City Caucus’ True Colour: Yellow
You know, there is much to be said about the work of Mike Klassen and Daniel Fontaine.
Their website started off as a smear machine against Mayor Moonbeam and his cadre of social engineers. But then, I suppose because of some criticism from their own ranks, including from me, they straightened their ship and magnificently sailed some uncharted waters–and how!
No less than a half dozen pertinent breaking news pieces; dozens of important posts on how the taxpayer in Vancouver has been duped, and some great features on the same, covered by all sorts of news venues.
But it’s tough to change your spots as they say, and particularly with Fontaine gone (or so we thought) I suspected the bitterness and antipathy towards anyone who pointed out what a horrible Mayor Sam Sullivan was would be gone. I thought that they understood credibility CANNOT be purchased, and real journalistic success cannot be measured by the amount of times you beg a particular producer to carry a story.
I’ve NEVER done that here. Mind you, I’ve never had to. On a weekly basis I hear from the mainstream press and the story is either on or not, either as feature or as backgrounder (as has happened with Basi-Virk this week).
City Caucus operate differently. Often, they’ll craft an angle, partisan as it may be, but particularly where it concerns Sam Sullivan, they are relentless.
This loses readers. Even if they show up, they’ll go about half way down the page and they’re gone.
And unfortunately with Fontaine’s latest insanity, they lost me, too.
In a post published at the top of their site today, Fontaine reviews the NPA Dinner. In so doing he outright LIES about statements made by Parks Commisioner Ian Robertson, only so he can take shots at him, since Fontaine has convinced himself that Robertson “snubbed” Sullivan in his remarks the other night, when he hailed Philip Owen as the last Mayor of consensus (a completely true statement).
Let’s be clear about two things before we go any further:
Regardless of how much Peter Ladner played nice-nice through his speech, Peter is well aware and has said so, that Sam Sullivan is the reason Gregor Robertson is the Mayor. Anyone who doesn’t understand that can stop reading now and go help Fontaine shine Sam’s shoes. Any fair minded observer understands that if Sam was running, Suzanne Anton might not have even been elected and you could very well have seen a complete wipe out of the NPA. Fontaine had those numbers on his desk when he was Sam’s Chief of Gaffe. I know the person who delivered them. Not only did Fontaine ignore them but he sent out dimbells like David Hurford to add to the lies about how wonderfully popular Sam was.
Also, NO ONE covered Sam closer, more accurately or more fairly than I did when he was Mayor and it was Fontaine, as his Chief, that produced dizzying spin, shameless lies and horse manure about legal action (against me when I was a columnist for 24 Hours) in defending policies from the political lunatic fringe–the second worst in the history of this city. Having Sam deliver the keynote at the dinner was a massive error and Fontaine can shovel the cow pies about that as well all he wants. I spoke to DOZENS of people who stayed away because of that. I also spoke to DOZENS of people who were in attendance and thought Sam’s appearance was even too much–including no shortage of federal Conservatives who previously backed him.
So, when Fontaine took shots in his most recent post at Ian Robertson and complained that Robertson was fanning the flames of division, was that act alone by Fontaine not the same thing? I finally got a hold of Robertson in Montreal (and not in Toronto as I mistakenly reported earlier), where he’s been on business, and his comments couldn’t have been more clear.
“I have no idea what Daniel’s problem with me is other than the fact that I didn’t support Sam for Mayor. Daniel’s never forgiven me for that and to be honest I don’t care what Daniel’s opinion on anything is because when he was Sam’s guy he was really unhelpful in how he treated a number of us in caucus and the stuff he said about how great we were doing was just a political suicide trip. I’ve got nothing against Sam personally, I think he’s had a great life and helped lots of folks. But he wasn’t and isn’t a consensus builder and neither is Daniel. We were constantly fighting an uphill battle. Anyway, if Daniel was really interested in writing a fair piece about me and not the hatchet job he did, he would have called me and he never did. How does he know what I meant? As well as rewriting history, now Daniel reads minds? The problem with the NPA is that all the people claiming the loudest that they want to move on are those who have vested interests in staying the same. I’m saying we need to go back to building consensus. Everyone on council is the government and not just the ruling party. Daniel never got that and neither did Sam, so none of Daniel’s comments are really surprising. Frankly, he is fooling nobody except himself. His post about me is embarrassing in that he’s doing exactly to me what he claims I did to Sam–and I didn’t. But like I said I don’t really care what Daniel thinks and outside his small group of friends neither does anyone else who can help the NPA win. Meanwhile Daniel’s fanning the flames of division while I’m talking about building consensus. My phone has been ringing off the hook from people wanting to come back because of my speech. And I’m concentrating on getting a consensus building NPA elected. The kind Philip Owen would be proud of. The city really worked well in those days and since then it’s been all about division and partisanship and nothing gets done. On Parks Board I proved that I can work with anyone from any party provided the things we’re talking about are reasonable.”
