Jump to content

Harper Withdraws nominee for Ethics Role


Recommended Posts

No one disputes that Asian gangs are a problem on the west coast. The term is used in the media almost every day. They are not the only ones of course but they constitute a large part of organized crime in the area and many have contacts with their countries of origin. To say it isn't so in the interest of political correctness is just plain dumb, as in NDP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It might be semantics and the degree of negativity you consider necessary for an overgeneralized negative comment on race to be considered "racist." Again, I think pretty much everyone is racist to some degree or other so it's not that big a deal that he made those comments, but they are what they are.

Indisputably true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me this is a typical Harper tantrum. His first choice for the commission didn't pass the committee, so instead of offering an alternative, he dumps the commission entirely. He's thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

Harper's first choice wasn't a good one. Criticism of the selection came immediately, even before Morgan sat before the committee. A former CEO of a major corporation, who has regularly and sizeably contributed to the Conservatives, who has deep links with corporate Canada - how is this a good candidate for the ETHICS Commission? There were sure to have been many people far more suitable. Alas, they weren't buddies of Harper.

The problem is not that Harper didn't get the guy he wanted...it is that the guy he wanted was publically accosted in the media by the opposition for strategic partisan purposes.

I don't know Gwyn Morgan from a hole in the ground. I'm prepared to accept that he might not have been a good choice for the committee. BUT, no one is offering a principled non-partisan argument for why he was not a good choice.

The purpose of the committe was to ensure that appointments were made based on merit. A highly successful businessman who is considered Canada's best CEO is someone who knows a thing or two about merit vs. patronage. You argue that because he is successful and he made completely legal and in no way unethical contributions to the political party of his choice that he is a bad candidate.

That is plain idiocy.

Dump the partisan b-s. Are we really saying that the only people we will accept on committees are those who have taken no interest in our country's politics (and as such have never made a legal political financial contribution), are not successful businessmen / women because every successful businessman / woman is unethical by definition?, have never tried to be socially engaged and therefore never made a single politically incorrect statement in public. Who would we appoint?

Give me a legitimate reason why he was a poor candidate and I'm all ears. Give me partisan rhetoric about his political tendencies and I'm with Harper...I'm taking my ball and going home.

FTA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The opposition parties were right in not accepting Gwyn Morgan's appointment to any ethics' role, and not because he was outed as a racist, but because he has been a longtime fundraiser for both the Reform Party and later the CPC. He held a fundraiser for Stephen Harper in this last campaign; and himself has donated thousands including $5,100 on May 26, 2005 (see Elections Canada website.). In addition, Encana CEO Michael Chernoff and his wife Dorrine each contributed $ 5,100 on May 20, 2005.

You can't have an ethics' watchdog, who is supposed to be non-Partisan and watch all politicians, also act as a cash cow for just one party.

Do you people ever read a newspaper? Why do you insist on discussing an issue you clearly know little to nothing about and have put zero thought into?

The position he was appointed to was to chair a commision.

The mandate of the Public Appointments Commission is to oversee and report on the selection process for Governor in Council appointments to agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations. The Commission will develop guidelines, review and approve the selection processes proposed by Ministers to fill vacancies within their portfolios, and report publicly on the Government’s compliance with the guidelines.

Furthermore, just who do you think you're going to get to chair such things without big paycheques? And once they have big paycheques, of course, they start building empires. He, and three other wealthy and prominent Canadians were all going to work for free, basically, out of a sense of national duty. People with such a strong sense of national duty are virtually always heavily involved in politics.

His links to the oil companies and the Fraser Institute; or what I like to call the backup singers for CPC policy; again make him unsuitable to answer to the Canadian public.

