Jump to content

Conservatives and Republicans


Recommended Posts

I read this on the CBC site, and felt an immediate sense of recognition. It's talking about the UCP in Alberta, but what the author said could also be applied to conservatives everywhere. 

The two factions within the party simply do not speak the same political language and as has become clear during the recent leadership race, they don't speak the same social language either. In my original piece, I identified the two factions as conservatives and republicans: conservatives being aligned with traditional Canadian conservatism, republicans being aligned with the ascendant philosophy within the Republican Party in the United States.

And yes. I see that in the federal party, and in other provincial parties, and most especially online. There are conservatives, as I feel I am, and then those whose viewpoints seem to have been wrenched away from traditional Canadian conservatism and into... whatever the hell the Republicans now consider proper policy. Assuming they ever develop proper policy other than owning the libs and admiring Vladimir Putin.

It's not that I don't agree with their resentment and contempt for 'woke' and its anti-intellectual, anti-merit ideology of paternalistic identity politics victim worship. I don't at all mind incorporating that into my conservatism. After all, my conservatism has always been about merit and fairness, about equality and not equity. But the conspiracy nonsense is not something I or most other conservatives can ever accept. And yes, that includes their absurd Trumpian beliefs on vaccines and the proper precautions against infection. My approval of Poilievre took a radical downturn when he started mouthing these things. And I, like most conservatives, are watching him somewhat warily to ensure that was just a temporary political ploy that will fade as we get near election time. Also, having such an appalling alternative in Trudeau buys him a lot of compromise from conservatives. For now.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/conservatives-alberta-united-conservative-party-annual-general-meeting-edmonton-1.6623529

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

It's not that I don't agree with their resentment and contempt for 'woke' and its anti-intellectual, anti-merit ideology of paternalistic identity politics victim worship. I don't at all mind incorporating that into my conservatism. After all, my conservatism has always been about merit and fairness, about equality and not equity.

I don't mind deleting anti-intellectual, anti-merit ideology of paternalistic identity politics victim worship from my progressiveness. After all I'm a business owner who even had my very own corporation once upon a time.  My progressivism has always been about accountability and transparency in government, to a degree that would make George Orwell blush.

Quote

But the conspiracy nonsense is not something I or most other conservatives can ever accept.

Really?  You don't truck and trade with conservatives who've been warning about Communists under every bed ever since I was making my way in the world as a paperboy?

Quote

Also, having such an appalling alternative in Trudeau buys him a lot of compromise from conservatives. For now.

I can't think of anything that would make me ever vote for a compromised conservative, not even Trudeau could do that so I guess that makes me a left out lefty.

I can see where you're coming from. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here I thought that support of the abolition of monarchies made you a republican. For example, the Bloc Quebecois is Republican. Australia has had many republican Prime Ministers. Republicans in Saudi Arabia and Thailand are often imprisoned for their views.

 

Also, given this absurd categorization, where would someone like Eric Duhaime fit? How about someone who wants to abolish the dairy cartel and pursue genuine free trade with other democracies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m for smaller government and fewer government powers apart from defending the country from hostile foreign powers.  Our old timey “conservatives”, much like our old “liberals” are no longer relevant categories in this new world of digital surveillance capitalism.   The threats to liberal-democracy are so grave today that governments can imprison whole populations overnight to fight crises.  Our Conservative Party may be just as useless as our Liberal Party before these very powerful totalitarian forces.  Poilievre seems to understand the threat better than most politicians, but I’m not sure yet whether he would’ve taken us down the same path of draconian rules and government overreach as Trudeau’s Liberals.  I’m hoping and betting that he wouldn’t.

As for the US Republicans, they’re also somewhat divided like our Conservatives.  Though I thought Trump was a bit jingoistic and too nationalistic, I see now that ideologically the populist Republicans that he led were more tuned into what’s under threat than the old timey Republicans like Liz Cheney, who is basically the old neo-con/neo-liberal politics of B. Clinton and George W.  I liked B. Clinton more than W, but I think both leaders would’ve struggled to maintain the American way of life during the pandemic and in future “crises”.   Perhaps W would fare better.   Hard to say.  I trust Ron DeSantis over Biden by far to navigate today’s world.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’m for smaller government and fewer government powers apart from defending the country from hostile foreign powers.  Our old timey “conservatives”, much like our old “liberals” are no longer relevant categories in this new world of digital surveillance capitalism.  

