tone and substance of Komrade's post much more than Replacement's.
    Of course you do. It defends a socialist who screwed up. People are more likely to defend inappropriate or wrong behaviour from people on their team.
    "My team" as you presume to call it has just kicked her off. I am not defending her because she is on "my team". I am not a team player.

    Kindly shut the hell up with your word socialist. You have no idea of what it means. Say rather what you mean, and call people like me s***heads or something similar.

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I don't absolve her entirely. Not at all. I've said already that her behaviour has been silly and unworthy of an MLA. If you read previous post carefully, you'll see that I say she was not necessarily wrong. As you who presumes to argue moral standards ought to know, "not necessarily wrong" does not mean "necessarily right" and is not an absolution. I've given reasons to consider giving her a pass, but they are very far from sating she was good and proper.

    What I do condemn, absolutely and with total distaste, disgust, and contempt, is your vacuous and simplistic absolutism.

    You are scoring cheap political points. That's beneath the pale.
    So you contemptibly condemn "condemning" then. Good to know.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I have to say I like the tone and substance of Komrade's post much more than Replacement's.
    Of course you do. It defends a socialist who screwed up. People are more likely to defend inappropriate or wrong behaviour from people on their team.
    "My team" as you presume to call it has just kicked her off. I am not defending her because she is on "my team". I am not a team player.

    Kindly shut the hell up with your word socialist. You have no idea of what it means. Say rather what you mean, and call people like me s***heads or something similar.
    Oh my.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  37. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    So you contemptibly condemn "condemning" then. Good to know.
    Thank you.

  38. #38
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,427

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I have to say I like the tone and substance of Komrade's post much more than Replacement's.
    Of course you do. It defends a socialist who screwed up. People are more likely to defend inappropriate or wrong behaviour from people on their team.
    "My team" as you presume to call it has just kicked her off. I am not defending her because she is on "my team". I am not a team player.

    Kindly shut the hell up with your word socialist. You have no idea of what it means. Say rather what you mean, and call people like me s***heads or something similar.
    Not sure why you quoted "My team" as if it was something I said. I will kindly shut up with the word socialist. I suppose I should have used Leftist.

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    So you contemptibly condemn "condemning" then. Good to know.
    Thank you.
    Excepting that nobody "condemned" anyone in the first place. Other than your own condemning.

    Still wondering how I'm scoring cheap political points given that I'm a lifelong NDP supporter.

    No need for you to respond with further specious inanity.
    Last edited by Replacement; 24-05-2015 at 12:50 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  40. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Excepting that nobody "condemned" anyone in the first place. Other than your own condemning.
    Cowardice. You won't even take responsibility for your own words:

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    she is unfit for office.

    Is this laziness? Not even caring enough to have any due diligence in checking her social media.

    This person was, and continues to be a blatant liability for the NDP caucus.

    Credibility gone.

    She compromised herself. Repeatedly.

    But continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Still wondering how I'm scoring cheap political points given that I'm a lifelong NDP supporter.
    Points for the Party are as cheap as points against.

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    No need for you to respond with further specious inanity.
    More cowardice.

  41. #41

    Default

    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.

  42. #42
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    I wonder if anyone in this board ever ran for politics what goodies we could dig up
    be offended! figure out why later...

  43. #43
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richardW View Post
    I wonder if anyone in this board ever ran for politics what goodies we could dig up
    So few people actually use their real names it would be hard to prove anything.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  44. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Excepting that nobody "condemned" anyone in the first place. Other than your own condemning.
    Cowardice. You won't even take responsibility for your own words:

    .
    I think you interpret what you want to see that fits your assumptive condemnation of others. If that quoted piece is "condemnation" to you you must see it everywhere in everyone.

    I'm done here. You can rabble on if you want.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.
    Of course, and there are problems throughout but where you envision this as a lark candidate I would instead counter that the NDP, until recently not a big party in the province since the 80's probably had trouble filling out a full table of candidates and finding adequate candidates in each riding. Clearly there was trouble in this. In several ridings there probably wasn't even contested nomination.
    I don't know all the particulars in the Calgary Bow riding but would be somewhat shocked if it was highly contested. One would think it would be the least likely riding to fall to the NDP.

    What probably occurred is the NDP screened, found out the young lady was a Mount Royal College student who presents well in person and is capable of thoughtful expression. As in an interview some have no difficulty winning people over and being convincing given an opportunity. But its why increasingly thorough checks need to be done to cross reference impressions.
    Politics involves vicious attack and opportunism. Didn't write the rules for that but it is the game played. Especially as recent opposition party that won election partly on a reform and clean up the mess ticket Drever is a liability as I keep stating. Overoceans nailed it in an earlier post.
    Last edited by Replacement; 24-05-2015 at 10:16 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  46. #46
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,704

    Default

    Good!!!!!!

  47. #47
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.
    It's a problem, but I don't know if there is much that can be done about it. You'd have to remove one of two things from the political process...

    1. You'd have to stop people from voting for the party instead of the person.

    2. You'd have to remove the right of a party leader to kick MLAs out of caucus.

    The first would be impossible to remove, short of developing totalitarian mind-reading powers.

    As for the second, you COULD remove that right, but then, you'd have a situation where MLAs could get up in the House every week and say the most ridiculous or offensive things("Mr. Speaker, I'm speaking today in praise of ISIS for their impressive commitment to democracy in the middle east"), and the party would be helpless to do anything about it.

