Al Gore attacks new, 'ultra-conservative' Canadian PM

[Shady]

One of the biggest political a-holes decides to take his turn attacking our new PM.

Gore accuses big oil of bankrolling Tories

"The election in Canada was partly about the tar sands projects in Alberta," Gore said Wednesday while attending the Sundance Film Festival in Utah.

"And the financial interests behind the tar sands project poured a lot of money and support behind an ultra-conservative leader in order to win the election . . . and to protect their interests."

Darcie Park, spokeswoman for oilsands giant Suncor Energy, said she's taken aback by Gore's remarks and hopes they don't resonate with Canadians.

"Our company just doesn't do business that way. We're really puzzled about where these comments came from," she said.

"Canadians understand how elections work in Canada and understand there are these very tight restrictions around what individuals and companies can contribute to individual parties or campaigns."

The federal Elections Act limits how much money individuals, corporations and unions can donate to political parties. Individuals are allowed to give as much as $5,000 a year, while companies and unions are capped at $1,000 a year.

In their election platform, the Conservatives promised to further limit individual donations to a maximum of $1,000 and ban all donations from corporations, unions and organizations.

Parties and candidates are required to make public any contributions exceeding $200.

Calgary Herald

[YankAbroad]

You do understand the cognitive dissonance which the Canadian election has thrown into the left fringe and mainstream left alike in America, right? They were convinced that Canada was a permanent enlightened, harmonious left-wing paradise where all the citizens had voted in a permanent benevolent Liberal Party majority, banished homophobia, and made crime obsolete. Not quite the reality, but it was a nice romantic fantasy which helped dispel the idea that they actually had to do some thinking about where they were and where they were going in the domestic political scene. After all, Xanadu waited across the border, and as long as it was there, it meant that the same thing could happen south of the border as well, once the populace gained sufficient enlightenment. That Canadians would choose to dispel this uniquely American myth of Canada comes as a severe shock to their systems.

It doesn't help that Paul Martin's effort to run against Bush (rather than for some policy area) failed as miserably in Canada as it did in the USA when Kerry tried the same tactic. This is a nasty repudiation of the failed Democratic Leadership Council strategy which has cost the Dems a lot over the past 10 years or so.

Then again, I suspect that some Canadian Conservatives will get a similar nasty shock to their equally idealized view of the United States over the next few years, especially now that they're in government. They'll find a USA which is quite a bit more bureaucratic, stilted, socialist and backwards-thinking than they probably expected. Perhaps we can look forward to a Stockwell Day speech slamming the Bush administration's big-spending, government-swelling, long-term-tax-increasing ways in a few years time!

[tml12]

You do understand the cognitive dissonance which the Canadian election has thrown into the left fringe in America, right? They were convinced that Canada was a permanent enlightened, harmonious left-wing paradise where all the citizens had voted in a permanent benevolent Liberal Party majority, banished homophobia, and made crime obsolete. Not quite the view.

Then again, I suspect that some Canadian Conservatives will get a similar nasty shock to their equally idealized view of the United States over the next few years, especially now that they're in government. They'll find a USA which is quite a bit more bureaucratic, stilted, socialist and backwards-thinking than they probably expected. Perhaps we can look forward to a Stockwell Day speech slamming the Bush administration's big-spending, government-swelling, long-term-tax-increasing ways in a few years time!

That would be quite hilarious.

Yes it was fun to see Michael Moore's shocked, almost desperate writing attempt...http://www.edmontonsun.com/Business/News/2006/01/26/1412262-sun.html

I am not an ideologue. I may lean right or left on certain issues. But in general I find the Liberal Party in this country quite distasteful.

[geoffrey]

Isn't there a law about foreigners interfering in our elections?

I say we do the world and the donuts a favour by locking him up next time he comes here (I'm in a lock 'em up mood today apparently).

[Drea]

Then again, I suspect that some Canadian Conservatives will get a similar nasty shock to their equally idealized view of the United States over the next few years, especially now that they're in government. They'll find a USA which is quite a bit more bureaucratic, stilted, socialist and backwards-thinking than they probably expected. Perhaps we can look forward to a Stockwell Day speech slamming the Bush administration's big-spending, government-swelling, long-term-tax-increasing ways in a few years time!

Woooo hoo!

LOL

Canadians will never be as right wing as Americans. It's just not in our genes ('cept Alberta their genetically all Americans) LOL

(Kidding! Of course it's not genetic -- it's attitude)

Don't you see the above comment is the reason Day isn't leader, is the reason Harper was "toned down" by his handlers and even with a million more people voting in this election, didn't get a majority.

