Let the Woman Speak!

[jdobbin]

That was a mistake. Too many people at the podium, the debate was a mess. Even four is pushing it.

Might have been a mess but I think not inviting them would have been an insult to the many people who continued to support them.

Why not? Trudeau refused to debate anyone in three different elections. If your support is already that strong, why would you give your competition a venue to attack you?

I personally thought it was an insult not to debate.

[HisSelf]

Let May speak. It's unfair that only Harper's there to represent God-fearing, religious zealots.

Except for the environment, Harper and May seem to share values. I suspect Harper fears that the religious right may find in May someone they can respect more. Even Jack Layton has now decided that May should participate in the debates. What's Harper afraid of?

Ha ha. That's good. Zealotry. Nice observation.

[Stephen Best]

Even better, stop giving anyone federal money unless they get official party status.

You know, Bryan, you might want to read the Election Act one day, and review the legal cases that resulted in the present situation regarding forming political parties, and how they are publicly funded. The official party status canard was dealt with years ago. Do we really need more restrictions on political participation? I thought we wanted to encourage people to be politically involved.

[Stephen Best]

It is interesting that all the leaders have now agreed to not block May's participation in the televised leaders' debates. What is more interesting is that it was Dion who led the way.

[jdobbin]

Harper flip flops.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...me=election2008

[HisSelf]

It is interesting that all the leaders have now agreed to not block May's participation in the televised leaders' debates. What is more interesting is that it was Dion who led the way.

He he. Another MLW triumph ... where is that tongue-in-cheek smiley?

[normanchateau]

Harper flip flops.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...me=election2008

Once again today Taliban Steve decides to follow in the footsteps of Taliban Jack.

[M.Dancer]

Harper flip flops.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...me=election2008

You mean harper and layton flip flops, which is to say, they all flip flopped.

Harper IMO has the most to gain in this, even with May subtly shilling for Dion. The likely split amongst the left and tree hugging classes bewteen the Liberals, NDP and Greens will allow harper to ride comfortable up the middle.

May has the most to lose. If she comes off as amateurish or shrill, apocalyptic or flaky, she will likely lose a % point here or there. She is likely to lose % points anyway as the last election, many disgruntled Liberals voted Green out of protest. They will probably either go back to Dion or swith to the conservatives.

[Topaz]

Harper flip flops.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...me=election2008

I just heard this on C-pac too. I don't know what they are scared of and it will be good for the voters to hear the debates and her point of view compared to theirs, especially Harper. I'm also wondering if Harper said yes because he knows maybe the networks will still say no and then Layton and Harper won't look bad.

[jdobbin]

Watch for the next group to start whining that they need to be included too. Anyone want to see all twenty five party leaders debate at the same time?

Maybe she'll burst into tears, fall to her knees, and beg God to strike Stephen Harper dead for not dedicating the entire budget to fighting CO2 emissions.

Well, it looks like it is Harper who buckled to the pressure today.

[normanchateau]

Well, it looks like it is Harper who buckled to the pressure today.

And went from being a "leader" to a follower.

[White Doors]

Let May speak. It's unfair that only Harper's there to represent God-fearing, religious zealots.

Except for the environment, Harper and May seem to share values. I suspect Harper fears that the religious right may find in May someone they can respect more. Even Jack Layton has now decided that May should participate in the debates. What's Harper afraid of?

May is not a memeber of the religious right, she is a member of the religious left.

Remember that Canadian 'Christian' that the Americans and Bristish rescued in Iraq?

The terrorists killed his compatriot from Britain (beheaded him in the next room) and after he was rescued he blamed his rescuers for being kidnapped int he first place? Well that is the religious left and while May may (no pun intended) not be that far left, that is her 'side'.

[Stephen Best]

May is not a memeber of the religious right, she is a member of the religious left.

Remember that Canadian 'Christian' that the Americans and Bristish rescued in Iraq?

The terrorists killed his compatriot from Britain (beheaded him in the next room) and after he was rescued he blamed his rescuers for being kidnapped int he first place? Well that is the religious left and while May may (no pun intended) not be that far left, that is her 'side'.

White Doors, are you condemning or congratulating the person of the "religious left" you're writing about above? It's not clear from your post.

[M.Dancer]

May is not a memeber of the religious right, she is a member of the religious left.

Remember that Canadian 'Christian' that the Americans and Bristish rescued in Iraq?