    Long and the short, unless you can think of a way to square the circle on this, I think we're basically stuck with a system that allows an MLA elected solely on the basis of her party to be kicked out of that party.

  48. #48
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.
    It's a problem, but I don't know if there is much that can be done about it. You'd have to remove one of two things from the political process...

    1. You'd have to stop people from voting for the party instead of the person.

    2. You'd have to remove the right of a party leader to kick MLAs out of caucus.

    The first would be impossible to remove, short of developing totalitarian mind-reading powers.

    As for the second, you COULD remove that right, but then, you'd have a situation where MLAs could get up in the House every week and say the most ridiculous or offensive things("Mr. Speaker, I'm speaking today in praise of ISIS for their impressive commitment to democracy in the middle east"), and the party would be helpless to do anything about it.

    Long and the short, unless you can think of a way to square the circle on this, I think we're basically stuck with a system that allows an MLA elected solely on the basis of her party to be kicked out of that party.
    This particular problem exists because our parliamentary system has the executive drawn from the legislature. If they are elected separately then you don't get this particular problem but you do get others.

    There is no perfect system and every system has its issues. All and all, for the all the complaining people do, we don't do too badly with ours.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  49. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    [It's a problem, but I don't know if there is much that can be done about it. You'd have to remove one of two things from the political process...

    1. You'd have to stop people from voting for the party instead of the person.

    2. You'd have to remove the right of a party leader to kick MLAs out of caucus.

    The first would be impossible to remove, short of developing totalitarian mind-reading powers.

    As for the second, you COULD remove that right, but then, you'd have a situation where MLAs could get up in the House every week and say the most ridiculous or offensive things("Mr. Speaker, I'm speaking today in praise of ISIS for their impressive commitment to democracy in the middle east"), and the party would be helpless to do anything about it.

    Long and the short, unless you can think of a way to square the circle on this, I think we're basically stuck with a system that allows an MLA elected solely on the basis of her party to be kicked out of that party.
    I agree with everything else you've stated in the thread but how would the bolded help? This to me makes it a worse situation.

    As for what can be done its right of recall obviously.

    I think that every riding should require a nomination process and not just appointing the only person running. If you haven't found candidates to have a nomination vote then the party doesn't get to run in that riding period. I think that's a preferable arrangement albeit the public in a particular riding needs to be informed more so that some candidates who might not of thought of running may get interested.

    Of course with my suggestion a voter should still be able to vote for the party in question they want to vote for but should be able to do that independently in the ballot. This leads me to the single biggest change that provincially there should be two votes on the ballot. Vote for the party, and then select Candidate in riding separately. In this way a person could still select the party they feel best represents them and who they think is the best candidate in the specific riding.

    Finally I would suggest tie breaker rules. No recount. Instead of recount the incumbent Wins if voting is really close. Or minimally at least establish that as a cross party etiquette wherein a challenger that was not able to clearly win a riding would concede. The benefit of this is that it retains some experienced MLA's in situations like we just experienced. In my view in an election like this any PC incumbent that went down the line in this vote probably did a fairly good job and still had a groundswell of support in the riding. I think it makes less sense having a rookie MLA just because of say 6 more votes with such slim margins also oft times involving judgement and consideration of spoiled ballots and cross evaluation of ballots and recounts.
    Last edited by Replacement; 24-05-2015 at 10:47 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  50. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richardW View Post
    I wonder if anyone in this board ever ran for politics what goodies we could dig up
    I'm Jan Reimer.

    At least that was the barbed accusation when I joined this board.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  51. #51
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    ^^ Well, I meant that, if you're concerned that Drever was removed from the NDP caucus even though she won BECAUSE she was NDP, then taking away the right of the leader to remove her would solve that problem(though create others).
    Last edited by overoceans; 24-05-2015 at 10:53 AM.

  52. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    ^^ Well, I meant that, if you're concerned that Drever was removed from the NDP caucus even though she won BECAUSE she was NDP, then taking away the right of the leader to remove her would solve that problem(though create others).
    I think that few people see it as a problem and even across different political stripes. Most times if a matter like this is duly dealt with its actually viewed positively, and that the party and leader responded judiciously with respect to the concerns. This of course requires acknowledging the problem, and the courage to take responsibility and leadership in making a decision that would be unpleasant for most.

    Notley handled this well imo. She first gave benefit of doubt, then direction, then guidance, and now is giving further opportunity for Drever to exhibit her suitability to be in the NDP caucus.

    Its a very reasonable approach given the circumstance.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  53. #53
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    Replacement wrote:

    Finally I would suggest tie breaker rules. No recount. Instead of recount the incumbent Wins if voting is really close. Or minimally at least establish that as a cross party etiquette wherein a challenger that was not able to clearly win a riding would concede. The benefit of this is that it retains some experienced MLA's in situations like we just experienced. In my view in an election like this any PC incumbent that went down the line in this vote probably did a fairly good job and still had a groundswell of support in the riding. I think it makes less sense having a rookie MLA just because of say 6 more votes with such slim margins also oft times involving judgement and consideration of spoiled ballots and cross evaluation of ballots and recounts.

    I can't agree with this. It seems to me, except in cases of an absolute tie, you either win the riding or you don't. Your proposal amounts to saying that the bar is set higher for challengers than for incumbents, on the assumption that, if the incumbent got X number of votes, well, that must demonstrate that he is better than the challenger. Even if the challenger actually won.

