Martin's Big Mouth

[Argus]

This is the guy who would improve our relations with the US by being quietly respectful and not playing to the anti-American zealots. But he and the idiots in his party seem to be ever willing to embrace anti-Americanism is they think it can earn them a few more votes.

His ban on hand guns, for example, had a very strong and obvious subtext; we're not like those stupid Americans, we're better than them.

His defence of the status quo in health care has the same message: We're not the Americans, watch out because those evil conservative will destroy health care and leave the poor to die, like those stupid Americans.

And he had to vocalize it at that pointless environmental conference on Kyoto. I mean, the man really has no shame. He's been self-righteous about his "support" of Kyoto for years, while doing NOTHING about it. There is no possible way we are going to get anywhere near meeting any of our "goals" under Kyoto, and he has no plans, no proposals and no programs to do so. But that doesn't stop him from pompously attacking those who fail to sign on, specifically, the Americans. Why mention them by name? And only them? The US is the biggest greenhouse gas emiter who haven't signed on, but China is the second biggest, and you won't hear Martin make a peep of protest about that. India is, I believe, number 5, and Martin won't dare say a word about them lest he offend Indo-Canadian voters.

So now the Bush administration is highly ticked off at us, which will please the anti-American crowd for some twisted reason. Over NOTHING. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind angering or standing up to the Americans if there's a reason, if there is some prospect that it will do any good. But to do it over Kyoto, as if that will have the slightest affect on them - and from a guy who has done NOTHING to live up to the commitments he boasts about. God, the man has no shame and no brain.

Way to improve our relationshp with the Americans, Martin.

[Guest eureka]

Chinese emissions are roughly one tenth of the American per capita: India is less. Using those two countries is a cop-out by the Americans.There is no excuse at all for their stance. It is greed and lack of concern for anything but their wallets that drives the Bush administration.

We should also remember that one of the biggest problems that Canada faces is the oil sands production. Perhaps we should shut them down and cut the Americans off the oil. That would make a huge reduction in the emissions of both nations since, as the single biggest source of CO2 is transportation - 24% of it - and forcing a reduction on transportation could only help.

About one quarter of that 24% is from air traffic so the failure of ground transport would also lessen that means of travel. A win-win situation.

[mcqueen625]

Chinese emissions are roughly one tenth of the American per capita: India is less. Using those two countries is a cop-out by the Americans.There is no excuse at all for their stance. It is greed and lack of concern for anything but their wallets that drives the Bush administration.

We should also remember that one of the biggest problems that Canada faces is the oil sands production. Perhaps we should shut them down and cut the Americans off the oil. That would make a huge reduction in the emissions of both nations since, as the single biggest source of CO2 is transportation - 24% of it - and forcing a reduction on transportation could only help.

About one quarter of that 24% is from air traffic so the failure of ground transport would also lessen that means of travel. A win-win situation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You want to talk about transportation? Who was it that privatized CN Rail, and allowed both it and CP Rail to abandon thousnads of miles of track in favour of transporting goods across this country by deisel powered transport trucks that are utterly destroying our highway infrastructure. They aren't satisfied with hauling single trailers anymore, now it is two and three trailers, called B-Trains.

Canadian National Railway, once a Canadian crown corporation is now basically owed by a U.S. corporation and much of their hauling is now south of the Canada/U.S. border.

I thimk you are minimizing the amount of pollution created by both China, India and other third world countries, so tell me again why they are exempt from this so-called Kyoto Accord. Could it be that major corporate sponsors of the Martin government wants these countries to stay exempt so they can pollute the world at will, while maximizing their profits through child labour, and few if any environmental controls.

You can't have it both ways, either the Kyoto Accord applies to every country including China, India, and the rest of the third world, or no country. How dare Martin act as is Canada is actually doing anything to rein in our own industrial polluters. In my province of New Brunswick we have two major groups of polluters, the pulp and paper industry and government themselves through the ownership of NB Power.

[tml12]

This is the guy who would improve our relations with the US by being quietly respectful and not playing to the anti-American zealots. But he and the idiots in his party seem to be ever willing to embrace anti-Americanism is they think it can earn them a few more votes.

His ban on hand guns, for example, had a very strong and obvious subtext; we're not like those stupid Americans, we're better than them.

His defence of the status quo in health care has the same message: We're not the Americans, watch out because those evil conservative will destroy health care and leave the poor to die, like those stupid Americans.