Disagree. Traditional conservatives are also for smaller (but big enough to do what's needed) government, as well as a strong national defense and national security. Unfortunately, we haven't had much work towards any of that lately out of conservative leadership - and that includes Harper, once the war was done. 

But there is a difference between making a careful assessment of the rising dangers of the world (and I accept they were not nearly as obvious in Harper's time) and buying nonsensical conspiracies. Traditional conservatives also see Russia as the enemy while too many on the "republican" side admire Putin for his 'strength'.

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

  Our Conservative Party may be just as useless as our Liberal Party before these very powerful totalitarian forces.  Poilievre seems to understand the threat better than most politicians, but I’m not sure yet whether he would’ve taken us down the same path of draconian rules and government overreach as Trudeau’s Liberals.  I’m hoping and betting that he wouldn’t.

I'm not going to accept putting temporary pandemic isolation and vaccination into the same category as national security or national defense. Therein lies the difference between conservatism and trumpist republicanism. 

 

 

Edited by I am Groot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Disagree. Traditional conservatives are also for smaller (but big enough to do what's needed) government, as well as a strong national defense and national security. Unfortunately, we haven't had much work towards any of that lately out of conservative leadership - and that includes Harper, once the war was done. 

But there is a difference between making a careful assessment of the rising dangers of the world (and I accept they were not nearly as obvious in Harper's time) and buying nonsensical conspiracies. Traditional conservatives also see Russia as the enemy while too many on the "republican" side admire Putin for his 'strength'.

I'm not going to accept putting temporary pandemic isolation and vaccination into the same category as national security or national defense. Therein lies the difference between conservatism and trumpist republicanism. 

 

 

Ha, everything liberal is old neoconservative war-mongering.  You don’t know the history if you think Putin isn’t a product of a terrible move by the west after the fall of the Soviet Union.  We could’ve included Russia in NATO.  Instead we poached their former republics and satellite states, adding them to NATO.  It was the shaming of the modern Russian empire in some ways.  I don’t agree with the way Putin is trying to restore it.  I’d ask you to think about how we influenced Russia for better or worse.  The smart Republicans dare to say this truth.  That doesn’t mean they support Russia over the U.S. or that they support invasion of Ukraine.  It does mean that they oppose goading a power that feels shamed.  Ask yourself, what would America tolerate of China or Russia entering our neighborhood?

Yes I want Ukraine to win, but it didn’t have to be this way.  Biden fed into this to some extent.

 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, I am Groot said:

But there is a difference between making a careful assessment of the rising dangers of the world (and I accept they were not nearly as obvious in Harper's time) 

The threat posed by the rise of dictatorships and above all else their growing respectability was as obvious as the nose on Harper's face.

Of course in those days most conservatives would call you a commie for rubbing the west's nose in it.

Putting up a photo of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam Hussein's hand triggered right wingers the most.  We had no choice they bleated...it was either Saddam or the commies...Pinochet or the commies...Noriega or the commies...

Effing right wingers are the stupidest people on the planet and the bane of humanity's existence. The only threat they seem to notice is taxes and of course social justice.

It's the word social that screws you up isn't it? NAZI's are magically turned into lefties because the word social is in their name. You people couldn't collectively assess your way out of a wet paper bag, why? Because you'd get all hung up on the word collectively.?

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The threat posed by the rise of dictatorships and above all else their growing respectability was as obvious as the nose on Harper's face.

Of course in those days most conservatives would call you a commie for rubbing the west's nose in it.

 

Sorry, chum. But in those days, the early days of Harper, he expressed nearly complete disdain for both Russia and China, and wanted nothing to do with either. No one much cared about Russia, but China, woah. The Liberals and NDP were AGHAST. How dare he not go and visit China!? How dare he not lead a trade delegation over there!? How dare he not show his admiration for China and its accomplishments!?

The Liberals, in particular, have always had a fascination for China, which extends from his father to junior. Even today junior can't say a bad word about the 'basic dictatorship' he admires for its efficiency. And he has put not one drachma towards our national defense or security as the military rusts away from neglect. As for the NDP (lol) give them a majority and they'll take us out of NATO and Norad and plead with Russia to respect our neutrality.