He wasn't supposed to report to the Canadian public. He was supposed to coordinate the development of hiring policies. Further, just who do you expect to chair commisions like this - worthless nobodies with no life experience or accomplishment, like, say, your average Liberal or NDP MP? The Liberals appointed hundreds of often incompetent party supporters, bagmen, ex-MPs and crooked lawyers to hundreds of important boards, commissions, ambassadorships, judgeships and the like without anyone on your side getting terribly upset. In essence, all his commision was supposed to do was to oversee reform of that process so that even if patronage appointments were made they were at least qualified for the jobs they were given - which was rarely a consideration with the Liberals, especially with regard to their last two appointments to the Supreme Court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morgan said this at the Fraser Insitute dinner:

"Jamaica has one of the world's highest crime rates driven mainly by the violence between gangs competing for dominance in the Caribbean drug trade. Why do we expect different behaviour in Toronto, Ontario, than in Kingston, Jamaica?"

Indisputably true, and no one involved in law enforcement in Ontario will disagree with the enormous contribution to violent crime, especially swarming, drive-bys, pimping and drug dealing the Jamaican community has made.

He went on to state the same about Vietnamese immigrants and their predisposition to violent crime as well.

Also unarguable. I recall the then head of Toronto's Asian gang squad getting into hot water a few years back for stating that 95% of Asian crime his group deals with involved Vietnamese. I can get you a quote if you like.

Yes, he has also been a vocal critic of all things Liberal, but regardless of his success at EnCana, anyone in their right mind knows you don't make racists comments

When did he make a racist comment? Do you believe it's racist to make a true statement? Do you fear the truth? Do you fear freedom of speech?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a telephone interview with CTV Calgary, the former Calgary oil executive who ran EnCana Corp. dismissed the opposition's rejection of a public appointments commission as nothing but "partisan politics."

"I think Canadians should be disappointed by the way this process has played out," Morgan said.

"All I wanted was to help my country, besides that, there wasn't a lot in it for me."

Morgan would have been paid a salary of $1 per year as head of the commission.

Oh boohoo...someone...where is my violin!

Ya gotta love guys like Morgan...blame everyone but ME..........

According to reports, he tried to explain why he said what he said, and the Liberal and NDP members insisted on repeating his words (or at least, the reports of his words) again and again and again ad nauseum, ignoring his explanation, ignoring his apology, ignoring his request that they put the statements into the context of the long speech they were taken out of. He was shown no respect. The MPs had no interest in anything he had to say. It was an exercise in bullying and abuse in an effort to score cheap, political points.

Cripes, I lived at Jane and Finch for years, and i'll bet that -unlike Morgan- I've actually met Jamican-Canadians...even knew their names. Heck, I've had fights with Jamaican-canadians, parties with them, played sports with them, learned what a bommel-clatt, rastaclatt AND a bloodclatt is, and I can safely say that there are some badass mofos, but there are people like that in any community.

Sure there are. There are just one whole helluva lot more in the Jamaican community.

Does anyone remember this, from Macleans earlier this year, when Linda Frum interviewed the Black Chief of Police of LA (formerly C.O.P. of NY)

Bratton asked: “Tell me, the gang violence that you are experiencing, what is the racial or ethnic background of the gangs?”

Frum replied: “That's a refreshingly blunt question. Some say it may be as high as 80 per cent Jamaican. But no one knows for sure, because people here don't like to talk about that.”

Chief Bratton’s blunt response: “You need to talk about it. It's all part of the issue. If it's Jamaican gangs that are committing the crimes, well then, go after the Jamaican gangs. And don't be afraid to go after them because they're black. That's the last thing you need to be concerned with.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me this is a typical Harper tantrum. His first choice for the commission didn't pass the committee, so instead of offering an alternative, he dumps the commission entirely. He's thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

Harper's first choice wasn't a good one. Criticism of the selection came immediately, even before Morgan sat before the committee. A former CEO of a major corporation, who has regularly and sizeably contributed to the Conservatives, who has deep links with corporate Canada - how is this a good candidate for the ETHICS Commission?

It wasn't an ethics commision. Why don't you pick up a newspaper and get back to us when you have some idea what the conversation is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comfort:

...and it's a typical racist strategy to blurt out that some of their best friends are non-white, like Morgan does IN PRINT, of all places.

