February 21st, 2006

Filed under:
Politics, Vancouver
3 Comments »

An Idiotic Letter to the Editor

Sue points to a letter to the editor in Business in Vancouver. It’s written by Richard Turner of TitanStar Capital Corp. (I can’t find their website…anybody?) and actually defends David Emerson’s recent betrayal of his constituents. The full letter is over at Sue’s site, but here’s a particularly offensive bit:

So, while I respect that some in the Vancouver-Kingsway riding may not be hugely pleased, it’s time for those of us who would prefer to remain in the background to speak up and say what is true. David Emerson is perhaps a unique individual. Those who contributed financially to his campaign did so because of what he can accomplish for B.C. Not because of any particular political stripe. The rest of the noise is just hyperbole.

Turner’s use of modifiers is hilarious. The riding members might not be ‘hugely pleased’? Right, I’m sure they’re just ‘largely pleased’. Emerson is ‘perhaps a unique individual’? Or is he perhaps a cynical political turncoat?

Turner speculates that more than 75 per cent of Emerson’s funding ‘came from folks who likely do not vote for the Liberal candidate wherever it is they vote’. I couldn’t find results for the current election, but in the 2004 election, Emerson had no less than 212 individual and corporate donors. Presumably he had a similar number for this election–has Turner met all of them? Turner offers a couple of other totally speculative numbers with no supporting evidence. Why is he to be believed?

What’s most shameful is that Turner differentiates between Emerson’s donors and his electorate, and places greater emphasis on the former.

Comments: 3 Responses so far

Anonymous
February 22nd, 2006
9:13 am

Titan Star actually don’t seem to have a website but here’s a link to a bio on Richard Turner.
http://www.icbc.com/inside_icbc/bios/turner.asp

[Reply]

James
February 22nd, 2006
9:13 am

From what I’ve noticed, all the bizzy types in Vancouver have come out in favour of David Emerson’s leap to the Conservatives. Our principled premier, the head of the Vancouver Board of Trade and others are playing the apologist role perfectly, as if to say, ‘Hey, he’s one that we can be chummy with *and* we have an angle on the ruling party. What’s not to like? Especially from a riding like Kingsway, which would have otherwise elected Ian Waddell, a communist.’

And Business in Vancouver is just a mouthpiece cheerleader, so don’t sweat it too much - received wisdom for the wisdom deprived, puff pieces for puffy advertisers. Vancouver has a long and distinguished tradition of insular robber barons that runs straight from CPR land speculators, through pump-and-dump mining stock brokers. Rich people like other rich people.

[Reply]

george dance
March 27th, 2006
9:59 am

Taylor distinguishes between the donors and his electors, because those are 2 separate questions. The V-K riding association brought up the donor one when they demanded Emerson return the almost $100,000 spent on his campaign, and threatening to sue them for the money.

Emerson himself has said that that claim is bullshit; that $80,000 was money that he raised personally, from Vancouver businessmen, who were contributing the money to elect him, rather than to elect a Liberal. Taylor is the third Vancouver businessman I’ve seen to corroborate this claim.

Emerson has challenged the riding association to have the books examined, in the presence of both parties, to see who’s telling the truth here; the response of the Liberals has been to shut up about it.

So, you might say: what about the other $20,000 that individual Liberals gave, just to elect a Liberal? Aren’t they defrauded? Aren’t they owed their money back?

Let’s say they are. Who should pay them?

Well, since Emerson received over 20,000 votes, his campaign qualifies for a government subsidy of over $30,000. That money goes to the Liberal Party, not to Emerson - if they think the Liberal donors should get their money back, they can and should return it out of that sum.

[Reply]

Add a comment