Quote of the Day/Week/Month/Year

[Riverwind]

Environmentalism is supposed to require scientific study. What a few blind people do with it is irrelevant. It's not a religion.

We live in a world where senior NASA scientists and editors of NYT are calling for charges to be laid against people that dispute the consensus view of the science. Such demands are the demands of religious bigots - not scientists.

IOW, science is to environmentalism as astronomy is to astrology. In both cases, science is used to confer a cloak on respectability on what is nothing more than a religious belief system.

Given that context, do you have the same concerns about political leaders who believe in the environmentalism religion? If not you should because it is just as dangerous.

[Smallc]

It may be dangerous, but I refuse to accept the view that it's a religion.

[jbg]

It may be dangerous, but I refuse to accept the view that it's a religion.

At least AGW is a religion; it's a belief with little direct basis in fact, and non-believers are excoriated in fire and brimstone manner.

[Riverwind]

It may be dangerous, but I refuse to accept the view that it's a religion.

Well do you shudder when a politician says he feels more worried about the 'fate of the planet' than winning elections? If not why the contradiction?

[Smallc]

It's not the same thing, no matter how much you want to make it the same thing. I'm certainly not on the side of radical environmentalism (I see it as quite unimportant for the most part, actually), but I still see that it isn't religion.

[Riverwind]

It's not the same thing, no matter how much you want to make it the same thing. I'm certainly not on the side of radical environmentalism (I see it as quite unimportant for the most part, actually), but I still see that it isn't religion.

A "rose" by any other name is still a "rose".

The problem is you are not shuddering because of 'radical christian fundamentalism' - you are shuddering because of a rather mild statement of belief in a higher power. If that bothers you then much more radical statements of belief in environmentalism by other politicians should also make you make you shudder.

In fact, unlike followers of environmentalism, Harper has shown no interest in using the power of the state to force others to follow the tenets of his religion which should mean his beliefs are not a concern to you or any other voter.

Let me put to another way.

Harper was not expecting others to share his beliefs - he was just saying what is beliefs are and yet you have a problem with it and implied he was not fit to be a politician because of it.

Why is your opinion anything other than narrow minded bigotry directed at people who have a different religion than you?

You can't argue that you are seeking some impartial neutral ground because you appear to have no problem with politicians which use environmentalism as their metaphysical frame of reference despite the fact that environmentalism as a belief system no more rational than christianity as a belief system.

[Smallc]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. i strongly belive in God and I'm a Catholic. If I were in government I wouldn't want to talk about it, because people would assume that if I talk about it, it influences my decisions. I wouldn't want it to do that.

Also, some would disagree that his Evangelical Christian beliefs don't influence his policy. I think he's done a pretty good job of keeping secular...but something like this gives me pause.

In the Constitution, we have freedom of religion. Such talk has no place in governing this country.

[Riverwind]

If I were in government I wouldn't want to talk about it, because people would assume that if I talk about it, it influences my decisions. I wouldn't want it to do that.

Ok. Now I am confused. If someone has a religious belief system that influences their decisions then the only thing they need to do is not talk about it?

[tango]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. i strongly belive in God and I'm a Catholic. If I were in government I wouldn't want to talk about it, because people would assume that if I talk about it, it influences my decisions. I wouldn't want it to do that.

Also, some would disagree that his Evangelical Christian beliefs don't influence his policy. I think he's done a pretty good job of keeping secular...but something like this gives me pause.

In the Constitution, we have freedom of religion. Such talk has no place in governing this country.

I agree that our leaders should keep their religion out of their politics. However, the article cited doesn't bother me much from that perspective.

It does reveal something important about Harper, though: He doesn't give a damn what Canadians think of him, so long as he figures he's straight with his God. Since 'God' is whatever you choose to believe it to be ... basically he's answerable to no one.

His contempt for Canadians shows up clearly once again.

[Smallc]

Ok. Now I am confused. If someone has a religious belief system that influences their decisions then the only thing they need to do is not talk about it?

No, they need to not talk about it and be able to keep an open mind to good ideas whether or not they agree with their religious sensibilities.

[August1991]

Jason Kenney, Minister of Immigration:

“Look. We've always tried to demonstrate willingness to co-operate with the opposition parties. We did in the last budget. But we're not for sale to the highest bidder, least of all the NDP,” Mr. Kenney told Calgary radio show host Dave Rutherford today.

“It's a party of hard-core left-wing ideologues. … It's not like a moderate, centre-left party. These folks, they drink their own Kool-Aid right? So I don't think we can see a realistic arrangement with the NDP.”