Liberal, conservative or Zorastrian, any idiot that goes on about attending black churches to cover his ass is a fool. Morgan shouldn't have said stupid crap like he did in the first place. As I said, I've known many Jamaican-Canadians from living in T.O., and a statement like he made implicating that every manjack of 'em is a potential gun user is pure, unadulterated, ethnocentric bulls**t.

Bratton asked: “Tell me, the gang violence that you are experiencing, what is the racial or ethnic background of the gangs?”

Frum replied: “That's a refreshingly blunt question. Some say it may be as high as 80 per cent Jamaican. But no one knows for sure, because people here don't like to talk about that.”

Chief Bratton’s blunt response: “You need to talk about it. It's all part of the issue. If it's Jamaican gangs that are committing the crimes, well then, go after the Jamaican gangs. And don't be afraid to go after them because they're black. That's the last thing you need to be concerned with.”

Writing in the National Post (Octrober 27, 2005), Bruce Garvey decried Jamaica’s “born fi dead’ culture being imported to the streets of Toronto – another vile result of poorly screened immigration and multiculturalism polices that encourage immigrants to hang on to their culture, no matter how dysfunctional of destructive. Writing of Toronto’s wave of gang shootings, Garvey noted: “Almost all of the victims and perpetrators are young black men, … It is widely – if quietly – acknowledged that a disproportionate number of the criminals and victims hail from Jamaica.

John Macfarlane, editor of Toronto Life (February, 2006) observes: “Nobody wants to talk about it, but the increase in gun-related homicides in Toronto has a cultural component: many of the young men involved – shooters and victims alike – are of Caribbean descent and many are from fatherless homes. As the Globe and Mail observed recently,” Tewo in three Jamaican-Canadian children … are being raised by a single parent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"He and his wife "basically love the Caribbean. We attend their churches. In fact, in January we were at an all-black church," he told the committee."

Sweet Jesus...this is priceless! "We attend their churches" ....my, how white of the man! "(we)....basically love the Caribbean"

The guy is white. What was he supposed to say? "Our" churches?

This is the whole PC thing in a nutshell. Because he said "their", he has committed an unforgiveable sin according to the Gospel of Political Correctness, and now he has been excommunicated by a High Priest of Modern Morality, an urban NDP MP.

Aside from the partisan politics on display, there is a whiff of holier-than-thou, smug hypocrisy in all this.

Temogami, you must have a chip on your shoulder the size of Manitoulin Island to be offended by Morgan's choice of words. And the sad thing is that in finding offense in his words, you ignore all the far more racist actions around you. The whole political correctness schtick is built on the false premise that a change of language reflects a change of heart.

I fear you would happily support a slick racist who has mastered the PC lingo while denigrating an honest man who hasn't.

There is nothing racist in Morgan's words but he unfortunately chose to express himself in a language that doesn't meet PC standards, circa 2006. If a guy like this is not acceptable in political Ottawa, then I can understand Harper's frustration. Political Ottawa is divorced from the rest of the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Argus:

I have no doubt that there are Jamaican criminals. I disput Mr. Morgan's because he is not an expert, and yet he could become a person wielding great influence over Canadians and their institutions. What if a whistle-blower just happened to be of Jamaican origin? Will his predisposition towards Jamaicans influence any decision made? Maybe not...but when you come across as giving the impression that you hold Jamiacans in general in ill repute, well that's another story.

To me, as a native Canadian, I already see most of the posters here lining up with their badass Jamaican/Vietnamese stories, without any inkling that there might be Jamaicans or Vietnamese who actually don't fit the murderous mold. If you know anything about the GTA, you'd know that the police are stopping as many Jamaicans as they can. Unfortunately, they also stop a lot of decent Jamaicans, Somalians, St. Lucian's, Ghanians, Rwandans and pretty near every type of black person possible. Sometimes things get out of hand and these decent people get shot or beaten by the police, or mis-identified by crime witnesses as criminals.