Ouch, double ouch and triple ouch.
Not enough to have managed to help convince people that Sam should be a speaker, Fontaine, who can no longer pretend to be impartial or fair, goes further and suggests that Robertson criticisms of the Current Mayor were “over the top.”
Huh? This from one of city caucus’ bright lights?
Thus, there is only one real issue here, since Fontaine is so willing to dissect and manufacture sentiments of certain speakers…..
Sam Sullivan at the NPA dinner suggested that City Caucus be congratulated for their work. He really went out of his way to single them out.
Hmmm. Really now? Why would that be? Because City Caucus is comprised of Sam brown nosers? Because City Caucus has never written a critical word about Sam’s real legacy?
Danny, I’m out. I was willing to give you and Mikey the benefit of the doubt, but when Sam made those statements about your site, it made it abundantly clear to me that Sam Sullivan is either the money behind City Caucus or has a significant interest in your website. I’ve talked to Mike Klassen at all hours of the day and he’s ALWAYS researching another Vision story. That takes time. You either have a comfortable existence and can play this game or someone is paying you–period. That cheap shot by Klassen against me in the recent Vancouver Sun piece wherein I was featured was a concern too, but this latest episode of having a failed former Mayor lauding one particular site at a partisan political gathering is only two thin shades different from having FD Element pay the Vision attack mutt to write Vision-positive crap. They are two of a kind.
You should not have to unfairly fire at your competition to boost yourself. I make even-handed criticisms here and cover issues with balance. When I mention that I was a fierce critic of Sam’s, everyone who cites that I’m a former NPA director shuts up very quickly. How soon we forget…
I’m removing City Caucus from my blog roll and recommend that my readers ignore them–at least until they can prove that they are not completely biased and paid for by Sam Sullivan. I have no interest in anything they write. Even the good stories they might do ARE NOW COMPLETELY TAINTED by Sullivan’s idiotic, but telling comments.
Bias journalism at Frances Bula’s site is fine as she’s not paid by Vision to support them. Same with Garr. But City Caucus in one swift move has proven that they are Jonathan Ross’ equal.
City Caucus has burned their credibility by playing these kinds of games again.
The city’s future is on the line in 12 months, and this blogger will not stand for the incredible stupidity and blind stubbornness that delivered Vision Vancouver to our shores.
Shame on Daniel Fontaine. If he had any…
Hi Alex,
I will ignore them until further notice.
Take care.
[Translate]
Count me in Alex.Shitty Caucus and their support of Sam lost me as well. I don’t mind someone having a bias but it’s obvious that Fontaine and Klassen are as bought and paid for as Jonathan Ross. I am sometimes taken aback by your revelations but you back them up and are not afraid to call a spade a spade.
I was at the dinner and I wish they let Robertson speak more. His honesty was a refreshing change to what we hear from politicians today.
[Translate]
I liked Ian’s speech, for the most part. He has passion and can deliver a good line.
I am sure he will be thinking about messaging —as should the whole party—as this election period gets started
[Translate]
Credibility and honesty are important to me.
You have always been willing to apologize when necessary, that in itself speaks volumes to your level of integrity…
Count me in Alex….
[Translate]
Anyone who understands impartiality does so by recognizing that out of any of the local or even provincial commentators I am in FIRST PLACE in this regard because I have a proven track record of being balanced and even-handed. I do not lie. I’m not paid by some political movement or some mayoral has-been to shovel garbage. Im not a whore. I stand alone. And I wouldn’t have it any other way. I’m not a lemming.
Before anything I’m here because of my fundamental belief in your right to know. It’s about the public interest.
Fontaine has never understood this. He’s a pathetic stooge.
