Saturday, April 14, 2007

Open for business

Billy "Third Time's a Charm" Cunningham has his campaign office ready to go. He just needs an election to fight against the NDP and Conservatives.

No word yet on whether the local Green Party candidate will be sharing office space in order to leave a small campaign footprint on the ecosystem of Burnaby-Douglas.

36 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hope the idiot has money.

It could be months before an election is called. the meter is running on the lease.

The only way a small campaign footprint could be left on the eco-system of Burnaby Douglas is by
Bill Cunnigham reducing his own Co2 (Carbon Dioxide) emissions by 80%.

4/14/2007 7:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it's kind of funny that I actually know where Cunningham's office is (just walked by it on the way to xsite the other day) yet I have no idea where our loser MP's constituency office is.

4/14/2007 9:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow! He's got an office. I have to say he is clearly working super hard.

Obviously they think they can take it. And why not? He'd obviously be better than Siksay.

4/14/2007 9:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While Billy Boy may not have the largest amount of Grey Matter between the ears, those smiling Irish eyes have been turning up on many door steps for the past few nights.

Bill Boy may yet prove the the tortise is faster than the hare. During the last campaign, Bumbuddy Siksay had over 1000 volunteers any only won by 1300 votes.

Good luck Billy Boy!

4/14/2007 9:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

His albatross this time is Dion. The guy's an idiot. It will be interesting how he comes off in a debate.
I think it will be a good old fashioned ass kicking. The only thing Dion can hope for is the mercy votes.

4/15/2007 12:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill Cunningham would not make as bad MP. His profile among the non chinese in Bby Douglas is much higher than his Conservative counterpart. If he can win on his own without any Dion coat-tails helping him, then he'll own this riding for many years.

4/15/2007 9:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If he can win on his own without any Dion coat-tails helping him, then he'll own this riding for many years. "

Ridings are owned by the voters, not the MP.

4/15/2007 10:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"it's kind of funny that I actually know where Cunningham's office is (just walked by it on the way to xsite the other day) yet I have no idea where our loser MP's constituency office is. "

His office is on Dawson Street.

There's new condo developments down there.

So where is Billy Boy's office?

4/15/2007 12:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill Siksay's constituency office is at 4506 Dawson Street to be exact. Where is that Cunnigham's campaign office agian?

He's wasting money in leasing, not too good of a move I think.

4/15/2007 9:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hopefully its a short term lease

4/15/2007 9:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What drivel

Yes- cunningham has money
no - dion has no coattails

Does anybody know who the Tories are going to run in this riding. Did Georgie-boy move south?

4/19/2007 12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What drivel"

The federal Liberals have the monopoly on producing drivel.

"Yes- cunningham has money
no - dion has no coattails"

Bily Boy is probably collecting his
Accounts Receivable.

Dion does have coattails. Every
leader has them, even Gordon Campbell.

"Does anybody know who the Tories are going to run in this riding. Did Georgie-boy move south?"

It ain't going to be Georgie-boy.

he ran twice and lost and the Tories don't allow for two-time losers to try again, so he can't
run anywhere within the Tories.

So Georgie-boy is toast.

The federal Liberals should have the same rule, but they're too busy
to think properly.

4/19/2007 3:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Cons are running Ronald Leung againt Billy Boy and Siksay.

The smart money says he'll have no more luck than Georgie-boy had.

Seems the Cons cant get enough of the good old fashioned Social Con stuff.

Just the recipie to finish dead last, yet again.

Keep up the good work!

4/20/2007 1:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The Cons are running Ronald Leung againt Billy Boy and Siksay.

The smart money says he'll have no more luck than Georgie-boy had."

If that's the case, better Siskay
than Billy-Boy.

"Seems the Cons cant get enough of the good old fashioned Social Con stuff. "

Leung isn't Social Conservative in
the religious pretext.

If you figure he is, cite of references that we can see?