Why does this happen? Because people like Mr. Morgan read news reports in the Globe or National Post about bad Jamiacans, heed the material and procedd not to make any distinctions between Jamaicans, like I can because I actually got to know people's accents and attitudes.

yep, people can't tell black folks apart. The also have a hard time distinguishing Vietnamese, Chinese and Koreans from one another.

So when Mr. Morgan exercises his right to free speech, then he should know damn well that he will have to defend his words and ideas. Unlike you, I don't stand for mere conjecture and proceed to explain to everyone that you know what happened during the session. I'm confident that, after having run EnCana, he must be a big boy and take care of himself now.

But the stupidest thing is blare out that you go to black churches. I'm not stupid. I've argued with enough Canadians to know the old "Oh yeah, well I've got (insert race/culture here) friends!" that I hear when people are trying to cover their tracks. The dude clearly implies that all Jamaicans are black, or all "Caribbeans" are black. Besides, he talks about "Caribbeans" in his repost. That's like me running down the Danish, and then turning around and saying that I go to European churches, so I'm really a nice guy.

The bottom line is that as a Canadian, I want people in public leadership that I can trust, and I certainly can't trust a guy that paints an entire group as criminals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

August:

The guy is white. What was he supposed to say? "Our" churches?

Read what I just said to argus above.

This is the whole PC thing in a nutshell. Because he said "their", he has committed an unforgiveable sin according to the Gospel of Political Correctness, and now he has been excommunicated by a High Priest of Modern Morality, an urban NDP MP.

Again, read what I said above. Particularly the bit about how people can't tell black people from one another, nor Chinese from Vietnamese, Arabs from Peruvians etc. That makes it easier for folks like you, Gwyn Morgan and Argus to condemn an entire identifiable group.

Aside from the partisan politics on display, there is a whiff of holier-than-thou, smug hypocrisy in all this.

I'm sure there is too.

Temogami, you must have a chip on your shoulder the size of Manitoulin Island to be offended by Morgan's choice of words.

I'm not offended, I'm astounded. I think the guy is a total fool in the political arena. An Alberta businessman can say anything he wants to whomever he wants, but when he becomes a public servant, he must gain the trust of the people. You can trust him all you want to. I don't. but then again, I don't make it a practice to get together with my buddies and run down Jamaicans.

And the sad thing is that in finding offense in his words, you ignore all the far more racist actions around you. The whole political correctness schtick is built on the false premise that a change of language reflects a change of heart.

What the hell is this supposed to mean? What far more racist actions around me? I'm certainly not politically correct, but neither am I politically stupid.

I fear you would happily support a slick racist who has mastered the PC lingo while denigrating an honest man who hasn't.

Buddy, if you are supporting Morgan, than you fit this description of having been taken in by a slick racist.

There is nothing racist in Morgan's words ...

Pfffffttttt ! what's that sound? August91 getting sucked in by Gwyn Morgan.

Political Ottawa is divorced from the rest of the country.

well, no argument here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bottom line is that as a Canadian, I want people in public leadership that I can trust, and I certainly can't trust a guy that paints an entire group as criminals.
Did Morgan say or even imply that anywhere? Did he paint an entire group as criminals?

BTW, you yourself Temagami have engaged in the "I've got good friends who are [insert Group Here]" when you describe living in Toronto. I have no doubt that you state this to show your legitimate efforts to understand others. Morgan's comment is no different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, read what I said above. Particularly the bit about how people can't tell black people from one another, nor Chinese from Vietnamese, Arabs from Peruvians etc. That makes it easier for folks like you, Gwyn Morgan and Argus to condemn an entire identifiable group.
Maybe not...but when you come across as giving the impression that you hold Jamiacans in general in ill repute, well that's another story.

To me, as a native Canadian, I already see most of the posters here lining up with their badass Jamaican/Vietnamese stories, without any inkling that there might be Jamaicans or Vietnamese who actually don't fit the murderous mold. If you know anything about the GTA, you'd know that the police are stopping as many Jamaicans as they can. Unfortunately, they also stop a lot of decent Jamaicans, Somalians, St. Lucian's, Ghanians, Rwandans and pretty near every type of black person possible. Sometimes things get out of hand and these decent people get shot or beaten by the police, or mis-identified by crime witnesses as criminals.

