Environmentalists apologize to Ambrose

[normanchateau]

Last week the Canadian Climate Action Committee made the mistake, in my opinion, of suggesting that Rona Ambrose was more concerned with her hair than her responsibilities fighting climate change. They were rightly criticized by politicians, academics and others for this ridiculous comment.

In this morning's Vancouver Sun, page A13, a story appears stating that David Coon, chairman of the Canadian Climate Action Network, has sent a letter of apology to Ambrose. I don't have a link to the story but here's an excerpt from the letter: "The remarks were thoughtless and insensitive. We are sorry for any offense that was caused."

It's really very easy to apologize when you've made a stupid mistake. Too bad Peter MacKay hasn't figured this out. Too bad he's Minister of Foreign Affairs, a job you'd think would require tact and diplomacy.

[gerryhatrick]

It's really very easy to apologize when you've made a stupid mistake. Too bad Peter MacKay hasn't figured this out. Too bad he's Minister of Foreign Affairs, a job you'd think would require tact and diplomacy.

Which goes to prove: environmentalists have more brains than Peter MacKay!

[watching&waiting]

The whole environmentalist lobby was very wrong to make the statements it did, and an apology just does not cut it. What this showed was that the environmentalists saw a method to make light of what an Environment Minister would have to say. They did this because they knew it would not be in support of ther cause. So they used the lies and smears to get they way.

Does that sound like people who claim they have scientific truths on their side? They know full well that very little of the whole issue of Climate Change, would soon drop the money they make by being alarmist, and so they will try anything they can. I make sure to read as much of their reports as I can, and I simply will say that there is one recurring theme over and over, that being that at the rate of (pick the issue they are sampling ) if it continues to grow at this rate we will (pick the problem they will state) in 75 to 100 years. What I find so odd is they then try to tkae issue of CPC plan that will do things within 50 years that will make the longer term prediction irrelevent. They want to impose this doom to get the money they want to research to collect the same doom and get more money.

For that reason I just do not even give small support to the environmentalists, as so far they are more far fetched then the scifi movies on TV.

[White Doors]

That's why I support groups like Ducks Unlimited that actually do something good instead of just whine all the time.

[cybercoma]

This makes me think of the co-founder of Greenpeace who quit the organization (Dr. Moore I believe it was...) because of the change in its viewpoints.

Looking through wikipedia just now, it appears he had this to say:

""By the mid-1980s, the environmental movement had abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism. I became aware of the emerging concept of sustainable development: balancing environmental, social and economic priorities. Converted to the idea that win-win solutions could be found by bringing all interests together, I made the move from confrontation to consensus."

Funny how there's still people who choose to bash corporations and globalism as having no redeeming qualities.

[White Doors]

This makes me think of the co-founder of Greenpeace who quit the organization (Dr. Moore I believe it was...) because of the change in its viewpoints.

Looking through wikipedia just now, it appears he had this to say:

""By the mid-1980s, the environmental movement had abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism. I became aware of the emerging concept of sustainable development: balancing environmental, social and economic priorities. Converted to the idea that win-win solutions could be found by bringing all interests together, I made the move from confrontation to consensus."

Funny how there's still people who choose to bash corporations and globalism as having no redeeming qualities.

Yes, you should see Penn and teller's take on it.

[normanchateau]

The whole environmentalist lobby was very wrong to make the statements it did, and an apology just does not cut it.

Maybe that's why Peter MacKay won't apologize. He knows that even an apology won't cut it with some people so it's best not to apologize at all. We should all adopt this practice of not apologizing when we do wrong or make a mistake.

[cybercoma]

Yes, you should see Penn and teller's take on it.

Penn & Teller: Bulls***!

One of my favourite shows.

[geoffrey]

The whole environmentalist lobby was very wrong to make the statements it did, and an apology just does not cut it.

Maybe that's why Peter MacKay won't apologize. He knows that even an apology won't cut it with some people so it's best not to apologize at all. We should all adopt this practice of not apologizing when we do wrong or make a mistake.

Or maybe people need to grow up and stop acting like school children on the playground.

TEACCHERRR!!! TEACCHER!!!! HE CALLED ME A DOG!!!! WAAAA...

Please. Get over it already.

[normanchateau]

The whole environmentalist lobby was very wrong to make the statements it did, and an apology just does not cut it.

Maybe that's why Peter MacKay won't apologize. He knows that even an apology won't cut it with some people so it's best not to apologize at all. We should all adopt this practice of not apologizing when we do wrong or make a mistake.

Or maybe people need to grow up and stop acting like school children on the playground.

TEACCHERRR!!! TEACCHER!!!! HE CALLED ME A DOG!!!! WAAAA...

Please. Get over it already.

Are you effectively saying that the Canadian Climate Action Network should not have apologized to Rona Ambrose?

[geoffrey]

Are you effectively saying that the Canadian Climate Action Network should not have apologized to Rona Ambrose?

Yes. She's in politics, she needs to learn to play the game. Same with Belinda. If it were two guys calling each other names, it'd be a non-issue.

[normanchateau]

Are you effectively saying that the Canadian Climate Action Network should not have apologized to Rona Ambrose?

If it were two guys calling each other names, it'd be a non-issue.

Yeah but a guy calling a woman names comes across as particularly discourteous.

[geoffrey]

Yeah but a guy calling a woman names comes across as particularly discourteous.

Then Mackay is discourteous. Who cares?

[normanchateau]

Yeah but a guy calling a woman names comes across as particularly discourteous.

Then Mackay is discourteous. Who cares?

Those who expect a modicum of tact and diplomacy from Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[geoffrey]

Those who expect a modicum of tact and diplomacy from Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Nah. Most Canadians wouldn't use modicum in a sentence.

Are you telling me you've never said something in response to an unfair comment towards yourself? EVER?!

That's pretty impressive. Personally, I could care less what politicans say to each other, it's the nature of the game.

[normanchateau]

Those who expect a modicum of tact and diplomacy from Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Are you telling me you've never said something in response to an unfair comment towards yourself? EVER?!

That's pretty impressive. Personally, I could care less what politicans say to each other, it's the nature of the game.

I never claimed this described me nor would I ever contemplate a diplomatic or political career (nor would anyone vote for me). But I expect better from a cabinet minister.

And I think you meant "Personally, I could NOT care less..."

[geoffrey]

And I think you meant "Personally, I could NOT care less..."

Indeed.

[jbg]

Yeah but a guy calling a woman names comes across as particularly discourteous.

Then Mackay is discourteous. Who cares?

Belinda was disloyal. She deserves to be treated like garbage. Ambrose has earned no such animus.

[jdobbin]

Belinda was disloyal. She deserves to be treated like garbage. Ambrose has earned no such animus.

Ronald Reagan was disloyal. He was once a Democrat. Winston Churchill was disloyal. He was once a Liberal.

Stephen Harper is disloyal. He was once a Liberal.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

[BubberMiley]

Is it hard for someone who complains bitterly about rabid political correctness to adopt a sense of outrage that someone would comment on a woman's hair?

[jbg]

Belinda was disloyal. She deserves to be treated like garbage. Ambrose has earned no such animus.

Ronald Reagan was disloyal. He was once a Democrat. Winston Churchill was disloyal. He was once a Liberal.

Stephen Harper is disloyal. He was once a Liberal.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Reagan, Harper and Churchill did not take a bribe, i.e. Cabinet portfolio (Democratic Renewal, no less), to save the government from falling on a richly deserved no-confidence vote.

[Canadian Blue]

"You know I don't blame Belinda for going over to the Liberal's, I don't think she had a conservative bone in her body. Well except for one!!!"

Ralph will be missed.

[geoffrey]

"You know I don't blame Belinda for going over to the Liberal's, I don't think she had a conservative bone in her body. Well except for one!!!"

Ralph will be missed.

Indeed. That's what politics is all about.

[jdobbin]

Reagan, Harper and Churchill did not take a bribe, i.e. Cabinet portfolio (Democratic Renewal, no less), to save the government from falling on a richly deserved no-confidence vote.

Um, Churchill crossed back and forth between Conservatives and Liberals. He was offered a safe seat to leave the Conservatives and run for the Liberals.

"In 1904, Churchill's dissatisfaction with the Conservatives and the appeal of the Liberals had grown so strong that, on returning from the Whitsun recess, he crossed the floor to sit as a member of the Liberal Party. As a Liberal, he continued to campaign for free trade. He won the seat of Manchester North West (carefully selected for him) in the 1906 general election."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill

As far a Reagan went, we learned in 2002 that he was Agent T-10.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan

"His first major political role was as president of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), the labor union that represented most Hollywood actors, but which, he claimed, was being infiltrated by communists. In this position, he testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) on suspected communist influence in the motion picture industry. He also kept tabs on actors he considered disloyal and reported them to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under the code name "Agent T-10," but he would not denounce them publicly. In public, he opposed the practice of blacklisting, while in private he and his first wife, Jane Wyman, met with FBI agents in 1947 to name "suspected subversives." Among those he allegedly fingered were actors Larry Parks, Howard Da Silva and Alexander Knox, each of whom was later called before HUAC and subsequently blacklisted in Hollywood. (This information was not revealed until a 2002 Freedom of Information Act request.)[4] FBI files allegedly show that he continually gave the FBI names of people he suspected of communist ties."

Now *that* is disloyal.

As far as Stephen Harper goes, both the PCs and Reform consider him a rather disloyal sort. Ask Preston Manning and Jim Hawkes what they think of Stephen Harper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper

[gerryhatrick]

Did anyone see her hair today?

Fantastic.