No bloody way the freaky right wing is going to make my family (and 99.9% of all other Canadian families) bow to their supposed "righteousness".

[tml12]

Then again, I suspect that some Canadian Conservatives will get a similar nasty shock to their equally idealized view of the United States over the next few years, especially now that they're in government. They'll find a USA which is quite a bit more bureaucratic, stilted, socialist and backwards-thinking than they probably expected. Perhaps we can look forward to a Stockwell Day speech slamming the Bush administration's big-spending, government-swelling, long-term-tax-increasing ways in a few years time!

Woooo hoo!

LOL

Canadians will never be as right wing as Americans. It's just not in our genes ('cept Alberta their genetically all Americans) LOL

(Kidding! Of course it's not genetic -- it's attitude)

Don't you see the above comment is the reason Day isn't leader, is the reason Harper was "toned down" by his handlers and even with a million more people voting in this election, didn't get a majority.

No bloody way the freaky right wing is going to make my family (and 99.9% of all other Canadian families) bow to their supposed "righteousness".

When I meet right-wing and left-wing Americans, they don't seem much different than their counterparts on this side of the border.

[uOttawaMan]

You need both a left and a right wing to fly a plane.

[tml12]

You need both a left and a right wing to fly a plane.

That's a great line uOttawaMan,

DAMN that's a really good line (especially since I am pretty moderate).

You are on a roll, what with your Sens on a role and now fantastic political humour!!!

[Montgomery Burns]

More from the deranged Gorebot:

Jiddah, Saudi Arabia -- Former Vice President Al Gore told a mainly Saudi audience on Sunday that the U.S. government committed "terrible abuses" against Arabs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that most Americans did not support such treatment. Gore said Arabs had been "indiscriminately rounded up" and held in "unforgivable" conditions. The former vice president said the Bush administration was playing into al-Qaida's hands by routinely blocking Saudi visa applications. Gore told the largely Saudi audience, many of them educated at U.S. universities, that Arabs in the United States had been "indiscriminately rounded up, often on minor charges of overstaying a visa or not having a green card in proper order, and held in conditions that were just unforgivable."

"Unfortunately there have been terrible abuses and it's wrong," Gore said. "I do want you to know that it does not represent the desires or wishes or feelings of the majority of the citizens of my country."

This guy almost won the presidency 5 years ago.

At least it took Jimmy Carter 20+ years before he went loco.

[Josh]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

[newbie]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

[geoffrey]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

Afghanistan would be under Taliban control, al-Qaeda would be flourishing more than currently and we wouldn't be stealing American jobs.

[margrace]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

Afghanistan would be under Taliban control, al-Qaeda would be flourishing more than currently and we wouldn't be stealing American jobs.

How are we stealing American jobs??

[Argus]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

To nowhere. The man's an idiot.

That he would describe Harper's government as "ultra right wing" when it, for the most part, is further to the left than Hillary Clinton, bespeaks an amazing ignorance which, in an intelligent man, would have provoked silence lest he make a fool of himself.

[tml12]

Argus,

We usually agree but OMG Harper is no where near as left as Hillary Clinton. Harper is centre-right. Hillary has always been left of centre-left Bill and is now trying to appear a moderate to appeal to middle-America voters.

Harper is a moderate right-winger, left of Bush for sure, but right nonetheless...

[politika]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

Afghanistan would be under Taliban control, al-Qaeda would be flourishing more than currently and we wouldn't be stealing American jobs.

As much as i dissagree with Gore accusing Harper of such "trechery"

correct me if I am wrong but the United States and Canada are in Afganistan under NATO, so no matter who wouldve/could've been president now Canada the United States and other countries would be freeing Afganistan from the Taliban regime.

[politika]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

To nowhere. The man's an idiot.

That he would describe Harper's government as "ultra right wing" when it, for the most part, is further to the left than Hillary Clinton, bespeaks an amazing ignorance which, in an intelligent man, would have provoked silence lest he make a fool of himself.

He also lost to Bush, that makes him look even worse

[newbie]

He also lost to Bush, that makes him look even worse

The jury's still out on that one.

[shoop]

Gore is painful and a jackass.

I like the Democrats. Still think Clinton was one of the best U.S. President's ever.

Most Democrats I knew were turned off by Gore. He is just icky....

Clearly clueless as well.

The election was about the tarsands? wtf? where did that come from?