"Just the recipie to finish dead last, yet again."

Just like Billy-Boy didn't win?

There's no prizes for second place, either.

When it comes down to it, winning
the seat is what matters.

Billy Boy isn't going to win the
riding.

If Billy Boy loses by 500 votes or
by a smaller margin than he did last, it doesn't matter.

4/20/2007 9:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

who the heck is ronald leung?

4/20/2007 11:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Ronald Leung (in chemistry) was ranked as the 100 most influential Chinese Canadian in British Columbia, he was later a star Fairchild radio host before resigning to run for Vancouver City Council and lost by the slimmest margin to another Chinese Canadian, from Taiwan.

I believe that tories this time are more ready than ever to take down the ndp incumbents, especially with the triple play in Burnaby and Coquitlam.

If you add Ronald Leung to Yonah Martin, and to even Sam Rahkra (who ran for both tory nominations and lost by a hair), that I tell you is a deadly combination against NDP incumbents. Just look at the message it sends to immigrant community in the riding.

4/20/2007 2:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Dr. Ronald Leung (in chemistry) was ranked as the 100 most influential Chinese Canadian in British Columbia, he was later a star Fairchild radio host before resigning to run for Vancouver City Council and lost by the slimmest margin to another Chinese Canadian, from Taiwan. "

This is Ronald Leung, not Raymond
Leung who is the Pres. of Team Burnaby.

"I believe that tories this time are more ready than ever to take down the ndp incumbents, especially with the triple play in Burnaby and Coquitlam."

Would be nice to see. Especially if
it means Billy Boy loses out again.

"If you add Ronald Leung to Yonah Martin, and to even Sam Rahkra (who ran for both tory nominations and lost by a hair), that I tell you is a deadly combination against NDP incumbents. Just look at the message it sends to immigrant community in the riding. "

Never mind the candidates, the determined and smart volunteer is a dangerous animal to the opposition.

4/20/2007 3:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Either Ronald Leung of Vancouver NPA fame - bill Cunningham migh be able to getthe federal govt to spring for $10 -$15 million for Burnaby Lake remediation. This city needs some help and the feds should be at the table.

4/20/2007 9:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Either Ronald Leung of Vancouver NPA fame - bill Cunningham migh be able to getthe federal govt to spring for $10 -$15 million for Burnaby Lake remediation. This city needs some help and the feds should be at the table."

Bill Cunnigham is a federal Liberal.

He isn't going to be of much value as there will be a Conserative government after the next election.

One needs a Conservative MP to get things from a Conservative Government.

Burnaby Lake doesn't need $10 to
$15 million. It will turn into a swamp eventually anyway.

Spend $1 million and develop a nature preserve interpretive park.

4/20/2007 9:54 PM  
Anonymous SoConConspiracy said...

Standard denial tactics for religious SoCons:

Leung isn't Social Conservative in
the religious pretext.

If you figure he is, cite of references that we can see?

The reference is below. Anybody can find it with a standard web search.

http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/000948.html
"When directly asked whether he supports gay marriage, Mr. Leung responded "This question has already been settled by the federal government a few months ago. It is the law in Canada. And I follow every law of the land." But what are his personal views?"

In addition, I was present when Leung was running for the nomination for the NPA before the election. The majority of his supporters I know to be religious Social Conservatives. Like the body, so goes the head.

4/22/2007 10:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone know how much money BillyBoys campaign has. I heard the Liberals are almost broke.

4/22/2007 10:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Leung isn't Social Conservative in
the religious pretext.

If you figure he is, cite of references that we can see?"

The reference is below. Anybody can find it with a standard web search.

http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/000948.html
"When directly asked whether he supports gay marriage, Mr. Leung responded "This question has already been settled by the federal government a few months ago. It is the law in Canada. And I follow every law of the land." But what are his personal views?"

Doesn't indicate anything. His
personal views are just that, personal.

That that says is a question was asked that did not need a compulsory answer.

So it validates nothing.

"In addition, I was present when Leung was running for the nomination for the NPA before the election. The majority of his supporters I know to be religious Social Conservatives."

Considering that what? NPA requires
voting members to be Vancouver residents in order to vote in an NPA nomination meeting?

No part of Burnaby Douglas goes into Vancouver.

and thsoe who did vote for Leung
in the Nomination Meeting were
Vancouver residents or property
owners, of which very few if at all
reside in Burnaby Douglas so they
would not be able to vote for him
if they wanted to, unless they bought a condo in Brentwood or other places were condos exist in the riding.

Civic politics doesn't have much value to the fundamentalists since nothing at the civic level is related to religious direction.

Unless of course there's Divine
Providence given to the City of Vancouver's sanitary department's trucks before they roll out to pick up garbage each day.

4/23/2007 1:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

y'know originally i didn't necessarily think that Ronald Leung is a credible threat against the "establishment candidates" like Billy the fat and Billy the lurch, but if you're trying to use the tired old religious fundamentalist schtick on HIM, then i guess there must be something about him that makes you non-Conservaives nervous. uh, yeah.

4/24/2007 12:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>Doesn't indicate anything. His
personal views are just that, personal.

Personal views are the whole point. If the guy is anti-gay, simply say so. The circus tent is large enough for everybody.


>No part of Burnaby Douglas goes into Vancouver.

Then what business does he have running for office in a place he does not live?

>Civic politics doesn't have much value to the fundamentalists since nothing at the civic level is related to religious direction.


All politics is relevant. Look at the "keep distance" orders placed on people demonstrating in front of Abortion Clinics. This flows from city hall.

The West is engaged in a titanic struggle between two opposing world views: Judeo-Christian and Secular-Humanism. BOTH are religious points-of-view. BOTH are political movements.

The Secular-Humanists are trying to hijack Western institutions like marriage and redefine it in their own image. They are also trying to hijack the birth process itself and
spread their genetics where natural selection has deemed otherwise.

The religious fundamentalists see this for what it is and are trying to put a stop to it. They are poorly organized but well motivated.

Which side is right will be judged by posterity.

4/24/2007 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Personal views are the whole point. If the guy is anti-gay, simply say so. The circus tent is large enough for everybody."

Who says he's anti-gay? Is he specificially? Did he say he was? Cite?

>No part of Burnaby Douglas goes into Vancouver.

"Then what business does he have running for office in a place he does not live?"

He can run whereever he chooses and where a political party will accept him. Yonah Martin doesn't
live in New Westminster Coquitlam, but it will be up to the voters to decide if they want her or Dawn Black.

c.i.p one fundamentalist who was
from Chillwack ran in Burnaby once
for the nomination of that party
with disasterous results.

Rosemary Brown who represented the NDP in Burnaby did not live in Burnaby until about 1/3 of the way into her first term.

Prior to her nomination Joyce Murray did not live in Vcr. Quadra, and one can also remember that prior to seeking the nomination for the NPA in Vancouver, Christie Clark did not live in Vancouver. She moved in as a matter of convenience to seek the
nomination.

>Civic politics doesn't have much value to the fundamentalists since nothing at the civic level is related to religious direction.

"All politics is relevant. Look at the "keep distance" orders placed on people demonstrating in front of Abortion Clinics. This flows from city hall."

Actually that arose from the provincial provincial government with their bubble zone legislation and also decisions by the courts, not by city hall.

"The West is engaged in a titanic struggle between two opposing world views: Judeo-Christian and Secular-Humanism. BOTH are religious points-of-view. BOTH are political movements."

Secular-Humanism is not religious
but rather a socio-political movement Secular-Humanism does not have a Divine Person or iconic means of worship as do Judeo-Christian does.

"The religious fundamentalists see this for what it is and are trying to put a stop to it. They are poorly organized but well motivated."