    But there's no reason why it couldn't be argued in the other direction: "Sure, the incumbent won, but it was only by six votes, and we know that a lot of people just vote for incumbents because it's the name they're most familiar with, and a lot of these incumbents are just doddering old coots who haven't had an original idea in years, so we'll give it to the challenger to get some new thinking in there."

  54. #54
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    I believe that, in the case of a tie, the practice in most places is for the chief electoral officer, having abstained in the original election, to cast a final, deciding vote. I don't see anything wrong with that system.

  55. #55

    Default

    ^^Fair response and you make a strong point. Often times what you indicate transpires. But in sweeping clean elections like this of course good and bad candidates are lost.

    There doesn't seem to be any answer that fits best. No perfect system.


    But still my other suggestion that there be two votes on the ballot still affords people to vote for who they feel is the best party, and who they feel is the best candidate in the specific riding. Really I doubt some of the candidates that did win end up winning in such a two vote process.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  56. #56
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    But still my other suggestion that there be two votes on the ballot still affords people to vote for who they feel is the best party, and who they feel is the best candidate in the specific riding. Really I doubt some of the candidates that did win end up winning in such a two vote process.


    Yeah, sorry, I meant to ask you about that one. How does it work in concrete terms?

    Say I mark down Joe Blow of the XYZ Party for my "best candidate" vote, but I mark down the ABC Party for my "best party" vote. If the majority votes the same way, Joe Blow represents my riding in parliament.

    But how is the "best party" vote represented? Is there a second house, with seats alloted according to which party was the most popular?

  57. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    But still my other suggestion that there be two votes on the ballot still affords people to vote for who they feel is the best party, and who they feel is the best candidate in the specific riding. Really I doubt some of the candidates that did win end up winning in such a two vote process.


    Yeah, sorry, I meant to ask you about that one. How does it work in concrete terms?

    Say I mark down Joe Blow of the XYZ Party for my "best candidate" vote, but I mark down the ABC Party for my "best party" vote. If the majority votes the same way, Joe Blow represents my riding in parliament.

    But how is the "best party" vote represented? Is there a second house, with seats alloted according to which party was the most popular?




    Good question.






    What I would do is reduce the number of provincial ridings around 10, theres too many anyway, and each leader would be able to shortlist some added caucus candidates based on value, seniority, and that would allow some of the best candidates to stick. This allotment would occur on the portion of popular vote the leader (i.e. party) obtained. So that 42% of vote yields 4 party selected candidates, using rounding off formula.

    So by voting for the leader one is most comfortable with it gives licence to that leader to decide which candidates (maybe even candidates that lost a riding) to step in and still be in the legislature. These individuals would not necessarily be representing a riding but could still be of value in the legislature. Could even be assigned portfolio.
    Last edited by Replacement; 24-05-2015 at 11:32 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  58. #58
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,517

    Default

    This is a version of mixed-member proportional representation. Variants are used in Germany, New Zealand, Lesotho, and Romania.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  59. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    This is a version of mixed-member proportional representation. Variants are used in Germany, New Zealand, Lesotho, and Romania.
    Yeah, thanks, I thought that I'd seen some sorts of precedents for it but was uncertain. What do you think of it? Seems to offer potential improvement.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  60. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.
    The bigger question is did you have a problem with First Past The Post when the Conservatives were getting in time and time again with a mandate beyond what the actual voter turnout warranted?
    Last edited by Dialog; 24-05-2015 at 12:30 PM. Reason: removed emotive language
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  61. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    I believe that, in the case of a tie, the practice in most places is for the chief electoral officer, having abstained in the original election, to cast a final, deciding vote. I don't see anything wrong with that system.
    PEI just had a tie and it was decided by a coin toss. Nevada had one a few years ago and they used a cut of a deck of cards.

    Coin-toss election win in P.E.I. election tie may be appealed to higher court

    McInnis, the Progressive Conservative candidate, lost to Liberal Alan McIsaac on election night, May 4, by two votes. A judicial recount Tuesday resulted in a tie. Under provincial legislation, ties are settled by a coin toss.

    The Elections Act on P.E.I. allows for only one judicial recount, but McInnis can still appeal to the province's Supreme Court under the Controverted Elections Act.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince...ourt-1.3081762
    Nevada Primary Tie Settled With Card Game

    Both tied with 381 votes in the primary. They remained tied after two recounts. State law calls for candidates to draw lots to get a winner when an election is deadlocked. It can be cutting cards, throwing dice, drawing straws or flipping a coin.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_633457.html

  62. #62
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richardW View Post
    I wonder if anyone in this board ever ran for politics what goodies we could dig up
    It's their choice to run for office. You do it at your own peril, knowing full well that you will be under intense scrutiny so long as you remain in office. I have little or no sympathy for any politician that wilts under that spotlight. They knew, or should have known, what they were signing up for.

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dialog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.
    The bigger question is did you have a problem with First Past The Post when the Conservatives were getting in time and time again with a mandate beyond what the actual voter turnout warranted?
    Please re-read the bolded part of my original post.

  64. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dialog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.
    The bigger question is did you have a problem with First Past The Post when the Conservatives were getting in time and time again with a mandate beyond what the actual voter turnout warranted?
    Please re-read the bolded part of my original post.
    Yes, similarly, Pentice, a party leader gets elected but the party looses its majority so the leader expectedly resigns as party leader - but also resigns as an elected MLA.