The terrorists killed his compatriot from Britain (beheaded him in the next room) and after he was rescued he blamed his rescuers for being kidnapped int he first place? Well that is the religious left and while May may (no pun intended) not be that far left, that is her 'side'.

That person is best described as part of the looney left, the Christian part is irrelevant.

[White Doors]

White Doors, are you condemning or congratulating the person of the "religious left" you're writing about above? It's not clear from your post.

neither.

[White Doors]

That person is best described as part of the looney left, the Christian part is irrelevant.

Alright, only if you think the Christian part is irrelevant for the religious right as well though.

[M.Dancer]

Alright, only if you think the Christian part is irrelevant for the religious right as well though.

I think it is situational. If someone wants to say, cut funding for schools that are teaching evolution, then the Christian part is applicable. But if someone wants to back out of Kyoto, then no....

Had the looney left person forgave his kidnappers and thanked his deliverers....then the Christian part holds....

[Argus]

In the 1988 federal election, before Deb Grey won her 1989 by-election, the Reform Party had 2.1% of the national vote, half what the Greens, who also have their first MP, enjoy now.

Reform was only running in western seats, and at least it actually won an election, unlike the Greens.

It wasn't until Reform was allowed into the debate in 1993 that their percent of the national vote increased.

Reform popularity was rising strongly in the years after Deb Grey was elected, and the Reform party began to push east and west, wit Manning giving speeches throghout Ontairo. In the following election it ran candidates throughout the country.

So Reform--a Western regional party--was allowed to debate with 1 MP and 2.1% of the national vote. The Greens--a national party--with 1 MP and 4.5% of the national vote are not permitted. Just the sort of thing that the Right would deem fair, don't you think?

Reform had run second in many of the ridings it had contested, and was poised for major breakthroughs with greatly increased popularity. I don't see much likelihood the Greens are going to win any seats, now or ever. Most of it's "popularity" is among young people who rarely vote anyway. If the Greens actually came second ANYWHERE that would be regarded as a major victory.

[Argus]

That was a mistake. Too many people at the podium, the debate was a mess. Even four is pushing it.

That might be what Dion is after. The more people there, the less he's going to have to talk. If he can get lost in the crowd, so much the better for him.

[Argus]

Might have been a mess but I think not inviting them would have been an insult to the many people who continued to support them.

I don't have a problem with that at all.

[Bryan]

That might be what Dion is after. The more people there, the less he's going to have to talk. If he can get lost in the crowd, so much the better for him.

That might actually be true.

[Wild Bill]

I don't have a problem with that at all.

Argus, this point has been raised in a number of threads. Someone cries "Hey, the Greens deserve this or that because they have an MP!"

Someone else points out that the MP in question was never elected as a Green but merely switched parties.

Then there's a deafening silence.

Have you seen anything by these Green supporters that answers the fact that they still haven't ELECTED an MP?

I haven't.

[Smallc]

Argus, this point has been raised in a number of threads. Someone cries "Hey, the Greens deserve this or that because they have an MP!"

Someone else points out that the MP in question was never elected as a Green but merely switched parties.

Then there's a deafening silence.

Have you seen anything by these Green supporters that answers the fact that they still haven't ELECTED an MP?

I haven't.

When the Bloc was first included, it hadn't won a seat under its own banner either. But irregardless, if we are giving the Greens money, we should have the right to hear them. Public financing really changes the whole dynamic.

Edited September 11, 2008 by Smallc

[Stephen Best]

Argus, this point has been raised in a number of threads. Someone cries "Hey, the Greens deserve this or that because they have an MP!"

Someone else points out that the MP in question was never elected as a Green but merely switched parties.

Then there's a deafening silence.

Have you seen anything by these Green supporters that answers the fact that they still haven't ELECTED an MP?

I haven't.

Actually, Wild Bill, I did respond as did others, making the point that how the Greens acquired an MP is irrelevant. It would seem that Dion, Harper, Layton, Duceppe, and the broadcast consortium agree with me. Their agreement, which is the only one that matters, decides the issue. You may not agree with their decision, but that's life.

[Stephen Best]

I don't have a problem with that at all.

Others hold the view that in a democratic society respecting differing political views and making them available to the voter for consideration is reasonable. Are you suggesting that because you are comfortable being contemptuous of others, we should all be?