Hyperbole among Canadians?

[Num13ers]

I've noticed a lot of Canadians (especially supporters of the NDP) say things such as 'Harper is a fascist', 'Harper should resign', 'Harper wants to destroy our schools', 'Harper is just like Bush', 'Harper wants to take away our freedoms', etc.

When I hear this, I'm reminded of all the stupid Americans that think Obama is the worst president in history. It's just asinine.

Harper is a fairly moderate fellow, as is the Conservative party. Ignatieff is a fairly moderate fellow as well, as is the Liberal party. One sits centre-right, the other sits centre-left. Some Canadians are acting as if Harper is some sort of right-wing populist like the Republicans south of the border. Harper and Obama aren't very different ideologically.

Can everyone just chill out please?

[bush_cheney2004]

When I hear this, I'm reminded of all the stupid Americans that think Obama is the worst president in history. It's just asinine.

...and when I read this, I am reminded that it is seemingly impossible for some Canadians to communicate a domestic political concept without reference to US politics.

...Some Canadians are acting as if Harper is some sort of right-wing populist like the Republicans south of the border. Harper and Obama aren't very different ideologically.

Ironic, since you have committed the identical hyperbolic error vis-a-vis "Republicans". PM Harper is not "south of the border", and he is not an "Obama" by any measure:

Obama wants to perfect his nation, Harper would rather his didn’t exist

....And so, as the skies grey and national institutions — health care, the cbc, equalization, etc. — are shredded, privatized, or not considered, the verdict is in: the disunion of our union trumps the occasional positive provincial move. As Canadians watch the US drama unfold, it is less the absence of an Obama-like figure that forestalls our own appetite for an election, and more that we’ve become voyeurs rather than voyageurs, grabbing what we can while we can, and looking on as the idea of national purpose is chucked into the ashcan of history. In this era of provincial sovereignty and greed, images of Canada are hard to conjure, and you cannot vote for that which exists in name only.

http://www.walrusmagazine.com/articles/2008.06-sightings-obama-harper-comparison-ken-alexander/2/

[charter.rights]

I've noticed a lot of Canadians (especially supporters of the NDP) say things such as 'Harper is a fascist', 'Harper should resign', 'Harper wants to destroy our schools', 'Harper is just like Bush', 'Harper wants to take away our freedoms', etc.

When I hear this, I'm reminded of all the stupid Americans that think Obama is the worst president in history. It's just asinine.

Harper is a fairly moderate fellow, as is the Conservative party. Ignatieff is a fairly moderate fellow as well, as is the Liberal party. One sits centre-right, the other sits centre-left. Some Canadians are acting as if Harper is some sort of right-wing populist like the Republicans south of the border. Harper and Obama aren't very different ideologically.

Can everyone just chill out please?

Harper is like the gate keeper at a harness race. The truck moves around the track with the horse itching to run and the gatekeeper waits and waits before he lets them out.

Harper isn't centrist. He is a Reformer, sitting on the extreme right of moderate conservatives. We all know that he has stifled his ministers because they would show exactly how far right the Conservatives really are. We all know by his actions - proroguing parliament, changing law without parliamentary consent, ignoring human rights and parliamentary protocol etc that he is not what he appears. He only attempts to make himself appear moderate in order to try steal his majority from the centre.

He thought he had it made. But Canadians are not fooled. He has little more support than the Liberals and they don't have any leadership that would be viable in an election.

The NDP on the other hand remind me of the chihuahua that barks at the feet of the two clydesdales doing all the work. While Jack Layton has made some contribution to the party, the days of an Ed Broadbent type leading the party to sensibility are gone.

Canadian politics in general is a dog's breakfast, and every election it is just a regurgitation of the same old puke. The Conservatives are trying to reinvent the Family Compact and are not better than the Victorians of old who will try tot usurp the power of parliament and put it into their pockets.

[Num13ers]

See this is the hyperbole I was talking about. What you're saying is ridiculous. Human rights, really? Come on...

The Liberal party and the Conservative party are both quite moderate.

Edited August 14, 2010 by Num13ers

[charter.rights]

See this is the hyperbole I was talking about. What you're saying is ridiculous. Human rights, really? Come on...

The Liberal party and the Conservative party are both quite moderate.

Omar Khadr. The Supreme Court has stated that the Conservatives violated his rights.

It isn't hyperbole. It is fact.

Edited August 14, 2010 by charter.rights

[Alta4ever]

Omar Khadr. The Supreme Court has stated that the Conservatives violated his rights.

It isn't hyperbole. It is fact.

Bull. I think you need to be reminded who was in charge when Khadr was captured and sent to gitmo.

[charter.rights]

Bull. I think you need to be reminded who was in charge when Khadr was captured and sent to gitmo.

It is irrelevent. The Supreme Court rule they violated his rights by not intervening. Harper is guilty of ignoring Khadr's Charter Rights. That is a fact.

[Argus]

It is irrelevent. The Supreme Court rule they violated his rights by not intervening.