    The party system really screws thing up. People sometimes vote for the party and sometimes for the individual representative. Their elected representatives sometimes honours the majority of the electorate's wishes and sometimes ignores their electorate and toes the party line. I believe our ideal is a representative democracy, but the system never attained that ideal. Same, but worse at the federal level because the senate is supposedly a house of sober second thought but party affiliations have usurped the power and prevented any attainment of that ideal.

    Anyway, wouldn't it be interesting if all MLAs sat as independents. It might be one step closer to direct democracy and one step away from elected dictators.
    Last edited by KC; 24-05-2015 at 10:19 PM.

  65. #65
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    teh city of gold
    Posts
    1,063

    Default

    Great news that she was punted! She deserves it!
    Stop illegal aliens! Enforce the LAW!

  66. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dialog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AGD View Post
    but continues to sit as an independent collecting 127K/annum for which she's evidently poorly qualified for.
    Here is a step by step that outlines how stupid our electoral system is:

    1. NDP runs Deborah Drever basically on a lark, thinking that there's no way that they will actually win that seat.

    2. Prentice is a total screwup and loses the election, due to people voting for Rachel Notley in protest.

    3. Of course, only people in Edmonton-Strathcona can actually vote for Rachel Notley. Anyone else who wants her to be premier needs to vote for whatever pulse-bearing carbon-based lifeform the NDP slammed into the riding as a candidate. (Quite a few parties did this. I'm not slamming the NDP here, but the system.)

    4. The NDP does FAR better than they ever could have dreamed, because when Alberta gets angry, she gets SUPER angry.

    5. Drever actually wins her seat.

    6. The public eventually finds out that Drever is a screwup of epic proportions. Not as bad as Prentice, but still pretty bad.

    7. Rachel Notley eventually comes to this conclusion as well and expels her from the NDP caucus.

    8. Now we have someone who was elected under the NDP banner as a protest vote not actually being allowed to sit as a member of the NDP. The ONLY reason that Deborah Drever was elected (running as a NDP candidate) has now been removed.

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this.
    The bigger question is did you have a problem with First Past The Post when the Conservatives were getting in time and time again with a mandate beyond what the actual voter turnout warranted?
    Please re-read the bolded part of my original post.
    I did, and my point stands but perhaps needs rephrasing: did you find this aspect of our political system as offensive when it was serving the Alberta PCs, or now that it's resulted in Rachel Notley, "my God it's time for action"? Did you feel this issue so intensely after Redford, or even Stelmach's provincial wins?
    Last edited by Dialog; 27-05-2015 at 02:56 PM. Reason: typo - intently - intensely
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  67. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Great news that she was punted! She deserves it!
    Agreed, what she did was really no different from what the bozo's did, both very homophobic. The difference though, is Notley pulled out her inner controlling / steven harperish nature, and punted her, whereas Smith did the democratic thing and left them in the party. Controlling = Smart politics.

  68. #68
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Great news that she was punted! She deserves it!
    Agreed, what she did was really no different from what the bozo's did, both very homophobic. The difference though, is Notley pulled out her inner controlling / steven harperish nature, and punted her, whereas Smith did the democratic thing and left them in the party. Controlling = Smart politics.
    I wouldn't put Drever in quite in the same category as Hunsperger, who was expressing a sincerely held theological view about how gays and lesbians are all going to hell unless they repent.

    Drever's "GayBoyz" comment(assuming it wasn't meant as an ironic send-up of Conservative homophobia) was the kind of slur that people toss around because they think it's funny, and not always because they're seriously trying to advance an anti-gay agenda. But it's still offensive and inappropriate, and Notley was right to suspend Drever from caucus over it.

  69. #69

    Default

    ^Its exactly the same, she was basically saying "these guys are pathetic gays". Regardless, unlike Smith, Notley did the right thing (eventually), she acted like a leader / cut off the bad messaging. That's the way politicians have to be today, they have to be like Harper's government, you can't have underlings talking crap.
    Last edited by moahunter; 27-05-2015 at 03:10 PM.

  70. #70
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,285

    Default

    As a gay man, I found it amusing and laughed openly at her doodle.

    I can't wait for 10 years time when almost every single person running for gov't will have to go through the same embarrassment as Drever now has. Imagine all the dirty pics, inappropriate pics and comments we will be entertained with. What will people do then?

  71. #71
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,256

    Default

    ^Moahunter/Top Dawg for President 2028!!

  72. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Great news that she was punted! She deserves it!
    Agreed, what she did was really no different from what the bozo's did, both very homophobic. The difference though, is Notley pulled out her inner controlling / steven harperish nature, and punted her, whereas Smith did the democratic thing and left them in the party. Controlling = Smart politics.
    I doubt Drever is homophobic. What she did was juvenile. On the lines of painting a moustache and glasses on a marquee poster of some public figure. If a eight year old did that one could say that's about their level of humour. She is 26, what's her excuse?.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  73. #73
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    For me, it was the juvenility of the offense more than anything that turned me off. It makes it hard for Rachel Notley to know what she's going to have to explain next. I don't think she's homophobic either.

    It should, however, be fairly easy for her to pass the year's probation period because now Drever knows she's in office and should be worthy of her salary.

  74. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    For me, it was the juvenility of the offense more than anything that turned me off. It makes it hard for Rachel Notley to know what she's going to have to explain next. I don't think she's homophobic either.

