We don't have to abandon our beliefs just because

maplesyrup · November 8, 2004

We don't have to abandon our beliefs just because a few million extra God-fearing gay-haters voted for Bush

This is a strange conclusion, considering that most of the world is at odds with the Bush administration. Since the bully has little credibility in world capitals, it's hard to imagine how the bully's pandering sidekick would have much either.
For all his alleged "realism," Gotlieb harbours the fanciful notion that we have the "potential for influencing the world's greatest power."

The Bush administration refuses to be influenced. As Bush put it in his first post-election press conference: "I'll reach out to everyone who shares our goals." That's as far as his reach goes; to those already on his side. As he's pointed out before, you're either with him or against him.

Even those who are clearly "with him" have been unable to influence him.

Take British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush's chief foreign ally, who apparently felt he could win the president's ear, thereby allowing Britain to help shape events in Iraq and also to push Washington to focus on the Israeli-Palestinian problem. Both goals proved elusive. Blair's cozying up to Bush won him nothing more than the nickname "Poodle."

Gotlieb points to Canada's "reality based" approach during the World War II. But he leaves out a key difference: We were working towards a mutual goal in World War II — once Washington finally entered the war, that is.

We didn't have to compromise our values or principles to work with FDR, and other allies, in fighting the Nazis.

To pretend nothing has changed, that our values and interests are aligned in the same way as they were during World War II, ignores the fact that the U.S. under Bush has behaved in a way that most Canadians find unpalatable, if not downright repugnant.

Canadians are stuck with the re-election of George W. That's reality. But it's also reality that we're a separate country.

And we don't have to abandon what we believe in just because clever Republican strategists managed to get a few million extra God-fearing, gay-hating, anti-abortionists to the polls.

My concern about this is that PM Martin is one of these folks who is prepared to lead us down the garden path. Scary stuff indeed.

maplesyrup · November 10, 2004

Is Ned Flanders keeping George Bush in the White House?

Interestin' comments by the NDP spokesperson.

ticker · November 10, 2004

We don't have to abandon our beliefs just because a few million extra God-fearing gay-haters voted for Bush]

But in Canada due to political correctness & Ontario/Quebec setting the agenda it is ok to muzzle the Canadians that believe in the tradition definition of marriage and call them extremists for not saying ok do what ever you want to do to traditional values.

It was woman, blacks and Hispanics standing up for their beliefs; not the evil white male Anglo Saxon trying to suppress the gays.

The US gets criticized for being outspoken but at least they stand up for their beliefs instead of being mowed over in the name of political correctness like bunch of ostridges afraid to challenge the liberal elite system.

Slavik44 · November 10, 2004

Is Ned Flanders keeping George Bush in the White House?
Interestin' comments by the NDP spokesperson.

so a 50/50 split with 1 undecided, I am betting on Springfield Illinois.

August1991 · November 10, 2004

What is McQuaig saying? Where did Bush get his votes?

CNN Voter Polls (13,660 respondents) (This is not one of those quickie exit polls. This is a detailed survey that paints an extraordinary portrait of both the US and its voters.)

Bush won a majority among White women (55% to Kerry's 44%) and a majority of Catholic voters (52% to Kerry's 47%).

Fully 44.5% of Bush voters self described themselves as either "Liberal" or "Moderate".

Only 22% of voters described "moral values" as the most important issue. Only 16% of voters said that abortion should be "always illegal". 60% of voters said that gays should be allowed to marry or form a civil union. Of those opposed to any legal recognition for gays, 29% voted for Kerry. Bush received 23% of the votes of self-described gays/lesbians/bisexuals.

(I don't know what McQuaig is on to in her article. She can't paint Bush voters nor even US voters the way she does. She is engaging in based anti-Americanism.)

The most fascinating stat is whether the voter is better off now than four years ago. 32% said they were better off now, Bush got 80% of their votes. Another 39% said they were about the same, Bush got half their votes. 28% described themselves as worse off and Bush got 20% of their votes.

Bush won because more Americans are better off than worse off.

Check the stats out, MS. The link is above and it makes for interesting reading.

maplesyrup · November 10, 2004

The reality is that Canada and the US are diverging more and more every day. We have different values.

The problem with Bush's re-election is the same as when Reagan was elected. It brings all the kooks out into the open because now they feel they have a right to spew their venom. Good examples are the social conservative that was on Don Newman's show today, and providing war mongers like David Frum airtime.