The judges on the supreme court make up law as they go along in pursuit of their own political agendas. I could not possibly care less what they think or say about anything. Hopefully, Harper will get to replace a few more with real judges before he leaves. Unfortunately, the worst of them were appointed by Martin - totally inexperienced political activists decades from retirement.

[kimmy]

...and when I read this, I am reminded that it is seemingly impossible for some Canadians to communicate a domestic political concept without reference to US politics.

The "Harper = Bush" stuff is a prime example of the sort of hype that the original poster refers to. Or now "Harper = Tea Party", as we discussed earlier this week.

Obama wants to perfect his nation, Harper would rather his didn’t exist

....And so, as the skies grey and national institutions — health care, the cbc, equalization, etc. — are shredded, privatized, or not considered, the verdict is in: the disunion of our union trumps the occasional positive provincial move. As Canadians watch the US drama unfold, it is less the absence of an Obama-like figure that forestalls our own appetite for an election, and more that we’ve become voyeurs rather than voyageurs, grabbing what we can while we can, and looking on as the idea of national purpose is chucked into the ashcan of history. In this era of provincial sovereignty and greed, images of Canada are hard to conjure, and you cannot vote for that which exists in name only.

What a dumb premise. The idea that Harper is "dismantling" Canada is as dumb as the idea that Obama is "perfecting" the USA. Both are neither "perfecting" nor "dismantling" their countries, merely making political and ideological decisions that some will approve of and some will disapprove of, and in regard to a country there are none who can say what "perfect" is or how it might be achieved.

Still, it illustrates your point, yet again, that many Canadians seem incapable of discussing politics without comparison to politics in the United States, and "where is OUR Obama?" is just the flip side of "Harper = Bush".

-k

[Alta4ever]

It is irrelevent. The Supreme Court rule they violated his rights by not intervening. Harper is guilty of ignoring Khadr's Charter Rights. That is a fact.

If its wrong now it was wrong then. Or are you so devoid of morality it takes a supreme court ruling to decide for you what your morality and ethics are.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Still, it illustrates your point, yet again, that many Canadians seem incapable of discussing politics without comparison to politics in the United States, and "where is OUR Obama?" is just the flip side of "Harper = Bush".

Agreed...the exact same coin. The "hyperbole" extends to the odd polled circumstance of Canadians giving up their domestic ballot just for a chance to vote for Obama in 2008. But it's not hyperbole in Canada...it is standard procedure.

[BubberMiley]

It's comforting to know that some Americans are completely obsessed with us though. Somebody's got to read the Walrus.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's comforting to know that some Americans are completely obsessed with us though. Somebody's got to read the Walrus.

Yea...weird..huh? What if an entire nation did that sort of thing? LOL!

[Argus]

Still, it illustrates your point, yet again, that many Canadians seem incapable of discussing politics without comparison to politics in the United States, and "where is OUR Obama?" is just the flip side of "Harper = Bush".

It's not "Canadians". It's the Left, to whom the US is the Great Satan. Thus comparing anyone with even mildly conservative viewpoints to Bush or Reagan, or some other deeply evil being is what serves for political rhetoric from people with no even moderately sane ideas to push.

And I don't think I want an Obama, given the nearly complete failure of Obama to accomplish anything of value while continuing the US's slow, graceless slide into national bankruptcy.

[charter.rights]

If its wrong now it was wrong then. Or are you so devoid of morality it takes a supreme court ruling to decide for you what your morality and ethics are.

Your argument is still....irrelevent....

No one knew at the time when Khadr was "arrested" that he was being sent away to be tortured. No one knew at Guantanamo that he would be tortured and held against his rights.

BUT! We found out all that after Harper became Prime Minister. He was asked by Khadr and his lawyers and family to do something. He did nothing. He knew he was being tortured and still he did nothing. The the case was taken to the federal court accusing Harper and his government of abandoning Khadr and not protecting him according to the Charter. The Federal Court ruled Harper couldn't do that and order him to do something to resolve his detention. Khadr was still being tortured and held without charge. Harper appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The SCoC ruled that the Federal Court was correct and told to do something but told him he didn't have to bring him home. Khadr was still being tortured and held unjustly.

Harper violated Khadr's rights, and no doubt once this is all over there will be a big law suit coming our way. That is only one example where Harper has violated a Canadian citizen's right. It is NOT hyperbole. It is fact. 100% true.

[PIK]

People mention how harper does not let his people talk, I remember how chretien would let his people say and promise whatever they wanted with him knowing he was not going to come thru. And he knew how dumb people are. Tell people stuff just to make them feel good and you have them eating out of your hand.And to all the liberals that keep calling harper a liar, ever hear about the ''red book''

Edited August 14, 2010 by PIK

[Alta4ever]

Harper violated Khadr's rights, and no doubt once this is all over there will be a big law suit coming our way. That is only one example where Harper has violated a Canadian citizen's right. It is NOT hyperbole. It is fact. 100% true.