    It should, however, be fairly easy for her to pass the year's probation period because now Drever knows she's in office and should be worthy of her salary.
    Now on her own with no mentors. (Often that just perpetuates problems.)

  75. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Great news that she was punted! She deserves it!
    Agreed, what she did was really no different from what the bozo's did, both very homophobic. The difference though, is Notley pulled out her inner controlling / steven harperish nature, and punted her, whereas Smith did the democratic thing and left them in the party. Controlling = Smart politics.
    I wouldn't put Drever in quite in the same category as Hunsperger, who was expressing a sincerely held theological view about how gays and lesbians are all going to hell unless they repent.

    Drever's "GayBoyz" comment(assuming it wasn't meant as an ironic send-up of Conservative homophobia) was the kind of slur that people toss around because they think it's funny, and not always because they're seriously trying to advance an anti-gay agenda. But it's still offensive and inappropriate, and Notley was right to suspend Drever from caucus over it.
    I'm almost more concerned that she finds slurs funny at her age. I'm half tongue in cheek with this but..

    Calling names suggests an elementary school development of humor. Regardless of the name, slur, target, whatever. But to specifically make slurs that quite clearly contravene NDP principles is beyond the pale.

    edit : just read some recent comments. Looks like I'm not the only one expressing as much concern at how juvenile this individual presents. .
    Last edited by Replacement; 27-05-2015 at 06:26 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  76. #76

    Default

    Some people's main purpose in life is to be an example to others, good or bad. I'd imagine the rest of the NDP MLAs have smartened up in their thinking and actions. You're playing in the big leagues now. Act like it.

    ---

    In September, 2003, Harper said characterizing gay marriage as a civil-rights issue was "disgusting." Canadian Press reported that Harper said: "Regarding sexual orientation or, more accurately, what we are really talking about, sexual behaviour, the argument has been made . that this is analogous to race and ethnicity. (For) anyone in the Liberal party to equate the traditional definition of marriage with segregation andapartheid is vile and disgusting.
    As much as Moa claims that Harper is a shining bacon of gay rights....

    "It's not really an orientation. It's just a bunch of people doing icky things because they want to. Only the goat herders that wrote the Bile two thousand years ago get to define marriage in the 21st century." as Stephen Harper wore his poly-cotton blend suit.

    Leviticus 19:19
    You are to keep My statutes. You must not crossbreed two different kinds of your livestock, sow your fields with two kinds of seed, or put on a garment made of two kinds of material."
    Later, while munching on some deep fried clams...

    Leviticus 11:9-12

    9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

    10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

    11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

    12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 28-05-2015 at 12:28 AM.

  77. #77
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    another victory for social justice warriors everywhere...
    be offended! figure out why later...

  78. #78
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,533

    Default

    Anyhoo, back to Drever, I agree with Gemini, Eve and Replacement on the juvenile nature of the incident. Notley made the right move on this, effectively sentencing Drever to a period of detention as an Independent.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  79. #79
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Bonnie Doon
    Posts
    5,262

    Default

    One of Drever's professors defends her:

    She knows her. She taught her. Finally someone willing to stand up for Deborah Drever

    In fact, Allison Dube — an associate professor at Mount Royal University who taught Drever — feels so strongly, she wrote a column.

    Here it is.
    It’s a disturbing picture. A young woman decided to hang with the big boys, but things are going wrong fast. She’s outnumbered and she’s down. People are getting ready to hurt her, hold her down or just laugh.

    http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...deborah-drever
    Last edited by North Guy66; 28-05-2015 at 09:14 AM.

  80. #80
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    Well, if Drever is truly the thoughtful person who made a misstep that Ms Dube sees (and I have no reason to doubt it), then she has plenty of time to carve out a role for herself. People talk as if Drever was fired from a job and is now unemployed. But she's not. She has a professional position that would be envied by many young folk who are struggling with starting their careers. She has unparalleled opportunities to gain experience, and mentors, and connections.

    This is the silly season where there has been massive change but so far there's really nothing to report on because everyone is getting their bearings. But it will pass.

  81. #81

    Default

    I think Ms. Dube is actually a Mr. Dube. Allison predominately being a female name it would be easy to assume a female. Anyway, please feel free to make a comment in the thread about removing 'sex' entry on Birth Certificates.

    http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...6-442cfe20d4eb


    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ad.php?t=37343
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  82. #82

    Default

    Drever will be back in the NDP caucus within a year.

  83. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by North Guy66 View Post
    One of Drever's professors defends her:

    She knows her. She taught her. Finally someone willing to stand up for Deborah Drever

    In fact, Allison Dube — an associate professor at Mount Royal University who taught Drever — feels so strongly, she wrote a column.

    Here it is.
    It’s a disturbing picture. A young woman decided to hang with the big boys, but things are going wrong fast. She’s outnumbered and she’s down. People are getting ready to hurt her, hold her down or just laugh.

    http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...deborah-drever
    Yeah. My life experiences may be closer to the other end of the spectrum but I try not to judge* others based on my upbringing, biases and prejudices. I never walked in her shoes. In fact, as I've said, I see her as representing a portion of the population that is generally ignored and beaten down at every opportunity.

    Many, if not most, of the people that are successful in life have had a number of things going their way, often from the time of birth. Then add luck to that formula as advantages compound as a result of being able to be in the right place at the right time.

    *Sometimes that is.

  84. #84

    Default

    An indepth look at the the Allison Dube support. Obtained from just a brief search. He is indeed a male session lecturer.