[Translate]
I read your commentary on the NPA dinner and found it quite informative. I was very leary about that gathering because of the involvement of Sam Sullivan as the keynote speaker – and Suzanne Anton as his continuing cheerleader. I can’t understand why the NPA still hasn’t realized why they lost so many votes in the last election – BECA;USE OF SAM’S LEGACY, AND THE BLIND SUPPORT HE GOT FROM HIS NPA COUNCILLORS. So why have him as the main speaker – unless of course you’re organizing the dinner according to the tastes of Suzanne Anton.
I agree with your assessment of Jonathan Baker – he really should run for Council again. He was an excellent councillor.
I am also impressed by one of Ian Robertson’s comments:
“Everyone on council is the government and not just the ruling party. ”
Amazing that someone in the NPA actually gets this, since the last 3 Councils have operated as though they’re the majority government in a parliamentary system, with the result that Council meetings have been more about political bantering than actual performance.
[Translate]
Complete agreement.
[Translate]
And this is how the NPA was trounced in the last election Alex. This in-fighting has GOT to stop. I agree Ian Robertson was totally in the wrong to snub Sullivan. But City Caucus is in the wrong for jumping all over him for it.
If we are EVER going to dispatch Gregor off to greener pastures we all have to admit that we’re playing for the same team. We need to find a leader that we can all find some common ground with. We need to stop bashing each other for every little mistake.
We need to be a team, we need to be strong, we need to show leadership. That and 10 council candidates who’s last names start with A or B will ENSURE our victory. (Sorry had to slip a bit of levity in.)
[Translate]
Paul: Robertson didn’t snub Sam. Who is Sam have asked yourself that? We have Gregor because of him. Sam’s apologists should be purged from the party permanently. Fontaine us a shameful, failed political assistant who shielded a fool. It took the party down. That’s the truth. Ladner didn’t have a hope.
The last time we had a leader that built consensus was Philip Owen. Not Sam. There was no snub. But Fontaine is a miserable little girl who missed the lead in the school play only to find she was never in contention to begin with. That’s the way he’s always operated.
Cheap shots. Duck and hide. That’s his modus operandi.
[Translate]
hehehe, well you are the political blogger Alex. You are more than entitled to look negatively on the actions of your cohorts. I’d rather see us all not attack each other over it. Sam Sullivan definitely made mistakes. And I’m not downplaying them. He also did SOME positive things. And in the end he was an NPA mayor. Whether we like him or not, he is part of our past. That doesn’t mean we have to worship him, but at the very least we can learn from his mistakes.
Learn from them, move on, become better. We’ve got to remember that Sam is not the problem. Ian Robertson is not the problem. GREGOR and VISION are the problem. Speaking as a proud new member of the NPA, I’m excited by all the positive things the party has done, and I hope we learn from our mistakes. But we’re never going get a chance to show the public that we’re better if we keep fighting amongst ourselves over spilled milk.
[Translate]
No Paul…let me explain.
I’ve seen what Fontaine does. I watched him during his tenure as Sam’s chief and Daniel is a destructive force when he gets on his high horse to defend the complete insanity of what Sam committed to. Gregor is only worse than Sam because Gregor is actually doing things that negatively impact a majority of citizens Sam essentially did nothing. What is the “some good” he did??? A street crime initiative that saw a spike in street crime. A density initiative that was missing a transportation component until Vision came along and stole it, turning it into something even more absurd. And a drug proposal that would require you to be a strung out junkie to even begin to understand it. That’s his legacy. And don’t even get me started about the lies and spin. IT’s was three years of NOTHING.
Yes, Gregor is the enemy of the people. No Mayor has been more destructive. No Mayor has lied more. No Mayor has broken so many major policy initiatives from the campaign trail today. But that doesn’t mean that an NPA that is led by a Vision hybrid is going to beat him. Suzanne Anton is indistinguishable from Vision. Sean Bickerton, who could be a great candidate, doesn’t know his derriere from a properly messaged statement. More bike lanes says Suzanne and then Sean agrees. Why?! Where?! Have you consulted with the people? Do you know what they want? Has there been a public consultation process?
Starting to see the problem?
The NPA are woefully unprepared, at this point, to govern. Burying hatchets is a waste of time when people like Fontaine buy new ones and start throwing them around while blind-folded.
[Translate]
The NPA needs to be careful of what they wish for. The crew behind City Caucus, and those at Sammy’s table were the reason they lost the last election. Now, all because Robertson didn’t go over and Kiss Sham’s ring, he’s a villain in the party??? Yeah right. Someone give the guy a medal.