You must like eating sand because your head is buried in it. So is the a persons actions illegal at the time of the alleged crime or does it become illegal after judgement of guilt is rendered? Khadr was first imprisoned under a liberal government, they did nothing to bring him back to Canada. The Harper government continued the policy set out by the previous liberal government. So in fact it was the GOVERNMENT OF CANADA not a single politician. So yes you are spouting hyperbole as fact because you can't bring yourself to pull your head out of your ass.

[charter.rights]

You must like eating sand because your head is buried in it. So is the a persons actions illegal at the time of the alleged crime or does it become illegal after judgement of guilt is rendered? Khadr was first imprisoned under a liberal government, they did nothing to bring him back to Canada. The Harper government continued the policy set out by the previous liberal government. So in fact it was the GOVERNMENT OF CANADA not a single politician. So yes you are spouting hyperbole as fact because you can't bring yourself to pull your head out of your ass.

Dumb is your middle name.

The TORTURE happened during Harper's government. Harper was well aware of the TORTURE and let it go on anyway.

The Supreme Court of Canada said that Harper violated Khadr's rights. That is a fact.

All your other rhetoric is irrelevent. Get it?

[Alta4ever]

Dumb is your middle name.

The TORTURE happened during Harper's government. Harper was well aware of the TORTURE and let it go on anyway.

The Supreme Court of Canada said that Harper violated Khadr's rights. That is a fact.

All your other rhetoric is irrelevent. Get it?

So he was only interrogated after January 2006? Why in the desision does it say

In 2004, a DFAIT official interviewed K again, with knowledge that he had been subjected by U.S. authorities to a sleep deprivation technique, known as the “frequent flyer program”, to make him less resistant to interrogation.

Didn't know Harper was the Prime Minister in 2004. Oh wait he wasn't Dumb is you middle name and you wear it so well!

n February and September 2003, agents from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (“CSIS”) and the Foreign Intelligence Division of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (“DFAIT”) questioned Mr. Khadr on matters connected to the charges pending against him and shared the product of these interviews with U.S. authorities.

Remind me who formed the government in 2003?

The appeal is allowed in part. Mr. Khadr’s application for judicial review is allowed in part. This Court declares that through the conduct of Canadian officials in the course of interrogations in 2003-2004, as established on the evidence before us, Canada actively participated in a process contrary to Canada’s international human rights obligations and contributed to Mr. Khadr’s ongoing detention so as to deprive him of his right to liberty and security of the person guaranteed by s. 7 of the Charter, contrary to the principles of fundamental justice. Costs are awarded to Mr. Khadr.

So the actions of the government officials in 2003-2004 are the subject and basis of the supreme court findings, might I remind you again who formed the government at that time?

So wait a minute what did I tell you earlier in the thread it was the actions of the Government of Canada not a single politician. You might want to read the supreme court judgement before you start talking about what is in it.

http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2010/2010scc3/2010scc3.html

[scribblet]

See this is the hyperbole I was talking about. What you're saying is ridiculous. Human rights, really? Come on...

The Liberal party and the Conservative party are both quite moderate.

It's all fear mongering, the sky is falling crap they've been spouting for years which has never materialized.

[lukin]

Alta4ever has sure made charter.rights look pretty foolish in this thread.

[capricorn]

We found out all that after Harper became Prime Minister. He was asked by Khadr and his lawyers and family to do something. He did nothing. He knew he was being tortured and still he did nothing.

How the hell would you know Harper did nothing. What do you expect anyway? A government that spoon feeds you every single action it takes on every single matter? I know it's too much to ask, but why don't you get real.

Harper violated Khadr's rights,

Good. I hope he did it in my name.

and no doubt once this is all over there will be a big law suit coming our way.

This isn't exactly breaking news for most Canadians. If that's the cost of keeping Omar Khadr out of my face and away from Canada, the payoff will be worth it. Goodness knows our governments have squandered money on useless things. If he never gets free to spend the cash extorted from Canadians, at least we'd be getting value for money with a measurable result.

[capricorn]

The Supreme Court of Canada said that Harper violated Khadr's rights.

The Supreme Court thinks everybody's rights have been violated.

[charter.rights]

How the hell would you know Harper did nothing.

The Federal Court found that Harper did nothing.

Good. I hope he did it in my name.

See that wasn't hard. Harper violated Khadr's rights. Thanks for agreeing with me that it is not hyperbole.

This isn't exactly breaking news for most Canadians. If that's the cost of keeping Omar Khadr out of my face and away from Canada, the payoff will be worth it. Goodness knows our governments have squandered money on useless things. If he never gets free to spend the cash extorted from Canadians, at least we'd be getting value for money with a measurable result.

Khadr is a Canadian citizen. He makes a better one than your do.

Edited August 15, 2010 by charter.rights

[Visionseeker]

Bull. I think you need to be reminded who was in charge when Khadr was captured and sent to gitmo.

Ah yes, the old canard "hey, the Liberals didn't fix it, why should [we] the Conservatives?"

My kids use that logic all the time. They’re 6, 5 and 2 years old. As their intellectual equal, perhaps you'd like to come over for a play date sometime?