And he had to vocalize it at that pointless environmental conference on Kyoto. I mean, the man really has no shame. He's been self-righteous about his "support" of Kyoto for years, while doing NOTHING about it. There is no possible way we are going to get anywhere near meeting any of our "goals" under Kyoto, and he has no plans, no proposals and no programs to do so. But that doesn't stop him from pompously attacking those who fail to sign on, specifically, the Americans. Why mention them by name? And only them? The US is the biggest greenhouse gas emiter who haven't signed on, but China is the second biggest, and you won't hear Martin make a peep of protest about that. India is, I believe, number 5, and Martin won't dare say a word about them lest he offend Indo-Canadian voters.

So now the Bush administration is highly ticked off at us, which will please the anti-American crowd for some twisted reason. Over NOTHING. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind angering or standing up to the Americans if there's a reason, if there is some prospect that it will do any good. But to do it over Kyoto, as if that will have the slightest affect on them - and from a guy who has done NOTHING to live up to the commitments he boasts about. God, the man has no shame and no brain.

Way to improve our relationshp with the Americans, Martin.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The irony is, econimically Martin's Liberals are more "American Republican" than they would like to admit.

You know, they cut healthcare funding and then swear by it, they ban handguns which will solve nothing and probably wipe them out of Alberta and the Prairies, been all talk talk about Kyoto while the Americans, who haven't even signed on, seem to be doing more, etc.

I think you get my point Argus...VERY good post (can you run for PM? )

[Argus]

Chinese emissions are roughly one tenth of the American per capita: India is less. Using those two countries is a cop-out by the Americans.There is no excuse at all for their stance. It is greed and lack of concern for anything but their wallets that drives the Bush administration.

Try and put aside your fear and hatred of the Bush administration and engage your mind. What I said was that the US was number one in emissions. China is number two. India is number five. Do you think it matters what the per capita rate is? They are number 2 and 5, and they refuse to sign on to the Kyoto accord. And Martin would urinate at the very thought of mentioning this.

But he singles out the US for criticism, alienating and irritating them - getting nothing in return, hoping to please anti-Americans and scratch out a few more cheap votes.

[Riverwind]

But he singles out the US for criticism, alienating and irritating them - getting nothing in return, hoping to please anti-Americans and scratch out a few more cheap votes.

What pissed me off about his comments is he should know that there is zero chance that Canada will meet its Kyoto commitments - it will simply cost to much.

[Argus]

But he singles out the US for criticism, alienating and irritating them - getting nothing in return, hoping to please anti-Americans and scratch out a few more cheap votes.

What pissed me off about his comments is he should know that there is zero chance that Canada will meet its Kyoto commitments - it will simply cost to much.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not merely that we won't meet our commitments, it's that he has done nothing, and plans to do nothing to meet our commitments. He self righteously puts down the Americans who won't sign on, and yet Kyoto for him is nothing but a cheap vote getter.

[Guest eureka]

Of course it matters what the per capita emissions are. That is all that does matter. That should not need saying.

China and India are part of the Kyoto accord: they are developing countries and in the second tier of Kyoto. The only major country and emitter of CO2 that is not a member of Kyoto is the USA and Martin did well to make the displeasure of the world known.

What is needed is even stronger talk and some action. Frankly, I think every ratifier of Kyoto should break off diplomatic relations with the US until it comes to its senses. This is more serious than either of the two world wars.

[sharkman]

Eueka, hasn't Canada's greenhouse gases increased by over 20% since the nineties while the U.S. has kept theirs to 13%? They are doing better than us and they aren't even signing up for kyoto.

By using per capita emissions on China, it skews their numbers downward, since they have 1.something billion people. They won't curtail their emissions when kyoto directs them to, have they left Tibet because of pressure brought to bear, or stopped manufacturing pirated goods because other countries or international courts say they should? How about listening to world organizations like the UN on human rights. They will do as they please and pollute freely as their economy dictates, not as Kyoto may eventually dictate.

[Argus]

Of course it matters what the per capita emissions are. That is all that does matter. That should not need saying.

China and India are part of the Kyoto accord: they are developing countries and in the second tier of Kyoto. The only major country and emitter of CO2 that is not a member of Kyoto is the USA and Martin did well to make the displeasure of the world known.