When that site was set up, it appeared they were trying to bury the NPA as revenge for Sham being shunned by the party. The site has always been questionable at best and the only reason why anyone goes there currently, is because there is no real gathering spot online for an alternative to Vision. Give people an alternative and City Caucus will be relegated to the traffic Jonathon Ross gets daily.
Lately, they prefer to call people like me, a neo-con, far right-wing and an extremist. And yet I’m the one that people accuse of name-calling. Funny, I didn’t realize I was any of the three and now it seems Vision doesn’t have a monopoly on the hypocrisy in this town.
They also seem to have a contingent over there that has forgotten that the NPA can’t win unless they have both Liberals and Conservatives in their fold. If I am right-wing as they suggest, they may want to consider pushing me out, because they lose a vote they desperately need and can’t win without.
The word “foolish” may not adequately describe this bunch.
[Translate]
It doesn’t. The NPA’s problems are once again coming home to roost. No policy book, never mind, what am I saying…?! No policy direction. Suzanne promises more bike lanes without saying where or when or how or whom it will affect! She’s a mad woman. Robertson takes a strong position for once, and he’s castigated as the anti-Christ, by whom? The Sullivanites. Nice, beauty. The people who destroyed the party have returned to finish her off. Brilliant.
[Translate]
Please don’t tell me those boys are trying to prop Sam up to run for Mayor in 2011, are they? He can’t be that full of himself, is he? (Probably). They can’t possibly be that stupid, can they?! They are not trying to give Vision an electoral victory, are they?
The reason I ask whether or not Sam’s planning on throwing his hat in the ring, because they’re treating Ian Robertson like a Judas, suggesting Suzanne bows out ASAP (the only sensible thing that was written), and who else is there? Carole Taylor is definitely out (mind you, if she even was interested, would they be smart enough to let her be at the top?) Does that leave Tung Chan? I don’t think he has a hope in hell of winning, and if they’re banking on getting the Chinese vote, they’ll probably be very disappointed. That pretty much leaves Christy Clark (that’s if she even wants it — she’s got a pretty good platform already) and as you stated on CityCaucus, Rick Peterson (although, how many of us know who he actually right now — mind you, campaigns are where we get to know the candidate). Other than those folks, who else would run and have a hope in hell to win or at least make a dent?
I find it stunning the number of commenters that are castigating you, Ian Robertson and Glen Hall for your very apt comments. I also generally find some of their commenters so rabid, it’s quite disgusting, and go straight into attack mode, no matter how inncuous it is.
I know there are disagreements on here, and I know we all have some disagreements on different issues (some of us say it, some of us say nothing) but for the most part, we’re civilized and hopefully at the end of the day, we can respect each other enough, even if we still vehemently disagree with each other.
Now as for Danny Fontaine and company throwing crap every which way, I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, “with friends like these, who needs enemies?”
[Translate]
Let me tell you something: You don’t know these people. I was prepared to go along with them because I thought they’d left the Sam shilling behind. It’s clear that both Mike and Daniel, less so Mike as he’s told me Sam was impossible to handle (um, duh), would be fully prepared to try and destroy the career of anyone who didn’t agree with Sam or exalt the bastard who destroyed this town. Fontaine’s post is so utterly divisive and unnecessary that he’s taken a lot of good work and turned it on it’s head. But he’s too stupid to understand that. He was NEVER a good political assistant. He’s a liberal policy wonk. He thinks he has some political savvy but he doesn’t. Daniel is a tactician, not strategist. And now we know that the charade city caucus has been playing for the many months they’ve been feeding off me and others for greater readership was just all bullshit. It’s a real shame.
For the record, in my opinion the only one who can beat Gregor and Vision handily is Christy Clark. She’d kill him.
As for the comments about me, I have nothing to do with either Robertson or Hall. I liked Robertson’s messaging at the dinner, I didn’t in the past. I let Hall post on my blog, but am not as conservative as he. I couldn’t care less about the comments. But it was only a matter of time before Fontaine crapped in the bed again. He just can’t help himself.
And, yes, city caucus would do anything for Sam, which tells you everything you need to know about both of them. They have painted themselves into a corner.
Plus, now I’m hearing Klassen is still mulling over a council run. If he does this, I will be the first to call him out as a fraud. It will mean that everything he’s done since Sam lost was about him. Shame if true.