Why does this happen? Because people like Mr. Morgan read news reports in the Globe or National Post about bad Jamiacans, heed the material and procedd not to make any distinctions between Jamaicans, like I can because I actually got to know people's accents and attitudes.

Temagami Scourge,

Where in heaven's name did any poster or even Morgan himself lump ALL of these different nationalities of people together into bunch of criminals.

The only poster that did that was you.

Do you really think Canadians think like you wish they would?

Canadians care for their fellow Canadians and what's wrong with stating the truth about criminal groups.

Where's your support for bikers like the Hell's Angels? Aren't they being wrongly persecuted?

"I actually got to know people's accents and attitudes."

Give me a break,because of this you know a criminal from a non criminal?

Pretending to be some kind of street wise person only makes you look stupid and you should get your head out of your anus and look around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Augie:

"Did Morgan say or even imply that anywhere? Did he paint an entire group as criminals?"

he said this: "Jamaica has one of the world's highest crime rates driven mainly by the violence between gangs competing for dominance in the Caribbean drug trade. Why do we expect different behaviour in Toronto, Ontario, than in Kingston, Jamaica "

He could have conveyed the same point by saying "According to law enforcement, I believe the police's estimation that current Jamaican gangs and their spinoffs in cities like Toronto, are replicating the level of violence found in Kingston, Jamaica. to make matter worse, these gangs use the greater population to hide in, while threateing their neighbours into silence."

I think that sounds legit without implying that a Jamiacan is a Jamaican is a Jamaican.

"BTW, you yourself Temagami have engaged in the "I've got good friends who are [insert Group Here]" when you describe living in Toronto. I have no doubt that you state this to show your legitimate efforts to understand others. Morgan's comment is no different "

Buddy, I can see why you'd make the interpretation that you do, but I want to prove that I know what a Jamaican is as compared to a "Caribbean". Morgan can't. He covers his statement about Jamaicans by saying he prays with the "Caribbeans".

Well, which Caribbeans is he refering to? There are couple of dozen distinct Nations down there, and I know that there are white Islanders on each island.

How can I trust the guy to be in a public position when he says what he has been saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stan:

Where in heaven's name did any poster or even Morgan himself lump ALL of these different nationalities of people together into bunch of criminals

My God lad, can't you read? Go back about seven or eight posts and think of something smarter to say. I can't stand people that are thinking French and writing English. It gets confusing.

The only poster that did that was you.

See above

Do you really think Canadians think like you wish they would?

hunh!? Buddy...Canadians haven't thought the way I wish they would my entire life! What would make you think otherwise?

Canadians care for their fellow Canadians...

Of course, what would make you think I've indicated otherwise?

... and what's wrong with stating the truth about criminal groups.

Absolutely nothing is wrong with telling the truth about criminal groups. I do object to saying that an entire ethnic group are criminals. Morgan used Jamaicans and Jamaican gangs interchangeably. That tells people that Jamaicans as a whole are potential murderers.

Where's your support for bikers like the Hell's Angels? Aren't they being wrongly persecuted?

I don't support Bikers in anyway. Why would you think I do? Why do you have a need to insult me? I barely know you.

Pretending to be some kind of street wise person only makes you look stupid and you should get your head out of your anus and look around.

Hunh? are you kidding buddy? I'm damn glad that I'm way out of the hood. I would not want to let my kids grow up there until they get more police in the area. I'm pissed at Harper for not sending some assistance to GTA police forces in the last budget. He could have set money in a set aside and sent more police in.

But even more importantly, I see no reason for you to insult me when i've not done you any harm. I've never communicated with you in any way before, and I'm sorry if my experience upsets you in anyway. There was no harm intended.

I just hope that I've treated you with more respect than you've shown me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Argus:

I have no doubt that there are Jamaican criminals.