They are also very stupid and naive, since the mainstream populace hasn't latched on to their views, and the fundamentalists have failed to see that.

Even the mainstrain elements of
Christianity do not accept alot of
the things that the fundamentalists
are wanting.

That's been demonstrated many times in the past.

"Which side is right will be judged by posterity. "

For now it will be decided by the voters.

4/24/2007 4:27 PM  
Anonymous soconconspiracy said...

>Who says he's anti-gay? Is he specificially? Did he say he was? Cite?
Refer to previous quotes where he will not state his views. Guilty until proven innocent.


>Actually that arose from the provincial provincial government with their bubble zone legislation and also decisions by the courts, not by city hall.

Access zone legislation has also been passed at the level of local government in Canada:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_protection_of_access_to_abortion

This is a debate of semantics, not meaning. Pot is illegal, the cops dont enforce this law. City hall trumps federal criminal code.


>Secular-Humanism is not religious
but rather a socio-political movement Secular-Humanism does not have a Divine Person or iconic means of worship as do Judeo-Christian does.


Secular humanism is a humanist philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice, and specifically rejects the supernatural and the spiritual as warrants of moral reflection and decision-making.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism

The denial of God is simply his affirmation in the negation. The only honest man is the agnostic.

>They are also very stupid and naive, since the mainstream populace hasn't latched on to their views, and the fundamentalists have failed to see that.

Very specific comment, direct hit. Advantage SoCon.

Whatever their mental and guile status, they have the clarity and singularity of their vision and purpose. Victory goes to those who believe the hardest ― and longest.
http://inpress.lib.uiowa.edu/poroi/papers/nelson050601.html

4/24/2007 7:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT?

hey buddy, i know the cure for cancer. i'm just not gonna tell you about it.

4/24/2007 8:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

">Who says he's anti-gay? Is he specificially? Did he say he was? Cite?
Refer to previous quotes where he will not state his views. Guilty until proven innocent."

Sorry. doesn't work. Doesn't validate your statements.

It's actually the other way around.
It's actually up to the opponent to
prove guilt, which in this chain
of blog letters has been pretty dismal so far.

He has no obligation to state his personal views, which might be different than what might be thought and besides it is a non issue for the majority of voters here in Bby. Douglas. They are more interested in economics and nation building, than catering to
fundamentalist dogma or perception that the fundamentalists might want to bring to the forefront.

">Actually that arose from the provincial provincial government with their bubble zone legislation and also decisions by the courts, not by city hall.

"Access zone legislation has also been passed at the level of local government in Canada:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_protection_of_access_to_abortion"

"This is a debate of semantics, not meaning. Pot is illegal, the cops dont enforce this law. City hall trumps federal criminal code."

Doesn't wash the clothes. The reference was to B.C. i.e. provincial not what was passed or tried to be passed by Vancouver, i.e. civic. In other words the bubble zones arose from court and B.C. provincial legislation, not any action of bylaws from the City of Vancouver.

In B.C., the chain of events was
through the courts and the provincial government, not the City of Vancouver's passage of
any civoc level bylaw.

>Secular-Humanism is not religious
but rather a socio-political movement Secular-Humanism does not have a Divine Person or iconic means of worship as do Judeo-Christian does.

"Secular humanism is a humanist philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice, and specifically rejects the supernatural and the spiritual as warrants of moral reflection and decision-making.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism

The denial of God is simply his affirmation in the negation. The only honest man is the agnostic."

Philosophy and religion are two different things. A person can be
guided by both religion and philosophy, or one of each.

>They are also very stupid and naive, since the mainstream populace hasn't latched on to their views, and the fundamentalists have failed to see that.

Very specific comment, direct hit. Advantage SoCon.


"Whatever their mental and guile status, they have the clarity and singularity of their vision and purpose. "

Which is also very narrow.