[scribblet]

Gore is painful and a jackass.

I like the Democrats. Still think Clinton was one of the best U.S. President's ever.

Most Democrats I knew were turned off by Gore. He is just icky....

Clearly clueless as well.

The election was about the tarsands? wtf? where did that come from?

Maybe from the part of the internet 'he invented' What an idiot Gore is.

[BHS]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

Afghanistan would be under Taliban control, al-Qaeda would be flourishing more than currently and we wouldn't be stealing American jobs.

As much as i dissagree with Gore accusing Harper of such "trechery"

correct me if I am wrong but the United States and Canada are in Afganistan under NATO, so no matter who wouldve/could've been president now Canada the United States and other countries would be freeing Afganistan from the Taliban regime.

We are not "now" freeing the Afghanis from the Taliban. That was accomplished within the first few months of the invasion, and would have been regardless of who was commanding the US military. It was a really, really, unfair fight. The question still stands as to whether NATO would have gone into Afghanistan in the first place, if Al Gore was in charge. Certainly, NATO is as much of a crippled and ineffectual organisation as the UN is, without American leadership. Call me cynical, but I doubt the invasion would have happened if left up to a concensus vote by NATO member countries, without American prompting. It would be like Darfur: everyone agrees something needs to be done, nobody wants to take any concrete actions.

However, I happen to believe that 911 was such a major event in US history and so affected America's political reality that a Democratic president would have reacted much the same way that Bush did. Meaning, at least the invasion of Afghanistan would have happened, if not further exploits in the Middle Eastern theatre.

[politika]

Ewww... Where would the world be if he was the President?

On the right track.

Afghanistan would be under Taliban control, al-Qaeda would be flourishing more than currently and we wouldn't be stealing American jobs.

As much as i dissagree with Gore accusing Harper of such "trechery"

correct me if I am wrong but the United States and Canada are in Afganistan under NATO, so no matter who wouldve/could've been president now Canada the United States and other countries would be freeing Afganistan from the Taliban regime.

We are not "now" freeing the Afghanis from the Taliban. That was accomplished within the first few months of the invasion, and would have been regardless of who was commanding the US military. It was a really, really, unfair fight. The question still stands as to whether NATO would have gone into Afghanistan in the first place, if Al Gore was in charge. Certainly, NATO is as much of a crippled and ineffectual organisation as the UN is, without American leadership. Call me cynical, but I doubt the invasion would have happened if left up to a concensus vote by NATO member countries, without American prompting. It would be like Darfur: everyone agrees something needs to be done, nobody wants to take any concrete actions.

However, I happen to believe that 911 was such a major event in US history and so affected America's political reality that a Democratic president would have reacted much the same way that Bush did. Meaning, at least the invasion of Afghanistan would have happened, if not further exploits in the Middle Eastern theatre.

Your right about the Taliban falling but not everything like you say needs to be led by the United States that is very cynical. Canada backed by a British force and other small countries that are currently in Afganistan could have went their alone. Although most likely like you said would never have happaned because the whole reason this started was because of September 11th.

[geoffrey]

Your right about the Taliban falling but not everything like you say needs to be led by the United States that is very cynical. Canada backed by a British force and other small countries that are currently in Afganistan could have went their alone. Although most likely like you said would never have happaned because the whole reason this started was because of September 11th.

Canada would never head an offensive operation anywhere in the world. It's political suicide in Canada to liberate anyone or intervene anywhere.

[politika]

Your right about the Taliban falling but not everything like you say needs to be led by the United States that is very cynical. Canada backed by a British force and other small countries that are currently in Afganistan could have went their alone. Although most likely like you said would never have happaned because the whole reason this started was because of September 11th.

Canada would never head an offensive operation anywhere in the world. It's political suicide in Canada to liberate anyone or intervene anywhere.

What are we doing in Afganistan? We are taking command of coalition forces and laucnhing an offensive/defensive/security against terrorist forces.

Political suicide to intervene or liberate anywhere? Canada? where did you here this? Canada can do what it wants when it wants and doesn't need the United States permission to do it.

[Black Dog]

Canada would never head an offensive operation anywhere in the world. It's political suicide in Canada to liberate anyone or intervene anywhere.

It's political suicide because it's such a impractical pipe dream. Intervention in local conflicts invariably involves choosing sides, which brings the risk of choosing the wrong one (I think Yugolsavia is a good example of that). Intervention against opressive regimes is even dicer because there's absolutely no guarantees the end result will be an improvement (see Iraq).