That's not the point. The point is there are a far, far, far higher number of violent street criminals of Jamaican ethnicity than there should be given their population. Hell, they make up a couple of percentage points of the population and yet you have Macleans, hardly a vicious right-wing rag, saying they're responsible for up to 80% of the gang killings. What does that tell you?

I disput Mr. Morgan's because he is not an expert, and yet he could become a person wielding great influence over Canadians and their institutions. What if a whistle-blower just happened to be of Jamaican origin? Will his predisposition towards Jamaicans influence any decision made?

He has nothing to do with whistle blowing. The job of his commision was to coordinate the setup of hiring procedures by the various ministries and agencies to ensure that in hiring patronage appointees only qualified people would be employed. Once the system was set up he'd be gone. How long do you expect him to work for a dollar a year anyway?

Maybe not...but when you come across as giving the impression that you hold Jamiacans in general in ill repute, well that's another story.

The fact Jamaicans tend to have a far higher level of violence than any other group in Canada does not mean the majority of Jamaicans, or anything like it, are violently inclined. Clearly, as he said, their community has a problem they need to deal with, but no one but an idiot would imply all or most Jamaicans are violent criminals.

To me, as a native Canadian, I already see most of the posters here lining up with their badass Jamaican/Vietnamese stories, without any inkling that there might be Jamaicans or Vietnamese who actually don't fit the murderous mold. If you know anything about the GTA, you'd know that the police are stopping as many Jamaicans as they can. Unfortunately, they also stop a lot of decent Jamaicans, Somalians, St. Lucian's, Ghanians, Rwandans and pretty near every type of black person possible. Sometimes things get out of hand and these decent people get shot or beaten by the police, or mis-identified by crime witnesses as criminals.

And all those bodies in the streets who were gunned down in drug fights? Were they mistakenly identified as Jamaicans? There is no dispute that young Jamaican men are disproportionately involved in violent crime. Given that, it is hardly unlikely that the police would take an extra interest in young Jamaican men as opposed to, say, young Japanese men.

Why does this happen? Because people like Mr. Morgan read news reports in the Globe or National Post about bad Jamiacans,

Do you actually think the cops are harrassing Jamaicans because they read the paper? The cops know better than anyone else just what groups are responsible for violent crime. Even if the news media are very reluctant to voice that information, the cops know. They always know.

So when Mr. Morgan exercises his right to free speech, then he should know damn well that he will have to defend his words and ideas.

Which he attempted to do. The point being no one was prepared to listen or consider. The hearing was a kangaroo court, with votes already decided, and used only to repeatedly condemn him without any context to his words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Argoose:

"The point is there are a far, far, far higher number of violent street criminals of Jamaican ethnicity than there should be given their numbers."

Yes...and this in a city where the murder rate is dropping every year. So, according to you and Morgan, Jamaicans are natural-born killers flooding the streets of T.O. in blood with fewer deaths each year!

gimme a break. You yourself know how the media likes to propagate matters beyond reality, and you should know that this is a case where things are blown out of porportion....and you defend it?

But to get back to Morgan, the Star printed Morgan's entire speech from the Fraser Institute, and it sounds worse than what I initially expected! Not only is it typical "angry old Whiteman" talk, but the gist of what he says when he is singling out people is that the majority of Canadians ie. those who aren't like him, are lazy whiners seeking a handout. Now, I work and pay taxes, and I believe that there are better and smarter methods of taxation, but damned if because I hold some socialist views that I'm an automatic welfare beggar! He gives us his bullshit Grasshopper story about the Canadian grasshopper that lazes around at the expense of everyone else. Has Morgan ever seen or spoke to welfare recipients? No...he just assumes he knows all about them, and that is intrinsically wrong. that is typical Mike Harris.

But to focus on Jamaicans, Morgan said this: Here is the root cause they all know, but don't talk about: the vast majority of violent, lawless immigrants come from countries where the culture is dominated by violence and lawlessness. Jamaica has one of the world's highest crime rates driven mainly by the violence between gangs competing for dominance in the Caribbean drug trade

I read this again and again, and all I know from the above quote is that Jamaicans are lawless, violent criminals. They are inherently criminal because their culture is dominated by violence and lawlessness. Ergo, Jamaicans in Toronto are bringing this lawlessness and violence with them..

