|
Post by princelh on Dec 2, 2006 10:06:32 GMT -5
Well? Bob Rae has Judy Sgro supporting him, (selling immigration visa's to illegal immigrants), Scott Brisson and Joe Volpe (illegal campaign financing) now supporting him. How can he lose, with all of those special interests supporting him after the first ballot?
|
|
|
Post by princelh on Dec 2, 2006 10:39:17 GMT -5
Ignatieff; Dead Man Walking.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 11:52:13 GMT -5
Ignatieff; Dead Man Walking. Yup.
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Dec 2, 2006 12:09:28 GMT -5
Parachute leaders, recycled eladers.....thongs, so at to remind oneself of the Liberal party every time one scratches their genitals.
Can the Liberals sink any deeper? And to think that at one time, it was led by one of the greatest minds of our times.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 12:16:03 GMT -5
From the speeches and without knowing how (exactly) the candidates stand on what the media characterizes quite inaccurately as "conservative" social issues, and which are in fact fundamental human social justice issues, my take on the candidates thus far is, howsoever inadequately
Ignatief: I've read MI over the years. He is highly intelligent and not very wise. He supported the Bush family oil war. Intellect divorced from fundamental principles of justice is just more dangerous than beneficial. Better to be stupid. That's way too harsh an indictment, but I do think he can. like most of us talk himself into things despite obiously ignoring the demands of reason.
Stephan Dion: I like him very much. He resonates principle.
Gerard Kennedy I like this guy too. He's spent more time than me at food banks. He practices what I too often only preach.
Bob Rae. On a sense of passion for his country, competence, and personal appeal, I would probably vote for Bob Rae. He is a highly intelligent man and on the surface the most eloquent and effective. He would have to work harder on his French though he's more bilingual than I am. Ontario is another question mark.
Ken Dryden Now eliminated, gave a beautiful and passionate speech about not being small in one's concerns. Very passionate. Very admirable.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 12:21:30 GMT -5
Kennedy to Dion
Without knowing how this will ultimately play out, these are both pretty good guys.
Iggy's effectively out according to most commentators... so where and when will he go? Dion is a great Canadien.
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Dec 2, 2006 12:22:49 GMT -5
You do realize that delegates are not picking on principle or the principled ones. They are picking on who is the best candidate to WIN the next election.
Sadly, even at the delegate level, it's about winning and power. "OUR man in OUR party is the right leader for the country".
Once, just once, I want to see a be governed by center version of Pierre Elliot.
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Dec 2, 2006 12:24:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 12:44:48 GMT -5
You do realize that delegates are not picking on principle or the principled ones. They are picking on who is the best candidate to WIN the next election. Sadly, even at the delegate level, it's about winning and power. "OUR man in OUR party is the right leader for the country". Once, just once, I want to see a be governed by center version of Pierre Elliot. So all these guys who ran food banks, served on international justice forums, worked on the Kyoto accord, took flak for defending Canada in their home province and committed to aboriginal peoples are the people without principle. So the principled people are ........where? The liberals are infected by enlightenment materialism, Ignatief is the poster boy for this methinks, and silence on abortion and the the emotionally satisfying Kumbya superficail inclusiveness of embracing homosexuality instead of embracing the person afflicted are fundamental signs of deep and unreasonable disorder. This is paradoxical given the popular and incorrect notion that the enlightenment was about reason. It was about reason divorced from reality, evident in Descarte, Hegel, Kant and Nietche. Nihilism. The last stop for moral relativism and destroyer of human community. For all that Libreals have the vestiges of a sense of community and concern for their neighbors; inclusiveness. They have delivered very effective govnernments throughout our history. Most of the major opposition to Liberals from conservative corners really comes from narrow and individualistic selfishness and greed, and too a legitimate hope that some of the so-called "social conservative' issues would be adressed (Even a broken clock is right twice per day). while from the left, the criticism often comes from those disaffected and given to frustrated idealism, Liberals in a hurry. Liberals generally maintain a concern for social justice....a concern for others, that to my mind is a more truly enightened approach to human life and its purpose. Trudeau would vote for one of the remaining candidates, and he would laugh his substantial cojones off at Stevey Harpur , the right wing bean counter. (Incidentally I liked Harpur's move on income trusts, that condervatives and corporations liked so much)
