Pffft. More than likely Dix was not prosecuted because the crown attorneys ascertained that they had no case against him. Campbell was charged with an offense because he was clearly breaking the law in Hawaii (he was driving drunk). Campbell has a record. Dix does not. 
Here is how I see itâŚ
Gordon Campbell went to a dinner and drank too much. He got drunk. HIs first error in judgement was drinking too much. His second error was getting behind the wheel and driving. However, when he made the second decision, he was already drunk and therefore using poor judgement. It is a bit of a quibble, but he was also on his own time.
Adrian Dix falsified a document while at work. He is a smart man. I expect that he probably deliberated about the creation of the document for a period of time. I also expect that he was probably sober at the time he decided to create the document. Falsifying the document was therefore neither a rash nor drunken act. To me, the creation of the document was done with intent by a person who was in a position of trust as a civil servant. He betrayed that trust. I expect he probably thought he would not get caught.
About the best you can say about Dix is that he put a personal relationship & loyalty ahead of personal integrity and honesty. However, I personally prefer people who have integrity and act honestly in their personal and professional lives. When they are being paid by me - the tax payer, I want to have confidence that good decisions are being made. I donât want to have leaders who put personal loyalties and friendships ahead of doing what is right. While I am pretty sympathetic to the NDP, I will not vote for them this year because they have selected a leader who when making decisions has shown a track record of giving greater weight to his relationships & personal loyalty than to the criteria of fairness, justice and integrity.
[quote=âPantagruelâ]Here is how I see itâŚ
Gordon Campbell went to a dinner and drank too much. He got drunk. HIs first error in judgement was drinking too much. His second error was getting behind the wheel and driving. However, when he made the second decision, he was already drunk and therefore using poor judgement. ** It is a bit of a quibble, but he was also on his own time.**
[/quote]
He was twice over the legal limit which means he was very drunk. He could have killed himself or someone else. So because he was on his own time that somehow makes his crime less serious than an error in judgement that Dix made(no charges filed)? How would you guys spin it if Campbell killed someone while driving plastered? I find it ironic that youâre defending a drunk who cared more about his paycheque than doing what is right and proper. Glen Clark stepped down when he had a major scandal.
Thereâs no excuse for what Campbell did in Hawaii, but he was punished and while thereâs obviously a question of trust when someone makes a decision that irresponsible, it wasnât an offense committed during the course of his duties.
Dixâs maleficence was committed while right-hand-man to the Premier of British ColumbiaâI think itâs silly to suggest that there isnât a different kind of trust issue here when his alleged crime undermined the principles public servants are supposed to uphold, and he did it while on the job. That said, I have a feeling that this kind of thing happens all the time in Victoria and Dix was just unlucky enough to get caught. And like Campbell, I have a feeling that BC will be willing to forgive Dix come election day.
I am very curious to see what happens on May 14th. The polls indicate that Dix will win, but I will wait and see.
Everyone knows I like the diaper adage. Iâve voted out both sides when I thought they were stale.
The Liberal diaper is FULL.
The Conservative one is made out of thorns.
So Iâll buy the NDP one regardless of quality, because it isnât full and wonât hurt like hell.
an error in judgement LOL that is toooooo funny, deliberately falsifying a document during an RCMP investigation into your boss is not an error in judgement, just because he wasnât chargedwould like to know the reason to that one, does not make what he did any less serious. Why doesnât he come out and say publicly yes i commited a crime by falsifying the document because I thought Glen Clark might have been guilty, I was not charged for it but i deeply apologize for that. No instead we get sorry I did a mistake. nice spin makes it sound like all he did was wizz in the garden at the parliment buildings. nice character, too bad the NDP picked him instead of Mike Farnworth who is a man of integrity
[quote=âherbie_popneckerâ]
So Iâll buy the NDP one regardless of quality, because it isnât full and wonât hurt like hell.[/quote]
Yep. Iâm going with the NDP as well.