....which translates into an ever-decreasing homicide rate in this city.

nice logic, Argoose.

and this guy is supposed to be ethical? Bull crap...he is another example of a right-wing albertan who hasn't got a clue about what he is talking about, but figures he knows alot because he ran a company and his buddy Harper probably tickles him ever now and again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the full text of Morgan's Dec 7/05 speech to the Fraser Institute. I've quoted the portion below, as it highlights for me further stereotyping by this man.

The Fraser Institute has made a big difference to our country, but evidently we still have a distance to go. There are still many Canadians who fail to grasp that ultimately the success of any society is dependent upon those who try harder achieving better rewards than those who don't.

And this leads me to a little parable called the Ant and the Grasshopper. There are two versions of this parable; the first is the classic version read by parents to children in teaching the importance of hard work and responsibility.

This is how the Classic version goes:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool, and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The shivering grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

Now here's the Canadian version:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool, and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. So far, so good, eh?

The shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others less fortunate, like him, are cold and starving...

So not only are Toronto's crime problems due largely to Jamaican immigrants, the country's problems are due largely to people in poverty. Every person in poverty is lazy and is justified in blaming only laziness as the cause of their situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because *you* extend Morgan's story to Jamaican immigrants the Canadian people should be deprived of having one of the country's premier ex-CEOs chairing a committee that vets public appointments???

So not only are Toronto's crime problems due largely to Jamaican immigrants, the country's problems are due largely to people in poverty. Every person in poverty is lazy and is justified in blaming only laziness as the cause of their situation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because *you* extend Morgan's story to Jamaican immigrants the Canadian people should be deprived of having one of the country's premier ex-CEOs chairing a committee that vets public appointments???
So not only are Toronto's crime problems due largely to Jamaican immigrants, the country's problems are due largely to people in poverty. Every person in poverty is lazy and is justified in blaming only laziness as the cause of their situation.

I was using sarcasm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoop:

Naci's dead-on right. Morgan blames the poor for being lazy, and thus creating problems for the rest of Canada by being lazy.

That is bullshit. In essence, Morgan is doing the same thing that all the other whiners have been doing on the Six Nations thread by castigating ALL natives as lazy and ALL natives are drunks and ALL natives are this and that. Now we hear that ALL Jamaicans are violent, lawless criminals, and that ALL welfare recipients are lazy.

But step back for a moment. Do you know any women whose husband's or partners skipped out on them, left them home without a vehicle and with three little kids and, if she is lucky, with a part-time job? Do you know how fast families like this go on welfare? Do you think this woman wants to be on welfare? How do we find the deadbeat if he takes off and simply doesn't leave a forwarding address? What if the deadbeat decides to quit his job before he pays a penny to the ex? We pay for all these people, but under no circumstances would I call that woman lazy.

However, your good buddy Gwyn Morgan did in a heartbeat.

Good CEO or not, an idiot who can so easily paint entire groups as social evils does not deserve to seat in a seat where he may have to render a judgement where a welfare mom or a Jamaican is a principle figure, and we already know how much he scorns these two groups. It makes it much easier to say that you have to look and act like him to get a successful judgement. Government and business are two separate animals, and Morgan is finding that out now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a few problems here temagami.

1. We shouldn't stereotype people who collect welfare. Are all of them lazy? No. However, you make the mistake of going to far to understand. *under no circumstances* are they lazy? Hmmm, then *under no circumstances* they should have to leave welfare, to follow your argument to its logical conclusion. (Oh wait, you were only talking about a specific case. But Morgan was only using a story about ants...)

2. Why would you call Gwyn Morgan my *good buddy*? Does that somehow strengthen your argument? Make me a bad person? You are making the same mistake Naci Sey made. Morgan used a story, but you extrapolated that he was calling somebody in your very specific case lazy because of your random story.