G&M

[August1991]

Robert Fogel, 83, Nobel Laureate in economics, on why health care expenditure is increasing:

"The main factor is that the long-term income elasticity of the demand for healthcare is 1.6—for every 1 percent increase in a family’s income, the family wants to increase its expenditures on healthcare by 1.6 percent. This is not a new trend. Between 1875 and 1995, the share of family income spent on food, clothing, and shelter declined from 87 percent to just 30 percent, despite the fact that we eat more food, own more clothes, and have better and larger homes today than we had in 1875. All of this has been made possible by the growth in the productivity of traditional commodities. In the last quarter of the 19th century, it took 1,700 hours of labor to purchase the annual food supply for a family. Today it requires just 260 hours, and it is likely that by 2040, a family’s food supply will be purchased with about 160 hours of labor."

AEI

[Pliny]

"Competition is the greatest sin." J. D. Rockefeller

[August1991]

Former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, 70:

"But, you know, I've found out that … by the time you're 70 years of age, I don't know of anybody in Canada at 70 who hasn't made some mistake in life that he or she would rather do over again, and that includes me."

CBC

[August1991]

Robert Fowler, 65, ex-diplomat, decribes the al-Qaeda militants who captured him:

"They live in a world that I can't understand," said Fowler. "There was no fun, there was no love, there was no joy."

CBC

[August1991]

Silvio Berlusconi, 72, PM of Italy:

“I think Italians recognise themselves in me,” he told a meeting of his party’s youth wing. “I am one of them. I was poor, I am interested in the things that interest them. I love football, I smile, I love others and, above all else, beautiful women.”

Times of London

[August1991]

Stephen Harper, PM of Canada:

"Let me be clear about this, we need to win a majority in the next election campaign," Harper said. "If we do not win a majority, this country will have a Liberal government propped up by the socialists and the separatists."

"If they get together and force us to the polls, we have to teach them a lesson and get back there with a majority, and make sure their little coalition never happens," said Harper.

CBC

[jdobbin]

Stephen Harper, PM of Canada:CBC

Saying that Conservatives can't be Conservatives. What exactly would they do differently?

[August1991]

Saying that Conservatives can't be Conservatives. What exactly would they do differently?

???

Here is the complete quote:

"We need to win a majority in the next election campaign," he said. "Do not be fooled for a moment. If we do not get a majority, the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois will combine and they will form a government. They will deny this till they're blue in the face in an election campaign, but I guarantee you if we do not win a majority, this country will have a Liberal government propped up by the socialists and the separatists. That government may not last very long, but every day it's in office it will do long-term real-damage to this country."

Don Martin

[Note how both the CBC and the youtube poster edited Harper's remark.]

[August1991]

Michael Ignatieff, 62, Leader of the Opposition:

"Let me be clear: the Liberal Party would not agree to a coalition. In January we did not support a coalition, and we do not support a coalition today or tomorrow," Ignatieff told reporters at a news conference in Ottawa Friday morning.

CTV

[August1991]

US President Barack Obama:

"And as I have said over and over again, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – period. This plan will be paid for."

Boston Globe Edited September 13, 2009 by August1991

[BubberMiley]

Shows what a buffoon he is.

Shows what a buffoon he is.

[August1991]

Leo Gerard, 62, Canadian president of the 850,000 member American United Steelworkers union:

"It's our union's responsibility to defend our members and to do it in a way that is within the law and that's what we have done," USW International President Leo W. Gerard said. "We're not against trade. We want a level playing field."

"President Obama rightly rejected groundless retaliation threats and imposed relief based on the merits of this case." The President correctly explained today that "enforcing trade agreements is part and parcel of maintaining an open and free trading system," said Gerard.

Reuters

"We're looking at what's happening in paper sector, glass, cement, steel. That's our obligation to our members," said Leo Gerard, president of the 850,000-member United Steelworkers union that represents workers in numerous industries and brought the original case against Chinese tires.

"We've had the market flooded with oil [pipes]. It's no different in steel, in toys, or medicine or dog food," Mr. Gerard said.

WSJ

[August1991]

Jimmy Carter, 84, former US President:

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man," Carter said. "I live in the South, and I've seen the South come a long way, and I've seen the rest of the country that share the South's attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African Americans."

Carter continued, "And that racism inclination still exists. And I think it's bubbled up to the surface because of the belief among many white people, not just in the South but around the country, that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It's an abominable circumstance, and it grieves me and concerns me very deeply."

MSNBC

[Riverwind]

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man," Carter

I see no significant difference between the vitriol hurled at Obama and the virtiol hurled at Clinton. In fact I don't see much difference between the vitriol hurled at Bush from the left and the vitriol hurled at Obama.

The only racists in this are the people like Carter who seek to play the race card in order to attack opponents.