WTF?

I go out for two hours and what happens?

Craig James screws the recallers on behalf of Liberal MLA (that wasn’t three words I just typed, was it?) Ida Chong and Finance Minister Colin Hansen reveals he was lying when he and Gordon Campbell cooked up the unsustainable tax cut for the tv address that didn’t work so necessitated Campbell resigning and the tax cut to be withdrawn.  Got all that?

Lets start with Colin Hansen.  Three and a half weeks ago, the Premier lied told the people of BC that the money was rolling in so fast we could all afford a tax break.  Here’s how the Globe put it: “The tax cut will reduce provincial revenues by $568-million each year. The fiscal room for a new tax cut relies on the September budget update, which forecast $2.1-billion in additional revenues over the next three years.”

Today Colin puts out the 2nd quarter figures and they show… revenues down, not up.  Now those revenues don’t come in all at once at the end of the quarter.  They are reported regularly throughout the quarter.  So it’s likely Hansen knew and the Premier knew on October 27th that the “fiscal room” had disappeared.

In other words, they lied.  I know, shocker!

And how about that Craig James, toady extraordinaire?

He rejected the Ida Chong recall petition for exceeding the 200 word limit, arguing that the acronyms MLA and HST represent 8 words not two.   But here’s how my dictionary defines acronym:  “acronym – a word formed from the initial letters or syllables taken from a group of words”.   “A word.”  Sounds pretty clear to me.  An acronym like MLA is one word not five.

Craig James has just jumped the Orwell shark.

Btw – an interesting take on the Basi/Virk plea bargain deal coming up tomorrow…

This entry was posted in BC Liberals, BC Politics and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to WTF?

  1. Norm Farrell says:

    From the Oxford Dictionary people:

    “Acronyms are treated just like ordinary words in a sentence, and may be composed of all capital letters, or of an initial capital followed by small letters.”

  2. Paul Kopas says:

    Actually, MLA and HST are not “acronyms”; according to half a dozen style guides I have on my shelf, they are “initialisms.” Acronyms are pronounceable, or more or less so, such as NATO, UNESCO, CUPE, but for initialisms each letter is sounded out. For example RCMP, FBI, USA and of course, MLA and HST. No doubt acronyms are words, but some doubt about initialisms. None of my books say whether they are counted a single word or as multiples. What’s’s name James is probably on safe enough ground as far as the editing worlds goes.

  3. Norm Farrell says:

    At the risk of starting a discussion about angels and pins:

    Oxford Dictionaries: “An abbreviation composed of the first letters of other words so that the abbreviation itself forms a word.”

    Cambridge Dictionary: “an abbreviation consisting of the first letters of each word in the name of something, pronounced as a word”

    Webster’s New World Dictionary: “A word formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for Women’s Army Corps, or by combining initial letters or parts of a series of words, such as radar for radiodetecting and ranging.”

    Merriam-Webster Dictionary “a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term”

  4. Paul Kopas says:

    Hi Norm: I note the definitions you give either say “forms a word” or is “pronounced as a word” or have pronounceable examples and would, it seems, agree with my books. My main source is the Oxford Guide to Canadian English Usage. So I don’t think there is any disagreement between what you have found and what I have — except that the Oxford Guide makes a clear distinction, as a definition of a word, between acronyms and initialisms. One way of telling the difference is that they follow different rules of grammar — (depending on the sentence) acronyms do not need a definite article, for example, but intialisms do.

  5. wendy says:

    this was posted on another website. It seems to show that the rules for submission of the recall petition were changed within the day
    http://www.donewithdalton.com/2010/11/25/proof-that-elections-bc-added-number-of-words-in-proponent-statement-on-november-24/

  6. Norm Farrell says:

    Wendy, the operative words are those written in the legislation, not what the website shows. The 200 word limit is in paragraph 19.2.c. However, IMO the interpretation by Elections BC shows contempt for the spirit of the law. Not surprising though is it?

  7. e.a.f. says:

    gordo and his crew will try to do anything and everything to stop the recalls. They think they are being smart, all it makes them look, is petty. gordo’s appointed monkey is doing as he is expected to and being well rewarded for it.
    We can only expect to see more of this type of thing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *