Wild Bill

At the risk of making another generalization, my good Dr. Dre, now you are sounding a bit elitist!

I don't disagree with you in the slightest, BH! I can understand why you don't like being lumped in with broad generalizations. I just don't see why you feel the need to point out some conservatives are guilty of the same sort of thinking. What difference does that make? Or perhaps you were just painting ME with a broad brush? Since I often disagree with many lefties on this board I must believe some sort of rightwing catechism? Maybe, one written by Angus?

No, there's no contradiction. My premise is that younger folks haven't yet had their brains develop good critical thinking. Sponges for facts without digesting and considering their validity. This has nothing to do with left or right philosophy, per se. The last half of my post is really a separate issue. There my point was the way the CANADIAN LEFT expresses itself! There have been many strong intellectuals worldwide on the left both today and down through history. The vitriol and outright hatred towards any who disagree seems to be strongest here in Canada. Look how Jaycee responded to my post! Not a word of debate. Just an attempt to make me out to look intolerant. No consideration at all towards the validity of my position. It's easier just to say I'm simply wrong! As if I come from the wrong church so why listen to me! There have been and are leftwing posters here on MLB who express this attitude even more strongly. I even detect a whiff of this stance in YOUR reply! I have found this attitude strongest among younger folks. This is culled strictly from experience and I couldn't care less if younger folks agree or disagree. Frankly, I expect them to disagree as an emotional reaction to not being considered intellectually fully mature. Again, that is Jaycee's reaction.

Exactly! It's not always a liberal/conservative thing. Especially when today both sides of the political spectrum tend to "spread the cowflops". I'll wager your values and philosophies are more well thought out and proven these days than when you were younger, regardless of ending up on the left or the right. There ARE valid arguments for leftwing values! It's just that the Left here in Canada seems never to express any. It's always emotional dreams or ad hominem attacks on whoever disagrees with them. To them politics is not a philosophy. It is a faith! They don't argue with those they consider heretics because their own beliefs are simply facts of the Universe! Heretics are to be ignored or despised, not debated. After all, heretics are evil! Only leftwing people care about their fellow man! Rightwing people are mean and spiteful! Just listen to ANY of the rhetoric from the left and my point is obvious! Better yet, spend a few days on "rubble.com". Make a post disagreeing with a "progressive" leftwing position and see what happens.

Bullying? I call it teasing. My brain went through the same stage, of course! I find it ironic in the extreme that you choose to simply make a flat statement to me, couched in a haughty and condescending manner, WHILE NOT SAYING A SINGLE WORD TOWARDS AGREEING WITH OR REBUTTING MY PREMISE! You must be young. You could not have picked a better way to prove what I had written than if you had planned it deliberately!

Angus, there are two trick questions I have sprung on many a university grad that have baffled them, to the great amusement of others in the group. I'll share them with you: "Did your mother have any kids that lived?" and this gem from my Nova Scotia relations: "Was it you or your brudder got killed in the war?" "Must've been me! My brudder didn't go to the war!" There's a few great silly math games that come from classic Abbott and Costello routines that are also sure-fire confusers for many a university grad. I think part of why so many of us like to pick on them is not at all envy, as our victims so like to childishly retaliate, but rather that it's so easy because it's not a result of education but of brain maturity. Adolescents don't like to recognize this fact but their brain is not totally developed while they are of university age. Research has proven that while they can absorb immense amounts of data very quickly it tends to be accepted without question. It is only in later life that they mature enough to be better at critical analysis - BS filtering, in other words. This factor in our brain development is why it is so vital that teachers be trained to keep biases out of their teaching. Human beings of such age will swallow almost everything as true and factual. When so many teachers today are leftwing in their philosophies it is not surprising that younger adults tend to the left, not becoming more central or rightwing until they get into their 30's. Anyone who doesn't believe my premise is welcome to take a nose count of any random group of people 18-26 years old that they meet. Better yet, if you are student at Queens try handing in a poli-sci or even economics paper that is not biased to the left and see what kind of mark you receive.

I guess you're right, Smallc! If I had thought about it, I would have realized that I myself am proof of that statement!

Most popular art is brainless. This attempt at satire is like gangsta rap - no real depth, just profanity and shocking images. Instead of true wit we see locker room humour. Supporters bray like teenagers because they will bray at anything that attacks someone on their "evil" list, like Harper. Folks might like to google up "spendthrift heirs". Once again, we are witnessing a social race to the bottom...

I lost faith in his judgement a while ago, MG, when he hooked up with Belinda Stronach. Look how well that worked out!

What are you suggesting? That after an election parties change their seats as government or opposition according to every change in the polls? Wouldn't all the MPs get tired of changing chairs every few days?

Cpl, as a navy brat myself (my father's last service was on the Bonaventure) I have often wondered why they stay! They have been treated VERY shabbily over the years, particularly by Liberal governments! As Kipling said: "Oh its Tommy this and Tommy that, And 'Chuck 'im out, the brute!' But it's 'Savior of his country!' When the guns begin to shoot!"

Interesting thread but I'm surprised everyone seems to think the election was based on such complicated thinking. Fellowtraveller seems closest, IMHO. The voters in France thought they could vote away their troubles! Change to a socialist leader who will refuse to impose painful measures and life will be wonderful! Sadly, they are going to get a reality check. They cannot ignore their debts or the consequences of not repaying them. The people who have been giving them the money don't care. They no longer trust France to repay the loans and will cut off the funding. How can a French election convince a German citizen to cheerfully accept higher taxes to keep the French living the high life? Like I said, for many European countries there is a very painful reality check coming.

Maybe so, but when Chretien as the Prime Minister of your country treats you so in such a petty and shabby manner its understandable why you would want nothing more to do with Canada.

Topaz, Conrad Black is and always has been a Classic Liberal! You really should read a book or two once in a while!

Toronto has gotten so self-centred and introverted these past years that it should really be considered its own PLANET!

Yeah, but GH, you make it sound like the fracking is liquifying hundreds of square miles! It would take the water from an entire Great Lake to cause such problems from 5 miles deep! Does pissing over the side of your fishing boat pollute the entire Pacific Ocean? Let's keep in the real world here!

No, ridding our gene pool of those stupid enough to think that anything they want they can have for free! Economies don't work by magic! Government money only comes from taxes on every citizen. To give free tuition means that either more taxes must be raised or some people must get less back from the goverment. This is simple math! What's more, violence breeds violence. For every Quebec rioter there is some pensioner trying to survive who will read about them in the paper and resent some young student who will likely eventually become a rich lawyer who wants to get his schooling for free on the pensioner's back! So you end up with resentment within other demographics of the population. If it goes on long enough we will eventually have everyone hating everyone else! Frankly, I resent these Quebec rioters and while you might think you just have to scold me and I'll change my mind you might find that I'm far from the only one who feels this way. To me, they seem like spoiled, greedy leeches! Hypocrites who make capitalists like Conrad Black look like Mother Theresa! They are really just looking for a fascist state that THEY control!

So this happening 5 miles underground will cause all this seismic activity? Seems a bit of a stretch to me.

Eventually we will all know if Mr. Khadr chose to be a murderous fanatic or was simply frightened into it by his father and the Taliban. Sooner or later Canada will let him out of jail. Probably sooner, since this is Canada, after all. When that happens, Khadr will be walking the streets. If he was acting under duress and now truly sorry, he will likely immediately find a job in a street mission. If he is just another barbarous fanatic, he will likely commit the same sort of acts that got him into trouble in the first place. If he does kill some more innocent people or Canadian soldiers - soldiers of his supposed country, Canada - then we can be sure that all his supporters will be immediately sorry about having supported him and will make large donations towards the families of those he has killed!

It's just human nature, GH. Especially among the young. They aren't thinking logically. They simply want what they want! They want free tuition and think all they need to do is practice a sufficiently high level of violence and it will be given to them. They are not thinking at all about where the money will come from. They don't think about higher taxes, or old folks not getting any increase in their pensions, or even if their province went bankrupt! It is the thinking of a child. Scream and holler and someone will give you a cookie! Baking those cookies or even growing wheat for flour is someone else's problem, not theirs. It might be a good time to cull the herd to improve the gene pool.