It is not anti-US, it is just pro-Canadian. Times have changed, and the US needs to start paying attention to the changing world, and to what is going outside its borders.

ticker · November 10, 2004

The reality is that Canada and the US are diverging more and more every day. We have different values.
The problem with Bush's re-election is the same as when Reagan was elected. It brings all the kooks out into the open because now they feel they have a right to spew their venom. Good examples are the social conservative that was on Don Newman's show today, and providing war mongers like David Frum airtime.

It is not anti-US, it is just pro-Canadian. Times have changed, and the US needs to start paying attention to the changing world, and to what is going outside its borders.

The reality is that Canada and the US are diverging more and more every day. We have been brainwashed by different values.

The problem with Chretien's re-election was the same as when Trudeau was elected. It brings all the socialist kooks out into the open because now they feel they have a right to spew their pie in the sky Trudeaumania venom.

maplesyrup · November 10, 2004

Social democrats are what Canada is all about. Time to get used to it. The difference between social democrats and social conservatives is that social democrats are tolerant of our differences, and social conservatives are not. No one is trying to tell social conservatives what to do, but social conservatives want to tell others what to do. Sorry but that is not going to wash.

ticker · November 10, 2004

It is just an unbalanced political system with ontario/quebec calling the shots while the US is more balanced. Quebec has a differerent view on how to run the country with the lefties and Ontario has been watered down but prepared to go along as long as they still get to control the political agenda.

The bottom line is have provinces are generally conservatives and the have nots lean toward the NDP/liberals. Ontario has been remolded by trudeau with loading the GTA with immigrants that will vote liberal no matter what the policy. The western have not provinces are getting tired of the Ontario/Quebec liberal regime and prepared to vote in more conservatives.

takeanumber · November 10, 2004

The good news is that the election made Canadians realize how lucky we are to have a country like Canada.

I think it also brings our CONservative party sharper into contrast with Canadian values.

The US election result gives the Liberals a huge boost.

CONservative 'moral' values?

UnCanadian.

caesar · November 10, 2004

The bottom line is have provinces are generally conservatives and the have nots lean toward the NDP/liberals. Ontario has been remolded by trudeau with loading the GTA with immigrants that will vote liberal no matter what the policy. The western have not provinces are getting tired of the Ontario/Quebec liberal regime and prepared to vote in more conservatives.

What a bunch of unsubstantiated nonsense. At the moment; only Alberta and Ontario are "have" provinces; and only Alberta in conservative. BC is at this time; still a have not province and from the sounds of the polls and G Campbells unpopularity ( he may call his party liberals but they ARE conservatives) these right wingers will be going down the drain come May 11 th.

August1991 · November 10, 2004

In some kind of weird anti-American, pro-English Canadian nationalism, McQuaig and others are trying to paint the US as a country of radical, born again, dolts.

It's not.

Fascinating maps of the US electorate

----

I am also absolutely astonished to read people describing Paul Martin, (yes Paul Martin the CSL guy who cut government spending), as Left.

More pertinently, Canadians tend to vote regionally (ie. BQ) and the Alliance/Conservatives are perceived as being from the West.

On a separate thread, there is a discussion of "who speaks for Canada". Can someone please tell me the difference between Canada and Ontario?

Bakunin · November 10, 2004

before the election, we where anti-bush, but after the election, we see that bush was not an accident, and its quite shocking.

Now its quite clear, even more when you watch the election map. The midwest is pretty rich in redneck, anti-gay, and gun lovers.....

By hating bush, we hate the red americans on the map, and vice verca, they hate us as well.

ticker · November 10, 2004

Ceaser Ontario was a more conservative province like in the days of Bill Davis but things have changed. And I know BC on a provincial level is still trying to decide if they like the cutbacks to fix the economy or put the NDP back in power to ruin the economy. But at the Federal level BC voted in more Liberals last election then they did during trudeau time

ticker · November 10, 2004

It is all a matter of degree. When Ontario was the only have province equalization was not a slush fund, as Ontario would not put up with being treated that way. The fiberals are now telling Newfoundland the are not allowed to get richer then Ontario from their offshore oil reserves Alberta received that memo in 1980 from your buddy trudeau.

takeanumber · November 10, 2004

They're still UnCanadian values -- and we need to be on guard from Red State encroachment.

They're trying to get us through our own political parties, especially through the Cons.

Cartman · November 10, 2004

I am also absolutely astonished to read people describing Paul Martin, (yes Paul Martin the CSL guy who cut government spending), as Left.