[Translate]
I realize that this might a trivial point, but I feel that I must issue a clarification and an apology Alex, as I wrote an extremely poorly worded previous statement. I can clearly see how it was miscontrued. I did not mean to imply that you had anything to do with Ian Robertson and Glen Hall, and I do apologize since that’s the way it came across.
What I should’ve said, and failed to say, is that I find it shocking that they’re castigating you for your very apt comments, in addition to their negative response of Ian Robertson’s speech, along with responses to Glen Hall’s comments.
(Side note: I’ve always subscribed to the notion that if you’re getting attacked by both sides, you’re probably doing something right!)
Now that I got that out of the way, just a couple of things. Here’s Ian Robertson on Jeff Lee’s blog:
“My comments last night were not at all an attempt to snub former Mayor Sam Sullivan – I have a great deal of respect for what Sam has accomplished both personally and in his passionate commitment to make Vancouver a better city. I was making a statement that Vancouver needs a Mayor who can build and reach consensus across all party lines; something that has not been done with any success since PhiIip Owen was Mayor. Francis and Allan should not have been surprised by these comments as they have widely reported in the past that Philip Owen was the last Mayor of Vancouver who was a consensus builder. In fact, Francis and Allan have spilled gallons of ink that both Larry Campbell and Sam were not good consensus builders. I am a true non-partisan in that if a COPE Mayor had accomplished this task, I would have pointed that out. Thanks Jeff for coming last night.”
Also, you’re right, I don’t know these people. I’m thinking I’m better for it
[Translate]
Thx so much for this! I hadn’t seen that. It perfectly explains his position. All Fontaine would have needed to do was ask, but that’s a tough thing to do when you are so deeply delusional that you believe Sam built consensus.
[Translate]
Oh, come on Alex. Sam Sullivan was one of the finest Mayors that this city has ever seen.
How many other Mayors do you know of that would give a junkie money to buy drugs so that said mayor could watch said junkie ingest said drugs. It was all in the name of research.
And, do you honestly think the NPA is going to be able to pull another James Green out of their sleeve?
Is the NPA going to be able to find a Gregory Robertson?
No, the NPA are done. You may as well write a eulogy for them.
Too many things happened on their watch that have left a sour taste in everyone’s mouth.
The only way Vision/Cope could lose the next election is if mayor and council got drunk on New Years eve and went to the petting farm in Stanley Park and beat the animals to death.
May the NPA R.I.P.
[Translate]
SC,
Thanks for the positive feedback.
One would think I’m enemy #2 of the NPA, right after Alex; and a right-wing neo-con nut job if you believe the crap being spewed by the people in the NPA trying to maintain the status quo over at city caucus.
Just to clarify, I may seem more conservative then Alex, but I have voted for all of Chretien’s governments, along with Paul Martin in his “Mr. Druther’s” minority.
I have voted for the Conservatives (Federally) since Mr. Martin’s abysmal failure as PM, but that’s more a result of who I’ve had a choice of MP to vote for. As you probably realize sometimes, the choice is not great either way at the best of times.
So am I a conservative or a Liberal? Even I can’t answer that question but I am certainly being labeled as something I’m not.
What is also quite funny is how everyone thinks Alex and I have the same views and like to lump us together in the venomous rants they accuse us of. The hypocrisy is simply stunning but I’m not surprised.
Frankly Alex is a much nicer guy than I am (don’t you dare edit that out AGT) and he gives people far more rope to hang themselves than I do. I won’t bother explaining my theories on that, but I give him full credit for doing so, even if I disagree with it.
So, no I’m not Alex, we communicate through his blog and various other blogs, and yes we disagree all the time despite being lumped into the same neo-con category (of course in a negative connotation) so that people threatened by the truth we speak – can try to marginalize the rationale we bring to the conversation.
I’d like to explain a bit more of my beliefs on civic politics and why I believe Suzanne Anton, Sean Bickerton and the current incarnation of the NPA is a complete and utter failure, but I’ll save my speech, it appears you already get it.
What I will say is that the board of the NPA and those they are being counselled by right now, are sooooo off the mark, its frightening to think they have control of a political organization. But of course, bash Glen Hall because he’s a Liberal voting, neo-con right wing nutjob. If I didn’t have my eyes open, I would swear they hired Jonathon Ross for his strategic advice.
[Translate]
Hey, who the hell am I to argue? I agree I’m a great guy, just ask me…
[Translate]