Blaming Harper for not seeing how things were going while the NDP and Liberals STILL admire the Chinese is kind of heavy partisanship.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

Ha, everything liberal is old neoconservative war-mongering.  You don’t know the history if you think Putin isn’t a product of a terrible move by the west after the fall of the Soviet Union.  We could’ve included Russia in NATO.  Instead we poached their former republics and satellite states, adding them to NATO.  It was the shaming of the modern Russian empire in some ways.  

 

Yes. I agree that this is the view Putin wants people to have. Those who have studied the man merely laugh at the suggestion Putin was ever anything but implacably hostile towards the West. Those who know Russia the best, are, of course, the nations which live closest to it. Those are the ones you seem to be suggesting above we should have left to Russia and not brought into NATO for fear of offending the kleptocrats in Moscow. That, in effect, we should have left them to Moscow's tender mercies and simply hoped there would be no attempt to put the old Soviet Union back together by force. And that if there was, well, they'd leave us alone, turn against us last. That's a cowardly way to run foreign policy. 

But we don't run foreign policy based on hope or cowardice (Canada exepted). No one with more than half a brain does.

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t agree with the way Putin is trying to restore it.

That's mighty white of you there, Hoss.

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’d ask you to think about how we influenced Russia for better or worse.  The smart Republicans dare to say this truth.  That doesn’t mean they support Russia over the U.S. or that they support invasion of Ukraine.  It does mean that they oppose goading a power that feels shamed.  Ask yourself, what would America tolerate of China or Russia entering our neighborhood?

This tries to equate a brutal authoritarian government attacking democratic countries near it with what we would do if a brutal authoritarian country attacked nations next to us. It assigns ownership of free nations near to Russia to Russia out of fear Russia will be angry at us if we don't. It masks itself as thoughtful geopolitics but it's just raw cowardice and short-sighted thinking. Russia didn't attack Ukraine because it was being hemmed in. It attacked Ukraine because it could, because Putin felt both Ukraine and the West were weak, and he could take the place over in a fortnight while the West wrung its hands and shook its collective fingers but ultimately did nothing. 

The "smart" Republicans you speak of are political opportunists who could not possibly care less how many people die there or in their own country or in their own state as long as they can craft a message which keeps them in power and makes them money. These are men and women clad in jewels and fine clothing who would yawn and examine their nails as they walk past children being beaten to death. They have no morals, no integrity, no patriotism, and no values. I have nothing but contempt for them.

Its sad to see some Canadians doing their best to emulate them.

 

Edited by I am Groot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Yes. I agree that this is the view Putin wants people to have. Those who have studied the man merely laugh at the suggestion Putin was ever anything but implacably hostile towards the West. Those who know Russia the best, are, of course, the nations which live closest to it. Those are the ones you seem to be suggesting above we should have left to Russia and not brought into NATO for fear of offending the kleptocrats in Moscow. That, in effect, we should have left them to Moscow's tender mercies and simply hoped there would be no attempt to put the old Soviet Union back together by force. And that if there was, well, they'd leave us alone, turn against us last. That's a cowardly way to run foreign policy. 

But we don't run foreign policy based on hope or cowardice (Canada exepted). No one with more than half a brain does.

That's mighty white of you there, Hoss.

This tries to equate a brutal authoritarian government attacking democratic countries near it with what we would do if a brutal authoritarian country attacked nations next to us. It assigns ownership of free nations near to Russia to Russia out of fear Russia will be angry at us if we don't. It masks itself as thoughtful geopolitics but it's just raw cowardice and short-sighted thinking. Russia didn't attack Ukraine because it was being hemmed in. It attacked Ukraine because it could, because Putin felt both Ukraine and the West were weak, and he could take the place over in a fortnight while the West wrung its hands and shook its collective fingers but ultimately did nothing. 

The "smart" Republicans you speak of are political opportunists who could not possibly care less how many people die there or in their own country or in their own state as long as they can craft a message which keeps them in power and makes them money. These are men and women clad in jewels and fine clothing who would yawn and examine their nails as they walk past children being beaten to death. They have no morals, no integrity, no patriotism, and no values. I have nothing but contempt for them.

