Comments on: Controversy Over Bulte Comments at All Candidates’ Debate http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/01/12/controversy-over-bulte-comments-at-all-candidates-debate/ any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:22:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: robhyndman.com http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/01/12/controversy-over-bulte-comments-at-all-candidates-debate/#comment-937 robhyndman.com Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:20:52 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/01/12/controversy-over-bulte-comments-at-all-candidates-debate/#comment-937 [...] A reader, Stuart MacDonald, has contributed an excellent account of the All Candidates’s debate in the Parkdate High Park riding that I wrote about earlier today. It’s a detailed account of events of the evening - please give it a read. Related Posts [...] [...] A reader, Stuart MacDonald, has contributed an excellent account of the All Candidates’s debate in the Parkdate High Park riding that I wrote about earlier today. It’s a detailed account of events of the evening - please give it a read. Related Posts [...]

]]> By: Stuart MacDonald http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/01/12/controversy-over-bulte-comments-at-all-candidates-debate/#comment-936 Stuart MacDonald Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:05:38 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/01/12/controversy-over-bulte-comments-at-all-candidates-debate/#comment-936 So my Wife and I went to the All Candidates Meeting last night. It was in the basement of our church, just a short stroll from our house. Bulte's seeming lack of judgement on the fundraiser is what I wanted to hear about. I am not a copyright expert, and as such the whole Pledge thing feels over the top - that is not my bone to pick in this case. For me, it is more the optics of the thing and that it shows such lousy judgment. In private industry, such poor judgment would get one's buttocks on the street, I'd say (at least if you worked for me). So we got a sitter, and off we went. Well, what a packed house. I did a quick survey, and I would estimate more than 250. So full that the church Minister asked me to help tote more chairs when I got there, which I was happy to do. Truly standing room only. The debate was predictable - silly monochromatic questions, cute "Young Canadians" asking cute "Young Canadian" questions, titters of laughter about the Marijuana Party candidates' responses. In all, I think the the NDP Candidate come across as strongest (note: I am a big time capitalist here, and essentially apolitical - I am just saying that she was best spoken and most compelling). Bulte wasn't bad, though a bit wooden. And yes, she did the "BRING MICHAEL GEIST HERE" thing, but when asked why the fundraiser was not a problem, did not answer (to rousing cries of "ANSWER THE QUESTION"). At the root of it, she just didn't seem to "get" the optics/judgment issue (astounding, no?). The NDP candidate did call it out, to applause and yells from the audience (sidebar: how great to see democracy in vibrant, grass-roots action. How lucky we are). So here's what I wanted to say: at the end of the thing, I went up to her and said "Ms. Bulte, I really want to vote for you but find the situation you have gotten yourself into baffling" to which she responded about protecting artists, needing to fundraise etc. I said "I don't know anything about copyright law, but I do have a real concern that you are putting yourself in the position of being beholden to people who's lives you can directly impact with this event. If you were the Finance Minister..." at which point she said "but I am NOT the Finance Minister". MAN OH MAN! She was shortly joined by a handler, listening intently and soon actively engaged in the discussion. Ms. Bulte said "well I am not calling off the fundraiser" while her handler made comments about needing money and what about the union donations to the NDP? Again, missing the point completely. To her credit, Ms. Bulte did seem sincere in trying to get me to understand, uh, something, but on the issue of optics and character? Not at all. The discussion probably went on for 5 minutes, before handler-boy moved her on. But get this, as I went to leave (my Wife, a wee bit embarassed by my discussion I think, had left) I said to the handler boys (who dressed and looked like they went to Handler-boy College of Fashion - a few too many episodes of West Wing, guys): "you have to admit that the optics of this are sh**" to which the guy in the black with the shaggy blonde hair responded loudly "YES". So...why the heck did they let their candidate get into the position in the first place? I hope she enjoys the party, because she will not be re-elected and the footnote to her career will be that she did it to herself. Shame. And *that* is my point. - Stuart So my Wife and I went to the All Candidates Meeting last night. It was in the basement of our church, just a short stroll from our house. Bulte’s seeming lack of judgement on the fundraiser is what I wanted to hear about. I am not a copyright expert, and as such the whole Pledge thing feels over the top - that is not my bone to pick in this case. For me, it is more the optics of the thing and that it shows such lousy judgment. In private industry, such poor judgment would get one’s buttocks on the street, I’d say (at least if you worked for me). So we got a sitter, and off we went. Well, what a packed house. I did a quick survey, and I would estimate more than 250. So full that the church Minister asked me to help tote more chairs when I got there, which I was happy to do. Truly standing room only.

The debate was predictable - silly monochromatic questions, cute “Young Canadians” asking cute “Young Canadian” questions, titters of laughter about the Marijuana Party candidates’ responses.

In all, I think the the NDP Candidate come across as strongest (note: I am a big time capitalist here, and essentially apolitical - I am just saying that she was best spoken and most compelling). Bulte wasn’t bad, though a bit wooden. And yes, she did the “BRING MICHAEL GEIST HERE” thing, but when asked why the fundraiser was not a problem, did not answer (to rousing cries of “ANSWER THE QUESTION”). At the root of it, she just didn’t seem to “get” the optics/judgment issue (astounding, no?). The NDP candidate did call it out, to applause and yells from the audience (sidebar: how great to see democracy in vibrant, grass-roots action. How lucky we are).

So here’s what I wanted to say: at the end of the thing, I went up to her and said “Ms. Bulte, I really want to vote for you but find the situation you have gotten yourself into baffling” to which she responded about protecting artists, needing to fundraise etc. I said “I don’t know anything about copyright law, but I do have a real concern that you are putting yourself in the position of being beholden to people who’s lives you can directly impact with this event. If you were the Finance Minister…” at which point she said “but I am NOT the Finance Minister”. MAN OH MAN! She was shortly joined by a handler, listening intently and soon actively engaged in the discussion. Ms. Bulte said “well I am not calling off the fundraiser” while her handler made comments about needing money and what about the union donations to the NDP? Again, missing the point completely. To her credit, Ms. Bulte did seem sincere in trying to get me to understand, uh, something, but on the issue of optics and character? Not at all. The discussion probably went on for 5 minutes, before handler-boy moved her on.

But get this, as I went to leave (my Wife, a wee bit embarassed by my discussion I think, had left) I said to the handler boys (who dressed and looked like they went to Handler-boy College of Fashion - a few too many episodes of West Wing, guys): “you have to admit that the optics of this are sh**” to which the guy in the black with the shaggy blonde hair responded loudly “YES”. So…why the heck did they let their candidate get into the position in the first place? I hope she enjoys the party, because she will not be re-elected and the footnote to her career will be that she did it to herself. Shame. And *that* is my point.

- Stuart

]]>