The NDP say they are going to run a deficit for 3 years, and then balance in year 4. Isnât that going to be nice, ramming a bunch of wasteful programs down our throat just when we can least afford it, in fact going deeper in debt to do it. Have they been watching the news from Europe at all? And how will they balance in year 4? Oh, natural gas, oil, coal, and timber. Unbelievable.
Not sure of your criticism. The Liberal government said the budget deficit prior to the 2009 election would be $495M. Whether that was an out and out lie, I will leave to others but a few months after the election they said it would be $2B or so. In the September budget of 2009, we were given this estimation
ahbl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2 ⌠er2009.pdf
Now, right before an election, the Liberals claim they have balanced the budget, (whether that is and out and out lie, I will leave to others) but most observers do not think it is balanced and the NDP claim that the deficit is actually about $800M. Some may think the NDP are lying, but to suggest that the NDP will be wasteful because they are predicting deficit budgets after the Liberals have run deficit budgets, is a bit rich.
The NDP finance critic said this
[quote]We wonât be able to do everything people want. Certainly we sense a pent-up demand for change in how things are done in British Columbia. We wonât be able to satisfy every request or desire,â he told reporters.
Of the platform, he said: âOur platform will be modest. Our funding sources will be identified. I think thatâs what the public is looking for in the post-HST world.â[/quote]
theglobeandmail.com/news/bri ⌠e10779870/
Now you can believe or not believe what the NDP have to say. And you can choose to vote as you please. Given what we have had over the past 12 years, especially the last four years, I am willing to give another party a chance. They sound reasonable.
[quote=âPantagruelâ]
About the best you can say about Dix is that he put a personal relationship & loyalty ahead of personal integrity and honesty. However, I personally prefer people who have integrity and act honestly in their personal and professional lives. When they are being paid by me - the tax payer, I want to have confidence that good decisions are being made. I donât want to have leaders who put personal loyalties and friendships ahead of doing what is right. [/quote]
I am not going to defend Dix and what he did. It was dumb. But what he did was trying to protect his boss (friend) from an accusation that was not completely true. He knew Clark was not guilty of anything (which was later proven).
I do agree with you though. I do not want to have leaders who put personal loyalties and friendships ahead of doing what is right. And I would like that extended to leaders who make decisions that help their - oh maybe corporate friends - at the expense of the taxpayers. I really do not think the Liberals of the past 12 years can claim any morally authority over Adrian Dix.
I donât think Adrian can claim much moral authority and I am doubtful about Christy given that her lead hand organized the ethnic vote buying scheme.
Sadly, provincial politics is a winner take all kind of thing. To start, I think to get nominated by your party, you have to be willing to really fight in the trenches against other possible candidates and take no prisoners. Winning is everything and only losers are penalized for tactics that would make most people blush. Then the deal making starts.
I remember reading newspaper accounts of Liberal nomination meetings in which it was subsequently proven that the successfully nominated candidate brought in a host of new party members so that they could carry the nominating meeting. Said members were then not seen until the next nominating meeting (incidentally, Iâve heard rumours that the local NDP nominating meeting saw a host of new members show up. Iâd love to find out if that is true).
When the writ is dropped, the fighting really gets interesting. Pretty much anything goes - just donât get caught.
The other thing to remember is that there will be people out there who will do things on your behalf that you wish they hadnât. I think a recent example is the fellow who kept trying to sanitize the Wikipedia entry on Adrian Dix.
And all I can say is we excorsized the moral demons when they dumped Wilson for leaving his wife for someone hotter and went back to eating the same old shit. Just like the man had pointed out.
Never mind morality how about voting for whoâs gonna do the best for YOU and for the province? For all the gum flapping back patting over the economy, your town and mine are shadows of their former selves and we know it, And as an elderly uncle pointed out about this part of BC: Prince George was 80,000 people when I went there to check out a job in the 70s. I visit you 40 years later and itâs âboomedâ to 78.000 people. HahahahaâŚ