Its sad to see some Canadians doing their best to emulate them.

 

The point is that when you bring a country to its knees to defeat its bad government, the incentive going forward should be to join the democratic fold, both political and military.  We did it with Germany and Japan.  We could’ve included Russia in NATO.  I studied Russia and worked there years ago.  It could’ve gone either way, more towards democracy or totalitarianism.  We distrusted Russia and advantaged their former allies and satellite countries.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Yes. I agree that this is the view Putin wants people to have. Those who have studied the man merely laugh at the suggestion Putin was ever anything but implacably hostile towards the West. Those who know Russia the best, are, of course, the nations which live closest to it. Those are the ones you seem to be suggesting above we should have left to Russia and not brought into NATO for fear of offending the kleptocrats in Moscow. That, in effect, we should have left them to Moscow's tender mercies and simply hoped there would be no attempt to put the old Soviet Union back together by force. And that if there was, well, they'd leave us alone, turn against us last. That's a cowardly way to run foreign policy. 

But we don't run foreign policy based on hope or cowardice (Canada exepted). No one with more than half a brain does.

That's mighty white of you there, Hoss.

This tries to equate a brutal authoritarian government attacking democratic countries near it with what we would do if a brutal authoritarian country attacked nations next to us. It assigns ownership of free nations near to Russia to Russia out of fear Russia will be angry at us if we don't. It masks itself as thoughtful geopolitics but it's just raw cowardice and short-sighted thinking. Russia didn't attack Ukraine because it was being hemmed in. It attacked Ukraine because it could, because Putin felt both Ukraine and the West were weak, and he could take the place over in a fortnight while the West wrung its hands and shook its collective fingers but ultimately did nothing. 

The "smart" Republicans you speak of are political opportunists who could not possibly care less how many people die there or in their own country or in their own state as long as they can craft a message which keeps them in power and makes them money. These are men and women clad in jewels and fine clothing who would yawn and examine their nails as they walk past children being beaten to death. They have no morals, no integrity, no patriotism, and no values. I have nothing but contempt for them.

Its sad to see some Canadians doing their best to emulate them.

 

That’s not most Russian people.  Russians are just like us in many ways.  I agree that Russia is less democratic and functions as an oligarchy in many ways, but again, this could’ve been different if Russia was democratized through trade and exchange as we did with Germany and Japan.  We did it with space cooperation.  There was about ten years after the Soviet Union collapsed when there was a real sense of hope, from Gorbachev to Yeltsin and even early Putin.  It deteriorated when the partnership didn’t really get completed because the west maintained old Cold War alliances.  I remember it well.

 I agree that since Russia hosted the Winter Olympics, what we have seen is the revival of imperial Russia.  Remember though how America and the UK asserted authority at times.  Doesn’t make it good, but clearly Russia will go to great lengths to maintain its sphere of influence.  Eastern Ukraine was already heavily influenced by Russia and was quite Orthodox and Russian speaking.  Western Ukraine is more Poland and Austro-Hungarian influenced, more Catholic and Byzantine Rite.   Russia and Byelorussia are pretty much on the same page. Ukraine is a more complicated situation.  Of course Ukrainians must determine their own fate without foreign influence, but we’re heavily involved in Ukraine.   I’m not sure that’s especially wise or sustainable without a political resolution where Ukrainians determine their own path.  Some parts may choose Russia, whether you like it or not.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Sorry, chum. But in those days, the early days of Harper, he expressed nearly complete disdain for both Russia and China, and wanted nothing to do with either.

So what, that has absolutely nothing to do with what I said neither does anything else you responded with.

In Harper's day and as it had/has been for years and years before Harper, Canada and our greatest allies have made it easier for dictatorships to survive and thrive.

It's been obvious for decades to anyone whose been paying attention that when the shiniest beacons for freedom, democracy and justice were selling out their principles and the people under the thumbs of dictators we armed or enriched that it would bite us on the ass. 

But apparently you're all woke now to the 'rising' threat dictators pose and provide Trudeau and Singh as examples of what you're talking about.  Sorry chum but that's about as dumb as a dog's dick.  Trudeau is merely a dolt not a rising threat, get a grip and give your head a shake.