China is one of the world's worst polluters, and under Kyoto it stands to pollute more, not less. The only reason it signed, as it was quite open about, is that it can now "explore deals" with developed nations to trade off industry and pollution and make money. It will not have to cut back, only its economic competeitors in the west will. The Kyoto accord is an economic suicide pact for developed nations, which is why the US won't sign it.

What is needed is even stronger talk and some action. Frankly, I think every ratifier of Kyoto should break off diplomatic relations with the US until it comes to its senses.

And Canada? Which signed the accord even though it had and continues to have no intention of living up to what it signed? What should be done to Canada? You know we will not meet any of our goals under Kyoto. You know there is no government plan to even TRY to meet any of our goals. Should the world break off diplomatic relations with us?

[Guest eureka]

We should make our government get serious. That includes the opposition portion of government which is committed to not doing anything.

Are you seriously trying to say that a people that emits only a fraction of the amounts that we and the US emit is to blame for this? I don't think any rational person can not see that it is all about per capita emissions. Would it be OK for you to keep your car running day and night provided your neighbours all used bicycles?

Every country except the US and Australia - every country that matters - is serious about Kyoto. Some have already met their targets.

It doesn't matter, I suppose, that one piece of information that has come from this conference is that every coastal city in the world will be under water in little more than 50 years if the current rate od temperature increase continues. George Bush will no longer be President then so it will be the fault of the President of the time.

George's MBA at work.

[sharkman]

This conference in Montreal where Martin took another swipe at the U.S. and Bush was a perfect example of the Martin strategy. Canada is actually doing much worse than the U.S. in this area and yet Martin chides the U.S. since they are not a part of Kyoto. Merely a cheap attempt at the anti-American vote and keeping attention on them, not his poor performance in this area.

It is something that deserves more than lip service at election time.

[Montgomery Burns]

Eureka:

Every country except the US and Australia - every country that matters - is serious about Kyoto.

"Every country that matters"

FYI, Tony Blair is opting out of Kyoto as is New Zealand. And China and India are two of the biggest polluters in the world. It is outrageous that you try to ignore their polluting ways while attacking the US--which has done a better job than Canada when it comes to emitting greenhouse gas emissions.

Besides, this Kyoto is a farce. These enviromental scaremongers can't even make up their mind whether global warming is coming or if a mini Ice Age is coming.

And your knee-jerk "let's cut off the US from Alberta's oil" is childish and econonic idiocy.

Now you know why I fear you NDPers getting into power. Stark-raving mad knee-jerk anti-American zealots.

[Guest eureka]

I tend to ignore your rants these days, Monty. There are real concerns to attend to.

Hpwever, Blair is backing off from Kyoto as some others are because it is imperative to have the US agree to something. You would probably ignore the reality that Blair backed off. as you call it, only after publicly rebuking Bush for not ratifying Kyoto.

Also, Britain has not "backed off" its committments but is well ahead in meeting them. It has also committed to a 60% (I think that was the figure but around there anyway) reduction by mid century.

And, as I have said ad nauseam but the oil tasters don't want to hear, China and India are part of Kyoto as is the US and almost every country in the world. They won't be much longer if the Bush administration continues in its vision of a short life and a merry one for all Americans and the devil take the rest.

[Montgomery Burns]

Tony Blair Pulls the Plug on Kyoto at Clinton Summit:

NEW YORK - Kyoto Treaty RIP. That's not the headline in any newspaper this morning emerging from the first day of the Clinton Global Initiative, but it could have been -- and should have been.

[...]

Blair, a longtime supporter of the Kyoto treaty, further prefaced his remarks by noting, "My thinking has changed in the past three or four years." So what does he think now? "No country, he declared, "is going to cut its growth." That is, no country is going to allow the Kyoto treaty, or any other such global-warming treaty, to crimp -- some say cripple -- its economy.

The bolded part is the real reason why the anti-American Eureka complains that the US has not signed on to Kyoto; he wants the US economy crippled. Socialists loathe the USA because it is the posterchild for capitalism and it has proven to be a far better economic system than socialism. This infuriates socialists.

Looking ahead to future climate-change negotiations, Blair said of such fast-growing countries as India and China, "They're not going to start negotiating another treaty like Kyoto." India and China, of course, weren't covered by Kyoto in the first place, which was one of the fatal flaws in the treaty.

But according to Eureka, it is not a fatal flaw. Two of the biggest polluters in the world deserve a pass!