"Victory goes to those who believe the hardest ― and longest.
http://inpress.lib.uiowa.edu/poroi/papers/nelson050601."

Victory goes to the candidate who can appeal to the widest possible
spectra in the political middle of the road, which leaves out the fundamentalists for sure.

4/24/2007 9:15 PM  
Anonymous soconconspiracy said...

>GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT?

>hey buddy, i know the cure for >cancer. i'm just not gonna tell you >about it.

So do I, and I'm not going to tell you either!!

That leaves us both blind, deaf, and dumb.

The difference between success and failure is measured in degrees.

If we are all in a boat and there is a hole in the bottom, you have two choices, either start bailing or argue over who owns the hole.

In this blog we have chosen to argue over who should bail first, let alone who owns the hole.

4/24/2007 10:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You two or three should
a: proof-read your posts for spelling and basic English grammar
b: try and figure out what you're trying to say before you write it
c: get a life

Although I will give you high marks for effort

4/24/2007 10:30 PM  
Anonymous soconconspiracy said...

>Philosophy and religion are two different things. A person can be
guided by both religion and philosophy, or one of each.


Philosophy is the discipline concerned with the questions of how one should live (ethics); what sorts of things exist and what are their essential natures (metaphysics); what counts as genuine knowledge (epistemology); and what are the correct principles of reasoning (logic).[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

A religion is a set of beliefs and practices generally held by a community, involving adherence to codified beliefs and rituals and study of ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

Sound very similiar to me, both deal with the "big picture".

>"Whatever their mental and guile status, they have the clarity and singularity of their vision and purpose. "

>Which is also very narrow.

Not as narrow, and certainly not insulting.

>Victory goes to the candidate who can appeal to the widest possible
spectra in the political middle of the road, which leaves out the fundamentalists for sure.

Long term victory is what interests the SoCons, myself included. The shape, focus, and direction of our civilization in the years to come will determine the final victory.

4/24/2007 10:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh yeah and i also have proof that God exists. or rather, that He (yes a he, let's not forget that Conservatives are all sexists and misogynists) used to exist. before He was murdered by soconconspiracy's mom.

i have proof for that too.

i'm just not gonna show it to you out of fear for the Apocalypse if i really do that.

oh and - gogo cheesy "your mom" jokes!

4/25/2007 10:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Long term victory is what interests the SoCons, myself included. The shape, focus, and direction of our civilization in the years to come will determine the final victory."

How's the 2000 years of losing working out for you?

4/25/2007 10:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

better yet, how does the mainstream Christian branches such as the Anglicans, Baptists, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Presbyterian, United, Ukrainian
Orthodox, etc. not caring what the fundamentalist Christians take on politics is grab ya?

That battle was lost in the Middle Ages.

This is 2007, not 1523.

4/25/2007 12:32 PM  
Anonymous soconconspiracy said...

Very specific comments, direct hit. Advantage SoCon.

Now that this blog has degenerated to the level of name calling and finger pointing, I shall leave you gentlemen with this final thought:

Actions speak louder than words. Do you have the strength of your convictions, if any?

I respect any point of view, whether it agrees with mine or not, depending upon the quality and quantity of its proponent(s).

I can say, with reflection, that I have the strength of mine.

Ronald Leung likely has the strength of his.

Do you have the strength of yours?

This is SoConConspiracy signing off.

4/25/2007 6:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Actions speak louder than words. Do you have the strength of your convictions, if any? "

Yep.

"I respect any point of view, whether it agrees with mine or not, depending upon the quality and quantity of its proponent(s)."

Too bad some other fundamentalists
don't respect other's views.

"I can say, with reflection, that I have the strength of mine."

Good.

"Ronald Leung likely has the strength of his. "

He does. Both are now even.

"Do you have the strength of yours?"

Yep. (again)

"This is SoConConspiracy signing off. "

Good. Now then back to the original
topic.

Billy Boy.

4/25/2007 8:09 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home