Anyone else recall the days when Conservatives and Republicans typically dismissed lefties as being naive when it came to wheeling and dealing with tyrants?  I suspect we'll get quite an earful more of that if after the November midterms Republicans decide to give Putin the assistance he needs by withdrawing America's support for Ukraine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, eyeball said:

Anyone else recall the days when Conservatives and Republicans typically dismissed lefties as being naive when it came to wheeling and dealing with tyrants?  

You mean when dealing with right wing tyrants, don't you? Because lefties have never had any problem at all dealing with left wing tyrants. Even today, after what we've seen of how Venezuela has been run into the ground some Canadian leftists still openly speak of their admiration for the great job they're doing. The idiots running CUPE, for example, are still in love with Venezuela and consider it a fine, upstanding example of democracy in action.

History is filled with examples of the Left ignoring or embracing tyrants from the Soviet Union to China to North Korea and Vietnam. Do I even have to mention Cuba? Lots of Canadian leftists still adore Cuba. Trudeau spoke tearfully of that great humanitarian Fidel Castro when he died. So did Singh. And Trudeau, of course, admired the efficiency of China's 'basic dictatorship', clearly longing for the same here.

Your team has nothing to teach anyone about standing against tyrants.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

The point is that when you bring a country to its knees to defeat its bad government, the incentive going forward should be to join the democratic fold, both political and military.  We did it with Germany and Japan.  We could’ve included Russia in NATO.  I studied Russia and worked there years ago.  It could’ve gone either way, more towards democracy or totalitarianism.  We distrusted Russia and advantaged their former allies and satellite countries.  

The problem was we had control of Germany and Japan and could direct how they recovered from tyranny. We never had control of Russia, whose fledgling democracy quickly deteriorated into violent corruption and then outright kleptocracy. There was no way we could embrace that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

That’s not most Russian people.  Russians are just like us in many ways.  I agree that Russia is less democratic and functions as an oligarchy in many ways, but again, this could’ve been different if Russia was democratized through trade and exchange as we did with Germany and Japan.

Japan and Germany were democratized through force and long years (decades) of occupation. Trade and exchange don't work, as China amply demonstrates. Russia has remained a poverty stricken midget with a machinegun. Its soldiers have behaved in Ukraine much like the way Soviet soldiers behaved in Germany, beating, torturing, murdering, raping, not to mention stealing everything in sight to bring home. Because even relatively poor (by western standards) Ukrainian villagers were rich compared to Russians. Every liberated village tells the same story.

10 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Doesn’t make it good, but clearly Russia will go to great lengths to maintain its sphere of influence.

Yes, great lengths that include destroying those around them. The US will pressure its neighbors to get its way, but through economic means, not invasions. And it gave up trying to put its own man in charge of democracies decades ago. Russia and China continue to try to use bribery and illegal money to influence democracies. Which is why the US is so vulnerable with all the billions in dark money going into elections there. It's ironic that if US democracy falls some future historian will point at one group as being mainly responsible: the US Supreme Court.

10 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Of course Ukrainians must determine their own fate without foreign influence, but we’re heavily involved in Ukraine.   I’m not sure that’s especially wise or sustainable without a political resolution where Ukrainians determine their own path.  Some parts may choose Russia, whether you like it or not.

I don't care who choses Russia. What I do care about is allowing murderous dictatorships to seize land by force. If one gets away with it the rest are encouraged to do the same. One of the good things about being able to forestall Russia's advances and cause so much trouble for them in Ukraine as Putin tries to revive glorious Russian nationalism is it might perhaps serve to daunt that other lunatic, Xi from attacking Taiwan in the name of Chinese nationalist glory. Not to mention teaching NATO members that we hang together or hang separately. Though obviously a man like Trudeau is too ignorant and shallow to ever learn such things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Japan and Germany were democratized through force and long years (decades) of occupation. Trade and exchange don't work, as China amply demonstrates. Russia has remained a poverty stricken midget with a machinegun. Its soldiers have behaved in Ukraine much like the way Soviet soldiers behaved in Germany, beating, torturing, murdering, raping, not to mention stealing everything in sight to bring home. Because even relatively poor (by western standards) Ukrainian villagers were rich compared to Russians. Every liberated village tells the same story.