    He's extremely popular, affable prof who gives open book finals and is available and helpful to all his students and gives "extremely long" extensions.

    http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/Show...sp?tid=1377816



    This, in his linked in profile and what he stresses in Experience:

    "General Education / Values, Beliefs and Identity"


    A prof who in previous links states;


    "It’s a disturbing picture. A young woman decided to hang with the big boys, but things are going wrong fast. She’s outnumbered and she’s down. People are getting ready to hurt her"

    The above is his essay opening. A prelude that if read carefully should probably preclude the reader from reading any further as it foreshadows the biased view contained therein. Its essentially demonizing any criticism of Drevers actions and even casting motives. So it absolves the poor, "hurt" Drever and casts aspersion on valid critique


    "She has grown through experiences such as witnessing abuse, living in foster care, and indeed, succumbing to peer pressure (as with the album photo shoot). Fortunately, she has a wonderfully irreverent sense of humour, which no doubt sparked her “indiscretions.”
    Now let me state here that the above is confidential client/student privileged disclosure. He may know all of the above, it may have been disclosed to him by Drever, but why is he stating it? I wonder if he signed a confidentiality release with Drever specifically to be able to state the above. I further wonder if such disclosure is even within Mount Royal's common practice or policy and if this was obtained.

    "Ms. Drever has apologized for her cringe-producing moments. But I admire her more because of them. They prove she is not like others Elstir describes, who “could publish a signed account of everything they have ever said or done,” but are “poor creatures, feeble descendants of doctrinaires, and their wisdom is negative and sterile.”
    The above is simply Dube quoting Proust but which apparently depicts his mindset as used in context. I find the bolded a bias of relevance in the Drever instance. Really what the above is stating is that the foolhardy are wise and the composed are poor and sterile. That's an odd opinion. I wonder if some of Proust's work was meant as satire. In anycase Proust and Dube with the above would have us believe that judgement is bad, except when its good..


    "Politicians love to welcome “youth,” but often the youth they love are younger embodiments of their own sterile doctrines.
    So we found the smoking gun: Ms. Drever is not an old person in disguise. But if she cannot be forgiven, we slam the political door on all young people who might have an electronic infraction to their names — which is almost all."
    So now we get to the meat of the matter and Allison would have us believe that nearly all youth are foolish and not many of them would be found acceptable. This is a blanket opinion, a poorly conceived one that isn't even kind, but is possibly even dismissive of youth, because Dube is stating here that most youth don't rise above this mark. I would wonder how even the younger MLA's elected that haven't been in the news due to inappropriate social media comments or statements would feel about that comment.

    I just felt some context was in order. I feel as if Allison Dubes feelings are essentially his own and that he would depict of most or all of his students.
    Last edited by Replacement; 28-05-2015 at 11:24 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  85. #85
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    This where I find viewpoints from the more privileged view offensive. I grew up as "poor white trash". I find it really dismissive for privileged folk to state that I somehow have an excuse for bad behavior because of that. Bad behavior happens with all social classes. I sometimes feel I am failing privileged critics because I did not commit criminal acts or succumb to addictions.

  86. #86

    Default

    ^I actually think people who come from less fortunate backgrounds who suceed, are far less tolerant of such behaviour. I grew up in a poor suburb and did a lot of stupid stuff (grafiti, vandalisim, etc.) as a teen. I certainly shouldn't have been elected as an MLA at that time or my early 20's when my life consistent of binge drinking every other day, and I'd even quesiton if I'd ever be appropriate now having that background, when I think of how many people I selfishly hurt.
    Last edited by moahunter; 28-05-2015 at 11:36 AM.

  87. #87

    Default

    ^^^ I believe most of that quoted background was published already and whoknkows she may have opening discussed that in the classroom.

    ^^ Bad behavior does happen in all social classes* but people raised in an environment where they already know there could be career consequences to it, teach their children to avoid it. If no one ever teaches someone common sense, they are unlikely to practise it. Additionally, we all have beliefs and behaviours that we've essentially adopted from those around us. Again, in many environments such behaviour is the norm and accepted but in other environments there is zero tolerance for it. Some people lack filters and others don't know when to use them often because they've never had a parent or mentor show them.

    I've encountered many people that openly say things, and sometimes even believe things, that would get them in a lot of trouble if they were suddenly in Drivers new position. Sometimes it's quite surprising because I would never even think let alone say such things.

    There are also many highly intelligent, rational people, in influential positions that believe in their various religions and will allow outrageous acts to occur because of their religious beliefs. The privileged deserve no more or less respect than anyone else but always seem to get it. So to hold a novice to the standards of the even flawed establishment types that are given free passes for their beliefs and actions is hypocritical.


    * I once worked on an epidemiological study that identified very high levels of alcohol consumption amongst lawyers and other professionals. Many addictions are had by the higher socio-economic classes that get another free pass on their addiction because they can, one, afford it, and two, shape their career around it, if not encourage society to define it as acceptable behavior. As far as crime, white collar crime and associated collusion gets another free pass as well. Again resources, connections and influence come into play.