3. Do you even understand the role Morgan was asked to play? How many welfare moms are being nominated for government appointments?

Sadly for the left, the opposition used their limited power too quickly and too harshly. This was a bad move for Canada, but will ultimately be a good thing as it makes it that much more likely the Conservatives will win a majority next year.

Do you think this woman wants to be on welfare? How do we find the deadbeat if he takes off and simply doesn't leave a forwarding address? What if the deadbeat decides to quit his job before he pays a penny to the ex? We pay for all these people, but under no circumstances would I call that woman lazy.

However, your good buddy Gwyn Morgan did in a heartbeat.

Good CEO or not, an idiot who can so easily paint entire groups as social evils does not deserve to seat in a seat where he may have to render a judgement where a welfare mom or a Jamaican is a principle figure, and we already know how much he scorns these two groups. It makes it much easier to say that you have to look and act like him to get a successful judgement. Government and business are two separate animals, and Morgan is finding that out now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoop:

Naci's dead-on right. Morgan blames the poor for being lazy, and thus creating problems for the rest of Canada by being lazy.

That is bullshit. In essence, Morgan is doing the same thing that all the other whiners have been doing on the Six Nations thread by castigating ALL natives as lazy and ALL natives are drunks and ALL natives are this and that. Now we hear that ALL Jamaicans are violent, lawless criminals, and that ALL welfare recipients are lazy.

But step back for a moment. Do you know any women whose husband's or partners skipped out on them, left them home without a vehicle and with three little kids and, if she is lucky, with a part-time job? Do you know how fast families like this go on welfare? Do you think this woman wants to be on welfare? How do we find the deadbeat if he takes off and simply doesn't leave a forwarding address? What if the deadbeat decides to quit his job before he pays a penny to the ex? We pay for all these people, but under no circumstances would I call that woman lazy.

However, your good buddy Gwyn Morgan did in a heartbeat.

Good CEO or not, an idiot who can so easily paint entire groups as social evils does not deserve to seat in a seat where he may have to render a judgement where a welfare mom or a Jamaican is a principle figure, and we already know how much he scorns these two groups. It makes it much easier to say that you have to look and act like him to get a successful judgement. Government and business are two separate animals, and Morgan is finding that out now.

I find it amazing how easy it is to be painted a racist & a bigot in this pathetic left wing world.

I read an article recently in the western standard, which basically said, to become left wing the only qualifications you need is ignorance to the truth. I know this sounds harsh, but given the right spin by our news media today, it is easy to be protective like a left winger. I will give you a for instance, if this was a headline on CBC," Gwyn Morgan, former CEO of Encana Corp, has been nominated by Stephen Harper to chair the public appointments commission. With this job comes the responsibility of overseeing public appointments and bringing down punishment to Jamaican gangs and strip poor single mothers of their welfare status.", wouldn't you be inclined to be against him and the Conservatives??

I know this is a drastic comment, but it's no worse than branding him for being a racist, like our media has. And because they called him a racist, with the slick job pointing out his connection to "bigoil"(evil people THEY are), the common public automatically dislikes him, Only because of media spin!! If they actually got to know Gwyn Morgan, they would find out he was Pro Kyoto, very environmentally minded, and quite an accomplished man and was willing to serve Canada for one dollar a year!!! Yet the media tends to leave out the important stuff and just call him a racist(as many of the lefties who have no idea what his job was supposed to be!).

So, as you can see, with the media today, it's easy to become a lefty!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't be arsed to read this whole thread, bogged down as it is in "You're a racist!/No I'm not!" exchanges, but did anyone bother to point out that the committee's vote is non-binding? In other words: Harper is free to appoint Morgan to the post if he wanted to. But it looks like, rather than stick with his man, he's going to cry about "partisan politics!"

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
      10,698
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    IPEM Group of Institutions
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ethan Wylde earned a badge
      First Post
    • Yakuda went up a rank
      Experienced
    • QuebecOverCanada went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • Jeary went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Gator earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

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