Yes, great lengths that include destroying those around them. The US will pressure its neighbors to get its way, but through economic means, not invasions. And it gave up trying to put its own man in charge of democracies decades ago. Russia and China continue to try to use bribery and illegal money to influence democracies. Which is why the US is so vulnerable with all the billions in dark money going into elections there. It's ironic that if US democracy falls some future historian will point at one group as being mainly responsible: the US Supreme Court.

I don't care who choses Russia. What I do care about is allowing murderous dictatorships to seize land by force. If one gets away with it the rest are encouraged to do the same. One of the good things about being able to forestall Russia's advances and cause so much trouble for them in Ukraine as Putin tries to revive glorious Russian nationalism is it might perhaps serve to daunt that other lunatic, Xi from attacking Taiwan in the name of Chinese nationalist glory. Not to mention teaching NATO members that we hang together or hang separately. Though obviously a man like Trudeau is too ignorant and shallow to ever learn such things.

Well thought out response.  Welcome to the forum.  You know your stuff.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Your team has nothing to teach anyone about standing against tyrants.

I don't have a team, but I'm most definitely not on yours.

The difference between the left and right with regards to tyranny is best illustrated by America's right-wings decision to overthrow the elected democracy of Iran in 1953.

Truman a Democrat, said forget it when approached by Winston Churchill to do so but Eisenhower a Republican said sure.

After that just about any hesitation to arm a dictator in the name of protecting the west from commies was met with scorn and fearful threats that we'd be doomed.

Now the world is populated with all sorts of dictators and commies are...everywhere according to you people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

I don't have a team, but I'm most definitely not on yours.

The difference between the left and right with regards to tyranny is best illustrated by America's right-wings decision to overthrow the elected democracy of Iran in 1953.

Truman a Democrat, said forget it when approached by Winston Churchill to do so but Eisenhower a Republican said sure.

After that just about any hesitation to arm a dictator in the name of protecting the west from commies was met with scorn and fearful threats that we'd be doomed.

Now the world is populated with all sorts of dictators and commies are...everywhere according to you people.

The people most devoted to their team are the ones who refuse to even admit they have a team.

I can't remember the last time anyone in public life complained about commies being anywhere. You need to get off the internet.

Edited by I am Groot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The people most devoted to their team are the ones who refuse to even admit they have a team.

I'm an Earthling which puts me in an entirely different league.

15 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I can't remember the last time anyone in public life complained about commies being anywhere. You need to get off the internet.

There's plenty of public figures doing this on right wing media. Public officials don't have to wear this particular idiocy on their sleeve though when they have millions of supporters willing to humiliate themselves.

I'm sure if Godwin were to redo his law he'd include people who can't resist pointing out the commies infiltrating government, media, universities, your bedroom etc etc.

In the meantime I note you're not to eager to address the appetite and ease with which western democracies seem to have had for supporting dictators in the past and how that's contributed so badly to the rising threat you're not really woke to at all in the present.

Let me guess, you were supportive of this sort of interference in other people's countries in the past. I mean it's kind of encouraging to see the split in Republicanism has resulted in questions about the wisdom of the wars Republicans used to cheer on but unfortunately the nouveau Republicans are just so outrageously stupid that it just doesn't matter enough to make any real difference what they think.

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know plenty of lifetime Conservatives who won't vote for them until they get rid of the extreme right elements. Some were Reform Party organizers and supporters who saw every sensible element of their platform discarded and the most assholic ones promoted.

Six of them are Albertans who'll be voting for Notley this spring.

I've always been a 'politicians must be changed like diapers' voter, but the box says 18-24 lbs. on the label and I'm sure not ready to change Trudeau's 10lbs of shit for ones that come new with 40 lbs of shit already in them.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2022 at 7:38 PM, I am Groot said:

And yes, that includes their absurd Trumpian beliefs on vaccines and the proper precautions against infection.

You can say "conspiracy", or you can say "our leaders are all literally dumber than a bag of hammers" if you want, but is one really that much easier to believe than the other?

Do you know how long it took me to figure out that blocking travel from China was the right thing to do? Less than a second, because I remember the old adages "Avoid it like the plague" and "Nip it in the bud". No one in the Liberal party ever heard of those sayings before though.

And if it wasn't important to block travel from there, then why was social distancing important here? Why was it important to keep unvaxed people out of restaurants (assuming the vax stopped transmission, which it didn't). And why did our PM block travel from India during the delta wave?

Was it stupid to leave flights open from China or stupid and racist to block them from India? How is it possible that our gov't was right both times? It's not..

Why were we blocked from walking outside in public parks in the summer?

Why did the Dems, Libs and MSM suddenly spring into action to rally against HCQ when they were so lackadaisical vs covid? What did they have against at least testing it? Ditto for ivermectin. Do you know the one place on earth to ever completely obliterate covid in a month? Uttar Pradesh, a province of 200M people in India, when they gave out ivermectin to everyone. Their neighbours in India didn't have the same success. 
"but no one proved that it was because of ivermectin!!! ?!!!"

How did those massive disbelievers have so much faith in the vax before it was even through trials?

And why was the crazy-ass bat theory so important that it had to be protected by a social media lockdown?

And what proof is there that "anti-vaxers" (a complete misuse of the term anti-vaxer, because that term is already in use for people who refuse to give their children actual vaccines that do save lives) are "very often racists and misogynists"? How did our PM get a pass for uttering such an atrocity?

Why did the WHO and Fauci err on the side of danger by jumping to the assumption that this one coronavirus wouldn't be airborne, when that's akin to expecting a bird species not to be able to fly? 

The vaxes were never shown to stop covid transmission, am I surprised? No, because I'm not stupid. I noticed that omicron went from just being in South Africa to being all over Canada in about 3 weeks, back when only vaxed people could fly, or travel on passenger ships. Small vessels can't cross oceans, aside from sailing boats, but there wasn't an armada of unvaxxed people that made it all the way from SA to Canada and then frantically driving all around the country to infect everyone. 

 

 

The whole thing about "the gov't fighting is covid" and "the vaccines are safe and they work" was total bullshit right from day 1. 

Honest to God, if you ever wondered how a bunch of retarded fascist would fight covid, look no further than the entire fight that our gov't had with covid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, herbie said:

I know plenty of lifetime Conservatives who won't vote for them until they get rid of the extreme right elements. Some were Reform Party organizers and supporters who saw every sensible element of their platform discarded and the most assholic ones promoted.

Six of them are Albertans who'll be voting for Notley this spring.

I've always been a 'politicians must be changed like diapers' voter, but the box says 18-24 lbs. on the label and I'm sure not ready to change Trudeau's 10lbs of shit for ones that come new with 40 lbs of shit already in them.

There are right-wingers in the Conservative Party?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

You can say "conspiracy", or you can say "our leaders are all literally dumber than a bag of hammers" if you want, but is one really that much easier to believe than the other?

Do you know how long it took me to figure out that blocking travel from China was the right thing to do? Less than a second, because I remember the old adages "Avoid it like the plague" and "Nip it in the bud". No one in the Liberal party ever heard of those sayings before though.

And if it wasn't important to block travel from there, then why was social distancing important here? Why was it important to keep unvaxed people out of restaurants (assuming the vax stopped transmission, which it didn't). And why did our PM block travel from India during the delta wave?

Was it stupid to leave flights open from China or stupid and racist to block them from India? How is it possible that our gov't was right both times? It's not..

Why were we blocked from walking outside in public parks in the summer?

Why did the Dems, Libs and MSM suddenly spring into action to rally against HCQ when they were so lackadaisical vs covid? What did they have against at least testing it? Ditto for ivermectin. Do you know the one place on earth to ever completely obliterate covid in a month? Uttar Pradesh, a province of 200M people in India, when they gave out ivermectin to everyone. Their neighbours in India didn't have the same success. 
"but no one proved that it was because of ivermectin!!! ?!!!"

How did those massive disbelievers have so much faith in the vax before it was even through trials?

And why was the crazy-ass bat theory so important that it had to be protected by a social media lockdown?

And what proof is there that "anti-vaxers" (a complete misuse of the term anti-vaxer, because that term is already in use for people who refuse to give their children actual vaccines that do save lives) are "very often racists and misogynists"? How did our PM get a pass for uttering such an atrocity?