Wow...I thought I was the only one on this forum who thought this.

The average US citizen is doing alright so why mess with things? Remember that he is also a war president and rarely does a Western nation oust a sitting war prez. Kerry also offered no real alternative agenda. Democrats got too greedy.

There does seem to be a divide though and I think it is the same one that exists here in Canada though more pronounced (rural/urban). The hearland of America helped push the Republicans slightly over the top (ECV) and slightly higher in the overall vote.

Bakunin · November 10, 2004

That could be caused by the immigration too, state with high lvl of immigration are blue.

maybe its my imagination but when we compare, the midwest wich naturally gets less immigration, looks like people with another mentality.

A more racist, sexist, anti-gay, pro-tradition, pro-war, gun lover, god lover the fanatic way, disconnected from reality kind of society.

maplesyrup · November 10, 2004

I thought separatists loved the US people but hated the rest of Canada - what happened?

Maybe Canada's not so bad after all, eh! :lol:

ticker · November 10, 2004

Kerry also offered no real alternative agenda. Democrats got too greedy.

Kerry has been watching too much Canadian politics. He figured if the liberals could push through gay marriage in Canada that he could do the same. Kerry got a rude awakening when he saw Americans still have the backbone to stand up for their beliefs in traditional values and not let the political social elites bad mouth them into hiding.

maplesyrup · November 10, 2004

Good ole USA.

HIGH SCHOOL ATTACK: KERRY TAUNTS TIED TO FIGHT

Bakunin · November 10, 2004

I thought separatists loved the US people but hated the rest of Canada - what happened?
Maybe Canada's not so bad after all, eh!

the blue states sill rulez !!!!

Usa is all about 2 extreme.

There is the modern democratic usa in blue and the old style (racist/slave owners style/redneck) wich include bush. it all start with the secession war.... canada should have helped the blue states and maybe we would be living in the united states of canada and the south would have their country, the rednecks states of america, and alberta could join them ;P )

Black Dog · November 10, 2004

But in Canada due to political correctness & Ontario/Quebec setting the agenda it is ok to muzzle the Canadians that believe in the tradition definition of marriage and call them extremists for not saying ok do what ever you want to do to traditional values.

We're still waiting for an answer to the question of how gay marriage will have any afect on indiiduals' traditional values.

The US gets criticized for being outspoken but at least they stand up for their beliefs instead of being mowed over in the name of political correctness like bunch of ostridges afraid to challenge the liberal elite system.

Oh give me a break. The Southern segregationists in the '60s "stood up for their beliefs" in the face of what was seen as an attack on traditional values. They were the wrong beliefs to defend, just as the traditional values of exclusion and division are wrong today.

t is just an unbalanced political system with ontario/quebec calling the shots while the US is more balanced. Quebec has a differerent view on how to run the country with the lefties and Ontario has been watered down but prepared to go along as long as they still get to control the political agenda.

How can a poltical system with a mere two parties of questionable distiction be considered balanced? Especially when that system has built in checks to limit the power of the people?

The bottom line is have provinces are generally conservatives and the have nots lean toward the NDP/liberals. Ontario has been remolded by trudeau with loading the GTA with immigrants that will vote liberal no matter what the policy. The western have not provinces are getting tired of the Ontario/Quebec liberal regime and prepared to vote in more conservatives.

Which doesn't explain why fewer westerners voted Conservative in the last election than in the prior one. :rolleyes:

Black Dog · November 10, 2004

In some kind of weird anti-American, pro-English Canadian nationalism, McQuaig and others are trying to paint the US as a country of radical, born again, dolts.

Whle your information on the actual make up of the U.S. electorate is interesting, it's largey beside the point: the fact is, the U.S. electorate voted Bush in, complete with his anti-gay, anti-abortion, theoconservative "values", neoconservative voodoo economic policies and aggressive militaristic foreign policy.

The question McQuaig is addressing is how does Canada now address the issue of our relationship with a U.S government whose stance on many issues is quite different from those of this country's electorate.

To pretend nothing has changed, that our values and interests are aligned in the same way as they were during World War II, ignores the fact that the U.S. under Bush has behaved in a way that most Canadians find unpalatable, if not downright repugnant.

I miss Reagan · November 10, 2004

Isn't it interesting how it used to be the "religious right" that was branded as intolerant, rightly or wrongly. Now we have a new leader in intolerance. The secularist, and closed minded, left.