  88. #88

    Default

    Drever's actions were foolish. If she had of stopped to think about it she would have realized that it's not a good thing to be putting stuff like that out there. Dube is trying to say it should not define her. Fair enough, but one could say he does not know her that well. It seems Drever has an 'unpredictable' side to her hence the twitter in question. It's the 'unpredictable' side of a person's personality that Notley wants to see gone.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  89. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Drever's actions were foolish. If she had of stopped to think about it she would have realized that it's not a good thing to be putting stuff like that out there. Dube is trying to say it should not define her. Fair enough, but one could say he does not know her that well. It seems Drever has an 'unpredictable' side to her hence the twitter in question. It's the 'unpredictable' side of a person's personality that Notley wants to see gone.
    Good points. Not sure if unpredictable is the best choice of words as she seems to be a serial political correctness 'offender' which could have been noted by deeper inspection. Maybe "impulsive"?

    I think it's inexperience but possibly, if the critics are right, actually "undesirable" thoughts and attitudes.

  90. #90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    ^^^ I believe most of that quoted background was published already and whoknkows she may have opening discussed that in the classroom.

    .
    This does not absolve confidentiality. Anything personal stated in the privy of individual disclosure, group disclosure or even classroom is still bound by expectation of professional confidentiality. Just because a Professor is not legally held to the same expectations of confididentiality that other professionals have to uphold does not remove a notion of professional accountability in maintaining reasonable confidentiality. What astounded me (as somebody who is professionally held by clearly stated standards of confidentiality) is how freely this professor volunteered the information. As if not even aware of the nature of the disclosure.
    Last edited by Replacement; 28-05-2015 at 12:20 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  91. #91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    ^^^ I believe most of that quoted background was published already and whoknkows she may have opening discussed that in the classroom.

    .
    This does not absolve confidentiality. Anything personal stated in the privy of individual disclosure, group disclosure or even classroom is still bound by expectation of professional confidentiality.
    Interesting. Some of it was definitely published and I believe I even may have quoted it somewhere earlier on this thread.

  92. #92

    Default

    I don't think any political party wants an unpredictable or impulsive member on the loose. I've said before I don't think Drever is homophobic. She's seems more immature than homophobic. Look at that guy Anthony Weiner in the states that was running for office. I suppose when news broke that he was texting pictures of his junk to women most of his political peers were thinking that it was unpredictable of him. I don't know if that would go under the category of childish or perverted but who wants him as a political peer.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  93. #93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    ^^^ I believe most of that quoted background was published already and whoknkows she may have opening discussed that in the classroom.

    .
    This does not absolve confidentiality. Anything personal stated in the privy of individual disclosure, group disclosure or even classroom is still bound by expectation of professional confidentiality.
    Interesting. Some of it was definitely published and I believe I even may have quoted it somewhere earlier on this thread.
    It doesn't matter if something has been published. This does not absolve expectation of confidentiality. If some other source has leaked confidentiality it is not suddenly OK to not act in accordance with standards of confidentiality.

    I can quote that the only venue I would be able to externally release such information would be in a court of law with disclosure occurring through Subpoena. Even in that instance the recommendation is to answer questions as asked and to not volunteer information that has not been specifically requested or inferred. When unclear about the extent of what is being asked and what information is sought I even ask for clarity.

    To have connection with a journalist and leak the above personal information regarding a client/student ( I do instruction and run groups as well) would have me fired probably within the day. With just cause. Now again I'm not stating that the professor is held by the same standard of confidentiality. He's not and theres more grey area in Student-Professor confidentiality but its an area currently of great concern and with changes impending and due to overt breaches of confidentiality that have occurred as precedents. Lastly while Dube is not held to the same standard of accountability in his practice a concept and adherence to professional confidentiality should still be respected and implied in the professor-student relationship.
    Last edited by Replacement; 28-05-2015 at 12:36 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  94. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I don't think any political party wants an unpredictable or impulsive member on the loose. I've said before I don't think Drever is homophobic. She's seems more immature than homophobic. Look at that guy Anthony Weiner in the states that was running for office. I suppose when news broke that he was texting pictures of his junk to women most of his political peers were thinking that it was unpredictable of him. I don't know if that would go under the category of childish or perverted but who wants him as a political peer.
    Yup. Fascinating isn't it. And really weird but ? but, but, but

    Ahh, just really weird and inexplicable behaviour. Anyway, it's out there. When should it be a liability? Did Churchill drink too much? JF Kennedy seemed like slime in many ways. Who was it (a US president) that would sit on the toilet with the door open to talk with staff. Ever hear the Nixon tapes. Swearing throughout. ... And these guys held the 'most respectable' jobs in the country!

    So, literally, "When" is it a liability? Not "when" society accepts it as ok or doesn't have a axe to grind or when the media deems it personal and forgivable and keeps it hidden. Times change, spin changes with the times.

    Same for churches and paedophiles.


    On another note, I know a lady who got pregnant as a teenager in the '60s in small town Alberta. She was forced to leave the town to go have her baby somewhere else - and then stay away for a prolonged period (basically a big coverup). In telling me the story, she was still clearly scarred by the events of the times and this is decades later. The idea that parents could do that to their children would be astounding today but apparently it was the norm back then. So much for maternalism or paternalism - she was a liability. As a society we haven't evolved much. Maybe in terms of blood connections but in terms of people connections (in companies, political parties, etc.), much less advancement.
    Last edited by KC; 28-05-2015 at 12:41 PM.

  95. #95
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement
    Now let me state here that the above is confidential client/student privileged disclosure. He may know all of the above, it may have been disclosed to him by Drever, but why is he stating it? I wonder if he signed a confidentiality release with Drever specifically to be able to state the above. I further wonder if such disclosure is even within Mount Royal's common practice or policy and if this was obtained.
    All of that info has been publicly stated by Drever herself, or in candidate profiles of her. You're barking up the wrong tree here.