Interestingly, these words from Blair, addressing an audience of a thousand at the Sheraton just a few blocks north of Times Square, failed to get any pickup in the media. Even The New York Times, published just down the street, ran a story that dwelt on the star power in the room, including King Abdullah of Jordan, Jesse Jackson, and George Stephanopoulos. "Isn't this awesome?" said one participant, and those words seemed to reflect fully the Times' take on the event.

Whaaa? The NYT would never ignore reporting things that doesn't fit their worldview. Besides, the NYT has more important things to do--like directing their resources towards investigating whether Bush missed a physical 30 years ago in the TANG.

For its part The Washington Post offered this bland headline: "Clinton Gathers World Leaders Nonpartisan Conference Focuses on Global Improvement," making no mention of Blair's global warming remarks. As for TV coverage, there wasn't much of that either; on CNN Headline News, Christi Paul said, admiringly, "former President Clinton is still looking to get things done," noting that Clinton garnered "more than $200 million in pledges" to address world problems.

Oh no! Not the WaPo and CNN too? Those darn rightwing media sources. :angry:

Where is that bastion of truth--Michael Moore--when you need him?

[PocketRocket]

Where is that bastion of truth--Michael Moore--when you need him? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Out shopping for a more fuel-efficient car

[speaker]

This is great, look at all these fine people putting down Martin for not doing enough to combat Global Heating. Praising the Americans for not increasing their percentage of gwgs as high as Canada. It does my heart good to know that the extremist right will do a better job when, if, lol, they gain power again.

The mouthpieces of the corporate conservatives, the ones whose livelihood depends on ever increasing volumes of green house gas production, have a lot of room to criticize here. Martin may be a fool, he may be corrupt, he may even be God forbid, misleading us, but to suggest the correct vote leans even further towards the reactionaries in the crowd is obtuse.

The reason the American government hasn't agreed to Kyoto is that it would require some measure of sacrifice on behalf of the American people. American culture couldn't stand that kind of a shock, and won't until it's probably too late. Canadian governments haven't done anything for much the same reason. It's a question of pressure. The do nothing crowd has been able to exert enough pressure on the Liberals, who are a very sensitive bunch, that they can't overcome the inertia. Even though there are some good people trying to accomplish serious initiatives.

We keep running into these economic collapse arguments that are groundless. We are responsible for the messes we create in the world. (Learned often at an early age.) Certainly China, Russia, India, and almost any country including the Americans would be quite happy to accept money if we want to send it to them to help them develop clean efficient energy systems and industry. I think though I would want to see some reason why we can't first do that kind of thing for ourselves.

[Argus]

This is great,  look at all these fine people putting down Martin for not doing enough to combat Global Heating.

You are sadly confused. People are mocking Martin for getting on a pedestal and self-righteously attacking the Americans for not combating global warming.

When he has done NOTHING, and has no plans to do ANYTHING himself.

So he insults our greastest trading partner - again, in hopes of scoring a few cheap political points with the brainless, braying, anti-American types.

Perhaps, unlike the Liberals, the Americans simply don't choose to sign an agreement when they have no intention of living up to it.

[Guest eureka]

Monty, your practise of ignoring everything that has been said to tirelessly repeat your discredited assertions makes it pointless addressing anything you do write.

Britain has not backed out of Kyoto. It is still bound by its obligations and has more than met them. It is now committed to the next round.

Just six months before that misconstrued statement, Blair publicly upbraided Bush for failing to ratify Kyoto.

China and India are part of Kyoto: read the damn thing instead of parroting the Bush line.

Frankly, I now think that anyone who supports Bush on this should be drawn, quartered and hung - a more painful process than the traditional method. There is no longer any doubt of the devastation that will follow inaction now. There is no longer any doubt that tens of millions of lives will be lost through inaction or that many hundreds of millions will suffer terribly. Or that every human on the planet will be very seriously harmed.

[Canuck E Stan]

There is no longer any doubt of the devastation that will follow inaction now. There is no longer any doubt that tens of millions of lives will be lost through inaction or that many hundreds of millions will suffer terribly. Or that every human on the planet will be very seriously harmed.

So Martin action now would be to send a couple of Billion dollars to the Russians immediately to get credit for the 30% increase in pollution that he has done nothing about here in Canada since getting involved with Kyoto?