I'm rather surprised! I truly thought the first reply in this thread would have blamed it all on Steven Harper, possibly adding a bit of Mike Harris to the mix.

Exactly! Like many on the left, this nostalgia for the old PC party is just a hope that the CPC will become more "leftish", like the old PCs. We all have our dreams but the plain fact is that more people voted for the CPC than any other party. These people tend to be strong in their beliefs, just as the supporters for the other parties. If Harper allowed the CPC to become too much like the other parties he would lose his support base almost overnight. Wishing for that to happen is like wishing for an enemy to commit suicide.

From the trend back then, the PCs were only shrinking and Reform/Alliance were steadily growing. I remember how the PCs had no leader for a time, since no one wanted the job. Finally Joe Clark came out of retirement to lead the party, rather than see it die for a lack of leader. As I saw it, Reform/Alliance was just too impatient to wait a few elections for the PCs to finally die! They were very small in the Maritimes but their support was also very loyal. Sooner or later the Maritimers would give up on the PCs when they saw they would never again be strong in the rest of Canada but the Alliance wanted to get into power right away! They thought that if the two parties merged then they would end up with the combined total of supporters. Of course, that never happened and it was very naive to think that it would! There were many people who just didn't want to see a merger and they drifted away to the Liberals and the NDP. To get agreement on the merger took a lot of talk and a lot of promises, some broken, like that of Peter McKay and David Orchard. The merged parties didn't keep enough of each other's supporters to win the next election but they did gain somewhat to be a stronger opposition. Then we saw an eventual CPC minority government that eventually became the present majority. There was much butt kissing by the Alliance towards the PCs to get their support. The PCs were given power within the new party far beyond what their low numbers deserved. Now it appears that so many concessions have been given to the PC portion that the CPC looks very much the same as Mulroney's old Progressive Conservatives! So yes, Harper would have gotten those eastern votes but not as fast as he wanted. As for using Diefenbaker as a party hero, it's all part of mending the wounds from the parties having split and smoothing over the hard feelings after the merger. The reason why the old PCs get more than the Alliance members is that the Alliance members HAVE to stick with the CPC for lack of any other choice! The PCs could easily defect to the Liberals. They never were all that different anyway!

Once again people seem to be letting their wishes affect their judgement. The people who voted for the Wild Rose Party are not going to go away. They are not likely to just go back to the PCs. So the question really is, will support for the Wild Rose Party grow or shrink for the next election? The Wild Rose is a new and inexperienced party. Apparently, they made some grievous mistakes during their campaign and particularly with some of the responses of the leadership debate. One can only expect them to learn from their mistakes as time goes on. One should look at Ontario to see a similar situation. Dalton McGuinty did not truly win the last election. Rather, Tim Hudak and his PCs lost it! Just as John Duffy had lost it for the PCs the election before. As I often have posted, any salesman knows it is never enough to just knock your competition. You also have to give people a good reason to think that switching to YOU would be better! The Wild Rose failed to do that, despite widespread disappointment with the present Alberta PC party. It was the same in Ontario. McGuinty has very little respect with most people. It's just that Hudak is frankly, boring! He has never successfully presented his leadership and his party as any BETTER than the Ontario Liberals! The Alberta PCs have a golden opportunity to mend fences with the support that had drifted over to the Wild Rose Party. If they just sit on their collective asses and sigh with relief that they won the election they will only be sorry the next time.

Well, the short answer is that legally the Progressive Conservatives, the former Reform/Alliance and the present CPC were and all completely different animals! A party is not some kind of high school club. It is a legal entity, like a corporation. It has its own money and its own debts. Each is responsible to the law for only its own sins. The CPC is no more responsible for something the old PCs did than is the Liberal party or General Motors! So if the PCs gave a bribe to Schreiber the present CPC has no responsibility at all. It was not just a completely different group of people but a completely different organization. Would you blame the Boy Scouts for a sin committed by the Shriners?