Why did the WHO and Fauci err on the side of danger by jumping to the assumption that this one coronavirus wouldn't be airborne, when that's akin to expecting a bird species not to be able to fly? 

The vaxes were never shown to stop covid transmission, am I surprised? No, because I'm not stupid. I noticed that omicron went from just being in South Africa to being all over Canada in about 3 weeks, back when only vaxed people could fly, or travel on passenger ships. Small vessels can't cross oceans, aside from sailing boats, but there wasn't an armada of unvaxxed people that made it all the way from SA to Canada and then frantically driving all around the country to infect everyone. 

 

 

The whole thing about "the gov't fighting is covid" and "the vaccines are safe and they work" was total bullshit right from day 1. 

Honest to God, if you ever wondered how a bunch of retarded fascist would fight covid, look no further than the entire fight that our gov't had with covid. 

I'm not up on all the conspiratorial stuff and not much interested in fighting that war. Was the government incompetent and virtue signaling in how it dealt with covid? Yes. Did Covid come from a lab? Possibly. Why did the new variants spread so quickly to Canada? Because we had no effective health screening at our borders and a multinational population which travels back and forth to their previous homes a lot. Are the vaccines effective? They are effective in keeping most people out of hospitals and morgues. The rapid changes in covid combined with the large number of people who refuse to either get vaccinated or take any precautions whatsoever has prevented the vaccines from being able to prevent the spread.

What's really interesting, and not much mentioned is the comparatively low number of deaths in most of the third world. Unless it's just that their reporting systems aren't really up on tracking such things (quite possible).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2022 at 10:38 PM, I am Groot said:

It's not that I don't agree with their resentment and contempt for 'woke' and its anti-intellectual, anti-merit ideology of paternalistic identity politics victim worship. I don't at all mind incorporating that into my conservatism. After all, my conservatism has always been about merit and fairness, about equality and not equity. But the conspiracy nonsense is not something I or most other conservatives can ever accept. And yes, that includes their absurd Trumpian beliefs on vaccines and the proper precautions against infection.

Surprisingly I have to agree with most of what you're saying here, though we've already learned my views on some of these issues are not nearly as...strong. 

On 10/21/2022 at 10:38 PM, I am Groot said:

My approval of Poilievre took a radical downturn when he started mouthing these things. And I, like most conservatives, are watching him somewhat warily to ensure that was just a temporary political ploy that will fade as we get near election time. Also, having such an appalling alternative in Trudeau buys him a lot of compromise from conservatives. For now.

I think Poilievre will slowly pivot to more mainstream conservatism.  Trumpism is (overall) mostly reviled in Canada, with the exception being among Canada's conservatives.  Canada-wide, something like 85% of people preferred Biden over Trump (and that wasn't because they liked Biden - it was because they hated Trump) and so this isn't a great federal election strategy.  41% of Conservatives, however, approved of Trump, so in a CPC leadership contest it was hard to ignore these people.  He has 2 years now to transition to a more reasonable brand, so we'll see which way he goes.   

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Are the vaccines effective? They are effective in keeping most people out of hospitals and morgues.

If you do the math you'll see that 88% of our covid deaths in the past few months were among the multi-vaxed, and only 85% of eligible Canadians are "vaxed". 

That's not really working. There never was a "pandemic of the unvaccinated". You were lied to.

Quote

The rapid changes in covid combined with the large number of people who refuse to either get vaccinated or take any precautions whatsoever has prevented the vaccines from being able to prevent the spread.

That's all completely wrong. It's just vaccine propaganda. 

Vaxed people were getting it, spreading it, and dying from it. And there was never a period when it worked, Fauci just said "Delta threw a curve" when it came out (and flopped) to make you think that "it woulda worked on ancestral covid" but we have no proof that would have been the case.  

Quote

What's really interesting, and not much mentioned is the comparatively low number of deaths in most of the third world. Unless it's just that their reporting systems aren't really up on tracking such things (quite possible).

The virus came out of a Chinese lab and doesn't kill a lot of Chinese people. It kills a lot of elderly, obese people with serious underlying medical issues (ie - Americans). There aren't a lot of obese people in 3rd world countries from what I can tell. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...