Like his hand gun policy of banning hand guns already banned, why doesn't he just proclaim a ban on pollution?

That would save us all today.

[Montgomery Burns]

The reason the American government hasn't agreed to Kyoto is that it would require some measure of sacrifice on behalf of the American people.

No. Americans value their sovereignty. Plus these enviromental scaremongers can't make up their damn mind if there is global warming or a mini ice age. The only reason why these people want to force Kyoto on the US is that they seek to cripple their economy, because every day they look at the US and are reminded that capitalism whips socialist ass.

Why would anyone listen to a bunch of kooks who say things like this:

"This is protest is important because time is running out to deal with climate change," said Steven Guilbeault, the director of the Greenpeace movement for Quebec.

"Ten years ago we thought we had a lot of time, five years ago we thought we had a lot of time, but now science is telling us that we don't have a lot of time," he said.

"Global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter, that's what we're dealing with," he said.

Good grief!

[Biblio Bibuli]

Good grief!   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

GOOD GRIEF, Montgomery Burns, you didn't make your prediction yet on how many seats will the CPCers win by.

Get to it!

[speaker]

The reason the American government hasn't agreed to Kyoto is that it would require some measure of sacrifice on behalf of the American people.

No. Americans value their sovereignty. Plus these enviromental scaremongers can't make up their damn mind if there is global warming or a mini ice age. The only reason why these people want to force Kyoto on the US is that they seek to cripple their economy, because every day they look at the US and are reminded that capitalism whips socialist ass.

Why would anyone listen to a bunch of kooks who say things like this:

"This is protest is important because time is running out to deal with climate change," said Steven Guilbeault, the director of the Greenpeace movement for Quebec.

"Ten years ago we thought we had a lot of time, five years ago we thought we had a lot of time, but now science is telling us that we don't have a lot of time," he said.

"Global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter, that's what we're dealing with," he said.

Good grief!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would be a lot better if we also valued our sovereignty, but I don't see that accepting something like Kyoto needs to compromise sovereignty. No more than accepting war crimes tribunals that are capable of judging Americans. Oh yea, they didn't want to accept that either.

I'm not sure that you've heard this before but global warming can mean a variety of weathers depending on how local topography affects winds etc. I know this is confusing, but if you look into it you might be surprised how serious it could be.

[speaker]

And Canada? Which signed the accord even though it had and continues to have no intention of living up to what it signed? What should be done to Canada? You know we will not meet any of our goals under Kyoto. You know there is no government plan to even TRY to meet any of our goals. Should the world break off diplomatic relations with us?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with Eureka we seriously need to explain to whoever holds any power after the election that the reason it's such a popular vote getter is that we Canadians really do care about the mess we're making, and it's for that reason that we voted for whatever party makes it.

The bolded part is the real reason why the anti-American Eureka complains that the US has not signed on to Kyoto; he wants the US economy crippled. Socialists loathe the USA because it is the posterchild for capitalism and it has proven to be a far better economic system than socialism. This infuriates socialists.

perhaps socialists loathe the USA not because capitalism is a better economic system than socialism, but that using capitalism is like running a marathon through downtown Calgary, on an unmarked, and unrecognized route while wearing blinders. there is just too much going on that isn't accounted for in Capitalism.

[

This is great,  look at all these fine people putting down Martin for not doing enough to combat Global Heating.

You are sadly confused. People are mocking Martin for getting on a pedestal and self-righteously attacking the Americans for not combating global warming.

When he has done NOTHING, and has no plans to do ANYTHING himself.

So he insults our greastest trading partner - again, in hopes of scoring a few cheap political points with the brainless, braying, anti-American types.

Perhaps, unlike the Liberals, the Americans simply don't choose to sign an agreement when they have no intention of living up to it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps I am confused. Far be it for me to deride anyone for mocking our great leader. It's not realistic to say that the Canadian government has done nothing, there has been a great deal of talk.

If the Americans can't handle an insult, one has to wonder where and when they grew up. With the level of anger floating around the world over issues like economic disparity, global warming, resource misuse, and outright military aggression something like what Martin said should be taken as being pretty minor. In fact anything that Martin said should be

[Montgomery Burns]

Eureka, Blair never scolded Bush. He wanted him to step up to the Kyoto voodoo but that was months ago.

And China and India are exempt from the framework of Kyoto.

Please do some reading; I am getting tired of educating you.