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Dec 2, 2006 12:49:53 GMT -5
You do realize that delegates are not picking on principle or the principled ones. They are picking on who is the best candidate to WIN the next election. Sadly, even at the delegate level, it's about winning and power. "OUR man in OUR party is the right leader for the country". Once, just once, I want to see a be governed by center version of Pierre Elliot. So all these guys who ran food banks, served on international justice forums, worked on the Kyoto accord, took flak for defending Canada in their home province and committed to aboriginal peoples are the people without principle. So the principled people are ........where? The liberals are infected by enlightenment materialism, Ignatief is the poster boy for this methinks, and silence on abortion and the the emotionally satisfying Kumbya superficail inclusiveness of embracing homosexuality instead of embracing the person afflicted are fundamental signs of deep and unreasonable disorder. This is paradoxical given the popular and incorrect notion that the enlightenment was about reason. It was about reason divorced from reality, evident in Descarte, Hegel, Kant and Nietche. Nihilism. The last stop for moral relativism. For all that Libreals have the vestiges of a sense of community and concern for their neighbors; inclusiveness. They have delivered very effective govnernments throughout our history. Most of the major opposition to Liberals from conservative corners really comes from narrow and individualistic selfishness and greed, while from the left, the criticism often comes from those disaffected and given to frustrated idealism, Liberals in a hurry. Liberals generally maintain a concern for social justice....a concern for others, that to my mind is a more truly enightened approach to human life and its purpose. Nice speech...but....have you been on the floor? It's all about your condidate WINNING. Pure power politicis.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 13:13:02 GMT -5
So all these guys who ran food banks, served on international justice forums, worked on the Kyoto accord, took flak for defending Canada in their home province and committed to aboriginal peoples are the people without principle. So the principled people are ........where? The liberals are infected by enlightenment materialism, Ignatief is the poster boy for this methinks, and silence on abortion and the the emotionally satisfying Kumbya superficail inclusiveness of embracing homosexuality instead of embracing the person afflicted are fundamental signs of deep and unreasonable disorder. This is paradoxical given the popular and incorrect notion that the enlightenment was about reason. It was about reason divorced from reality, evident in Descarte, Hegel, Kant and Nietche. Nihilism. The last stop for moral relativism. For all that Libreals have the vestiges of a sense of community and concern for their neighbors; inclusiveness. They have delivered very effective govnernments throughout our history. Most of the major opposition to Liberals from conservative corners really comes from narrow and individualistic selfishness and greed, while from the left, the criticism often comes from those disaffected and given to frustrated idealism, Liberals in a hurry. Liberals generally maintain a concern for social justice....a concern for others, that to my mind is a more truly enightened approach to human life and its purpose. Nice speech...but....have you been on the floor? It's all about your condidate WINNING. Pure power politicis. That wasn't a speech. It was an effective rebuttal of your assertion. It is far more likely and therefore reasonable to believe that Angels exist than that they do not. (I have one (Celeste) who helps me avoid speeding tickets and get parking spaces in the Beaches on summer Friday nights.) But while they may be metaphorically perched on the shoulders of people on the floor at the Liberal convention, we are not angels. Our motives are often and commonly mixed. We get selfish and self-serving. But given a choice between someone who will really effectively adress Kyoto, resist Bush's family war, increase my taxes to put money to the aid of others, I would definitely vote for guys like that while I give them ship for terrible deficiencies (as people should do to me for my deficiencies). If you believe in what you are doing, even if it's hard to sift through our motives. (How many would marry if sexual relations were not involved? How many like Mother Theresa give their lives to the service of the poorest? Not me. I bought a new driver. I thihnk it is important that Ignatief not win, because I disagree with him and think my reasons are sound. I think Rae is a better choice. I would still prefer the Liberals generally to the alternatives, though fundamental issues are make or break with me. (I won't vote for a candidate I generally agree on most things with but who thinks slavery is ok.) Winning is important. If you can generally advance your values without too significant compromises, then you should do so. Partial goods are better than no goods. I am considering taking out a membership in the Liberal party. If I do, I will spend most of my time giving them ship for their failings while supporting their good plans. I will get booed and shipped upon by many, but so the hell what. Oh ya! More Liberals (by far) are Habs fans.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 2, 2006 13:26:25 GMT -5
So all these guys who ran food banks, served on international justice forums, worked on the Kyoto accord, took flak for defending Canada in their home province and committed to aboriginal peoples are the people without principle. So the principled people are ........where? Not in politics. They are still running food banks. Other than that they are political hacks. International justice forums? Political appointment. Kyoto workers? Political appointment. Flag wavers? Political hopefuls. Those of us who stormed Parliament Hill before the last referendum have returned quietly to our burrows; those who felt they could do something further besieged governmental offices and found further work. Which is great . . . except that most such people get sucked into the great bureaucracy and wind up spinning their wheels for an issues-related paycheck What, and the Liberals are the only ones who care about Canada? The only ones who care for their neighbours? Their communities? And their share of poor ones. This seems strange to hear, seeing that Liberals by and large are pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage while conservatives by and large are not (that, I admit, is stereotyping: there are pro-life and pro-marriage Liberals and there are pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage conservatives). The social issues you espouse seem to fit in more with the conservative agenda yet you allow that the Liberal Party shares your ideals. Interesting . . . Ah, social justice . . . which is defined as "what I think people should do because I know better than they". [/quote]Trudeau would vote for one of the remaining candidates, and he would laugh his substantial cojones off at Stevey Harpur , the right wing bean counter.[/quote] Ah, the ghost of Mr. Trudeau. Mr. Don't-Raise-the-Gas-Tax (and Mr. NEP that did just that), Mr. No-Wage-and-Price-Controls (and Mr. 6-and-5), and, or course, Mr. Tax-and-Spend, who got us into the deficit mess in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 2, 2006 13:28:25 GMT -5
Oh ya! More Liberals (by far) are Habs fans. Reference, pplease? ;D
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 13:55:23 GMT -5
Oh ya! More Liberals (by far) are Habs fans. Reference, pplease? ;D To deal with the important stat first. CBC coverage Mansbridge ...Toronto Dryden...Habs Mahovalich...probably Habs Goodale ..Habs Liberals from Quebec....Habs Listen to the right wing madness of the Leaf station AM 640, hosted by indicted police union moron (Brunnel or something) and you know that Toronto fans are right wing) Compare this to the dulcet tones and meliflous sophistries of Team 990 in Mtl. and all is clear. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 14:25:26 GMT -5
You seem to view democracy and its workings as evil. Feed the poor by hand yes, but direct the resources of the country to address their needs and keep them from needing handouts from individual acts, perhaps begging on the streets, bad.
Communities have the right and I would argue the absolute moral duty to decide that they will build schools and hospitals and make sure help is available to the poor. Better not to have a need for food banks.
Politics is a noble activity, not simply the domain of warlords and corporations, princes and the wealthy. It is where different objectives and values are fought for in the public domain. Conservatives tend not to see the offices of government as where we get our say, but as intrusions into their own private domain, hence the gun advocacy, the give me back my money attitude to taxation, enshrine "property" rights in the consitution , support for state-sanctionned killings of prisoners already behind bars, a visceral disregard for Quebec and native rights. The conservative impulse is narrow, divisive and all about "me".
The evangelical wing of support does indeed formally oppose abortion, but also tends to believe that God is a commie-hating right wing capitalist, who doesn't mind nations going to war with other nations even if there is no reason for it.
In the book, "A handbook on abortion" published in the "80's as I recall, the author was himself surprised to discover that more Democrats were opposed to the crime against humanity that is abortion and members of pro life groups than Republicans.
Catholics are traditonally Liberals and in the US democrats, so this is not a surprising finding. It is a fundamental human rights issue and Democrats geberally care more for their neighbors and the poor than trickle downers. The right wing has always tended towards the pole of individualism and in the extreme, fascism.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 14:39:08 GMT -5
I don't think that the right wing in Canada, let's Alberta conservatives, are pro-life. I think that like many Liberals and Democrats they oppose abortion, but they also support for the most part the heinous practice of so-called capital punishment, which is in Canada where we have secure prisons, a completely unjustifiable homicide. Lots of specious and gratuitous quotations like "An eye for an eye" are inappropriately pulled from the old testament in defence of the indefensible.
And too, you don't have to listen to too many bible belt preachers speaking about people afflilcted with a same sex sexual attraction, to see that there is very little love or concern for these persons. That's not being pro-life.
Taxes are about community. Others. Conservatives hate taxes. They love money. Everybody knows that the powerful in all societies espouse the right wing conservative agenda. Take a glance to the South, or at home.
Canadian values are bigger.
Incidentally, your criticisms of Trudeau, reflect exactly the conservative mindset and values I pointed out above, tax, spending "my" money on others.
You neglect to mention that he pulled hundreds of thousands of Canadian seniors out of poverty and was forced to deal with the baby boom coming of age and needing significant help, help which they received.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 2, 2006 14:43:20 GMT -5
In answer: because he wound up in third place.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 14:48:35 GMT -5
In answer: because he wound up in third place. I missed the context of this, which I presume concersn Rae. Looks like he's telling them to follow their own inclinations. I bet he goes to Dion. He won't be doing it publicly which I thought he might do. So Dion of Ignatief. I'd prefer Dion, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 14:59:52 GMT -5
Bryson's french is worse than mine.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 15:02:56 GMT -5
If I had to bet a hundred bucks right now, I would bet on DION.
Good for him. I admire this guy a lot. I don't know if he can win, but I'm happier with him though I don't know him in depth.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 2, 2006 15:06:39 GMT -5
In answer: because he wound up in third place. I missed the context of this, which I presume concersn Rae. Referring to the title of the thread. None of the above.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 15:07:09 GMT -5
Going in, I thought it would be Ignatief as most likely, with Rae the next. I didn't think Dion had the charisma or English skills to win. Apparently his English is just fine.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 2, 2006 15:11:54 GMT -5
Well? Bob Rae has Judy Sgro supporting him, (selling immigration visa's to illegal immigrants), Scott Brisson and Joe Volpe (illegal campaign financing) now supporting him. How can he lose, with all of those special interests supporting him after the first ballot? And now supporting Iggy on the 4th.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 15:12:12 GMT -5
I missed the context of this, which I presume concersn Rae. Referring to the title of the thread. None of the above. Ah. Right. I forgot the post leadoff. A real embarrassment for me is seeing Belinda (in brun) on the CBC coverage. I can't STAND this airhead. Yech! Goodale is thinking Ignatief ain't going to get there. Looks like Dion. That's ok for me.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 15:21:22 GMT -5
Interestingly enough, if Dion wins, it will be over the candidtate (Ig) who was said to have the Winablility factor in his favour.
Dion was the joke candidate in Quebec, but everybody respects him.
As Rex Murphy says, he's a dark horse fascinating possiblitiy.
Apparently he's not a good gladhander and even anti-political.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 2, 2006 15:25:40 GMT -5
Habs goalie opts for Dion.
|
|
|
Post by princelh on Dec 2, 2006 20:05:14 GMT -5
Conservative Majority To Come. Harper will eat this lightweight for lunch and leave his bones to bleach in the sun.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 3, 2006 12:35:05 GMT -5
Can the Liberals sink any deeper? And to think that at one time, it was led by one of the greatest minds of our times. Surely you don't mean Trudeau, the guy who's only redeeming quality is that he's finally died? His legacy is the cause of just about every national unity we've had in my lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 3, 2006 20:57:28 GMT -5
Can the Liberals sink any deeper? And to think that at one time, it was led by one of the greatest minds of our times. Surely you don't mean Trudeau, the guy who's only redeeming quality is that he's finally died? His legacy is the cause of just about every national unity we've had in my lifetime. Couldn't agree less. Trudeau's rejection of separatism was built upon the fundamental truth that narrow nationalism was and is outdated, as it was and is. He was and still is ahead of his time, and unfortunately his country. Great, great man.
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Dec 3, 2006 20:58:44 GMT -5
Conservative Majority To Come. Harper will eat this lightweight for lunch and leave his bones to bleach in the sun. In what sense do you perceive Dion to be a lightweight?
|
|