  96. #96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement
    Now let me state here that the above is confidential client/student privileged disclosure. He may know all of the above, it may have been disclosed to him by Drever, but why is he stating it? I wonder if he signed a confidentiality release with Drever specifically to be able to state the above. I further wonder if such disclosure is even within Mount Royal's common practice or policy and if this was obtained.
    All of that info has been publicly stated by Drever herself, or in candidate profiles of her. You're barking up the wrong tree here.
    You're questioning me on standards of professional accountability I am upheld to professionally protect in all practice? Come on.

    Again, and I'm not sure if people are reading, it does not matter if a person has self divulged information even publicly. This does not absolve, in anyway, an accredited professional answerable to professional standards of confidentiality from exercising professional confidentiality regarding the same privileged information.

    Why would you think it does?
    Last edited by Replacement; 28-05-2015 at 12:58 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  97. #97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement
    Now let me state here that the above is confidential client/student privileged disclosure. He may know all of the above, it may have been disclosed to him by Drever, but why is he stating it? I wonder if he signed a confidentiality release with Drever specifically to be able to state the above. I further wonder if such disclosure is even within Mount Royal's common practice or policy and if this was obtained.
    All of that info has been publicly stated by Drever herself, or in candidate profiles of her. You're barking up the wrong tree here.
    You're questioning me on standards of professional accountability I am upheld to professionally protect in all practice? Interesting.

    Again, and I'm not sure if people are reading, it does not matter if a person has self divulged information even publicly. This does not absolve, in anyway, an accredited professional answerable to professional standards of confidentiality from exercising professional confidentiality regarding the same information.

    Why would you think it does?
    "You're questioning me on standards ..."


    How are we to know that you know. Interesting, that you think we should know.

    Anyway, maybe to right a wrong? Show compassion, prevent someone from sliding into despair as the masses and media bully someone into a corner...
    (The whistleblower paradox.)


    or a bit of this...


    Ten Things I have Learned

    4
    PROFESSIONALISM IS NOT ENOUGH or THE GOOD IS THE ENEMY OF THE GREAT.
    Early in my career I wanted to be professional, that was my complete aspiration in my early life because professionals seemed to know everything - not to mention they got paid for it. Later I discovered after working for a while that professionalism itself was a limitation. After all, what professionalism means in most cases is diminishing risks. So if you want to get your car fixed you go to a mechanic who knows how to deal with transmission problems in the same way each time. I suppose if you needed brain surgery you wouldn't want the doctor to fool around and invent a new way of connecting your nerve endings. Please do it in the way that has worked in the past.Unfortunately in our field, in the so-called creative – I hate that word because it is misused so often. I also hate the fact that it is used as a noun. Can you imagine calling someone a creative? Anyhow, when you are doing something in a recurring way to diminish risk or doing it in the same way as you have done it before, it is clear why professionalism is not enough. After all, what is required in our field, more than anything else, is the continuous transgression. Professionalism does not allow for that because transgression has to encompass the possibility of failure and if you are professional your instinct is not to fail, it is to repeat success. So professionalism as a lifetime aspiration is a limited goal.

    http://www.miltonglaser.com/files/Es...hings-8400.pdf
    Last edited by KC; 28-05-2015 at 12:57 PM.

  98. #98
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    "Show compassion, prevent someone from sliding into despair as the masses and media bully someone into a corner..." You consider being an MLA and enjoying the salary and perks as a young person a grounds for sliding into despair? You clearly have no idea of what non-privileged people cope with.

  99. #99

    Default

    ^^

    Other advocacy is possible. Discrete advocacy. Nothing prevents a professional from obtaining a specific confidentiality release signed by a client/student and speaking on that persons behalf discretely with it being stated who the professional would be speaking with. To go to the media with that and volunteer the information may, or may not, be considered appropriate within the professors professional body or the Mount Royal institution.
    It is a grey area, but again one that is exposed to increasing scrutiny and concern due to precedents.

    ps I am sympathetic to the "whistle blower" paradox. A whole other matter though and lets remember that the professor is commenting in this specific context.

    btw the following is melodramatic narrative;

    "prevent someone from sliding into despair as the masses and media bully someone into a corner..."
    It could be stated in reply that protecting individuals who may be homosexual from slurs, depiction, and targeting may also be consistent with preventing bullying from masses...albeit in this case from professionals who are elected to supposedly represent them legislatively.

    With that I wonder who chooses to be in the corner.
    Last edited by Replacement; 28-05-2015 at 01:02 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  100. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    "Show compassion, prevent someone from sliding into despair as the masses and media bully someone into a corner..." You consider being an MLA and enjoying the salary and perks as a young person a grounds for sliding into despair? You clearly have no idea of what non-privileged people cope with.
    Yes, despair maybe overstating it - especially when its be brought on by ones self. However, there's women in the RCMP that held good positions with good pay but were sexually harassed on the job, that seem to have been traumatized by those attacks. Character assassination may not be treatable by salary and benefits. (Hey, I'm playing the devil's advocate here, it's not always easy. Hence my numerous edits. As I said , I can't walk in her shoes. Took guts for her to run in the first place. So despair may not be something she's capable of.)
    Last edited by KC; 28-05-2015 at 01:05 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •