Comment by Elizabeth May

[scribblet]

What is funny is how there has been little comment on May's statement:

"We have a moral obligation to our Lord and Father to ensure we do not destroy the creation that was given to us. Through the power of our Lord and Jesus Christ, we can meet this moral obligation."

Can you imagine the uproar if a CPC MP had said that. If it is wrong in the eyes of some for non elected people fervently defending traditional marriage and see it as a moral threat, it is also wrong for Elizabeth May to use the pulpit to do so.

[Catchme]

May's comments are indefensible because Stephen Harper or anyone else who dissents from the Kyoto cultism are not looking to kill anyone and are hardly abetting evil, there is quite a moral distinction.

I disagree.

[Figleaf]

What is funny is how there has been little comment on May's statement:

"We have a moral obligation to our Lord and Father to ensure we do not destroy the creation that was given to us. Through the power of our Lord and Jesus Christ, we can meet this moral obligation."

Can you imagine the uproar if a CPC MP had said that. ...

They'd sure get shuffled out of the Environment portfolio PDQ.

[Michael Bluth]

They'd sure get shuffled out of the Environment portfolio PDQ.

Really? A cabinet minister got shuffled for being too Christian?

Do explain.

[sharkman]

What is funny is how there has been little comment on May's statement:

"We have a moral obligation to our Lord and Father to ensure we do not destroy the creation that was given to us. Through the power of our Lord and Jesus Christ, we can meet this moral obligation."

Can you imagine the uproar if a CPC MP had said that. If it is wrong in the eyes of some for non elected people fervently defending traditional marriage and see it as a moral threat, it is also wrong for Elizabeth May to use the pulpit to do so.

Wow, the media is really giving her a pass on this comment. They would freak if a Tory said that. It's why so many are turning to conservative media outlets. At least there you know what you're getting.

[scribblet]

What is funny is how there has been little comment on May's statement:

"We have a moral obligation to our Lord and Father to ensure we do not destroy the creation that was given to us. Through the power of our Lord and Jesus Christ, we can meet this moral obligation."

Can you imagine the uproar if a CPC MP had said that. If it is wrong in the eyes of some for non elected people fervently defending traditional marriage and see it as a moral threat, it is also wrong for Elizabeth May to use the pulpit to do so.

Wow, the media is really giving her a pass on this comment. They would freak if a Tory said that. It's why so many are turning to conservative media outlets. At least there you know what you're getting.

Exactly, can you imagine the diatribes about 'fundies' and theocracies etc. and how Harper has the nerve to go to church and all that. I can see it all now.

[Canadian Blue]

I wouldn't put to much stock into what Elizabeth May says, I was considering voting for the Green Party until I realized that she was just another typical partisan hack.

[betsy]

Although May tries to wiggle out of the Chamberlain's Nazi comparison by suggesting that not only was she quoting somebody else, but that quote simply said that the Conservative policy on the environment would be judged in history the same way Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler's had been judged.

Although the comparison is of little value, and a stretch even in the liberal mind, the irony is that Elizabeth May, Jack Layton, Stephane Dion et al, had they been in government at the time, would've been firmly behind Chamberlain, with their noses appropriately pressed to his posterior. Just as Chamberlain had hoped to have his nose appropriately placed to please Hitler.

In the same way will history judge both the seditious stand of the liberals of every party on our war effort in Afghanistan....AND their stand on the environment based on disinformation and fanaticism, inspired by environmental fascists.

[BubberMiley]

And they're stupid and ignorant. You forgot that.

Way to make an intelligent argument.

[Figleaf]

Although May tries to wiggle out of the Chamberlain's Nazi comparison by suggesting that not only was she quoting somebody else, but that quote simply said that the Conservative policy on the environment would be judged in history the same way Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler's had been judged.

So, you're saying May's comment was alright after all?

[betsy]

Although May tries to wiggle out of the Chamberlain's Nazi comparison by suggesting that not only was she quoting somebody else, but that quote simply said that the Conservative policy on the environment would be judged in history the same way Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler's had been judged.

So, you're saying May's comment was alright after all?

Nope. What made you think that? It said anything but that. Can you not read or can you not comprehend? Or is this a deliberate weasel-like strategy of taking things out of context....etc..,

Anyway, you clearly missed my point.

Here is the continuation.

Although the comparison is of little value, and a stretch even in the liberal mind, the irony is that Elizabeth May, Jack Layton, Stephane Dion et al, had they been in government at the time, would've been firmly behind Chamberlain, with their noses appropriately pressed to his posterior. Just as Chamberlain had hoped to have his nose appropriately placed to please Hitler.

And this.

In the same way will history judge both the seditious stand of the liberals of every party on our war effort in Afghanistan....AND their stand on the environment based on disinformation and fanaticism, inspired by environmental fascists.

[Figleaf]

Although May tries to wiggle out of the Chamberlain's Nazi comparison by suggesting that not only was she quoting somebody else, but that quote simply said that the Conservative policy on the environment would be judged in history the same way Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler's had been judged.

So, you're saying May's comment was alright after all?

Nope. What made you think that?

It seemed like you were saying that if May's quote was simply a comment that history would judge one the same as the other that would be ok. Thanks for clarifying.

[normanchateau]

What is funny is how there has been little comment on May's statement:

"We have a moral obligation to our Lord and Father to ensure we do not destroy the creation that was given to us. Through the power of our Lord and Jesus Christ, we can meet this moral obligation."

Can you imagine the uproar if a CPC MP had said that. If it is wrong in the eyes of some for non elected people fervently defending traditional marriage and see it as a moral threat, it is also wrong for Elizabeth May to use the pulpit to do so.

Wow, the media is really giving her a pass on this comment. They would freak if a Tory said that.

Actually May's religious views and her opposition to abortion have been reported frequently by the media, e.,g.

May: "Nobody in their right mind is for abortions. I've talked women out of having abortions. I would never have an abortion myself, not in a million years. I can't imagine the circumstances that would have ever induced me to it."

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/columni...52-48221ba043ed

While I personally deplore her position on a number of issues, I am astonished at the venom directed at her by Harper supporters. Both Harper and May are anti-abortionists and both have strong religious opinions which influence their political decisions. Why don't they don't share common views on the environment?

Doesn't Harper know that even evangelical Christians now embrace global warming? See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/08/national...ec7507a&ei=5070

[August1991]

While I personally deplore her position on a number of issues, I am astonished at the venom directed at her by Harper supporters.

Harper supporters?

The NDP/rabble.ca crowd direct a venom at May that is worthy of a Stalinist/Trotskyite purge, show trial, axe.

The NDP mistakenly gave up its union, leftist vote and sought the social liberal (gay), environmental, alternative, "none of the above" vote. The effort failed. May and the Greens are a better alternative.

May will get the alternative, anti-politics-as-usual vote. The NDP won't. Layton's too glib and too polished. He's too 1980s.

More generally, traditional politicians ignore May and the Greens at their peril. She's the future of western democratic politics. (Look at the leading edge of Sarkozy and even Dumont.)

[rrabbit]

I don't believe much E May says or support her party despite my own lefty environmental leanings.

All the white middle class political parties are the same pile of self-interested poo! They all operate from the same severely limited conceptual and cultural mentality. They all have the same colonial vision of economic development for the country, just keep ramping up the mining and export cheap unfinished or no value added raw materials at firesale prices. None of them have any real vision of economic, social and cultural development for Canada beyond that of the classic colonial governor. They all argue about and promote themselves with minor differences on how to keep raping the environment, to keep on keep'in on as we always have. They're all looking desperately and wishing like naive children for fairy tale technological fixes for environmental problems with none of them recognizing the problems are really cultural and not technological.

The biggest problem with modern Canadian democracy is the absolute worst people to have as leaders are the people who want the role. The more they want it the worse a leader they are because its all self interest and ego. We're all familiar with the highly unlikeable coworker who wants desperately to be boss. Many of us have the further unpleasant experience of actually having the moron become the boss. I delight to this day at the fall of Paul Martin and his right wing faction in the Liberal party. Blindly rank personal ambition in leadership is never ever good for a country. And yeah, Jack Layton is just as full of himself as the rest!

I don't know if I said this before here?

The surest mark of the true peasant is a burning desire to be monarch!

The surest mark of the true monarch is a burning desire to be peasant!

[normanchateau]

While I personally deplore her position on a number of issues, I am astonished at the venom directed at her by Harper supporters.

Harper supporters?

The NDP/rabble.ca crowd direct a venom at May that is worthy of a Stalinist/Trotskyite purge, show trial, axe.

No doubt about it. The NDP loathes the Greens and that's no surprise given that to some extent they're competing for the same voters. But for Tory supporters to feel this way about May surprises me. Perhaps they, like the NDP, view her as potentially stealing some of their votes as the electorate becomes increasingly more disillusioned with the inept, current government.

[Rue]

I don't believe much E May says or support her party despite my own lefty environmental leanings.

"All the white middle class political parties are the same.."

"They all operate"

"They all have" t

"They all argue"

"They're all"

Rrabbit you are full of racist generalizations. You lost me the moment you decided to resort to racist stereotypes and then make sweeping generalizations based on your subjective biases and preconceptions that "white" people are out to get you and control Canada.

Excuse me if I say it right to your face-you are a bigot and slurring white people is odious. Its as odious as doing it to any one else.

You feed into the stereotype other racists want to justify being racist themselves. They use people like you to hate non white people.

You fuel racism with such stereotypes. Maybe its time your brain tries to be a bit more flexible when it conceives what is out there.

[normanchateau]

May will get the alternative, anti-politics-as-usual vote.

Yeah, and much of it will come from those who know nothing about her and would have voted for a party called "None of the above."

[betsy]

All the white middle class political parties are the same pile of self-interested poo! They all operate from the same severely limited conceptual and cultural mentality. They all have the same colonial vision of economic development for the country, just keep ramping up the mining and export cheap unfinished or no value added raw materials at firesale prices. None of them have any real vision of economic, social and cultural development for Canada beyond that of the classic colonial governor. They all argue about and promote themselves with minor differences on how to keep raping the environment, to keep on keep'in on as we always have. They're all looking desperately and wishing like naive children for fairy tale technological fixes for environmental problems with none of them recognizing the problems are really cultural and not technological.

I assume you're one of the white middle-class. Only leftwing liberals are gratified by wallowing in self-deprecation. Of course we know, it's an imagined superiority that allows them to do it. Nonetheless, it's racist bigotry....no matter from what mouth it comes.

[noahbody]

But for Tory supporters to feel this way about May surprises me. Perhaps they, like the NDP, view her as potentially stealing some of their votes as the electorate becomes increasingly more disillusioned with the inept, current government.

If a Liberal government was in power, do you think they would have let the comment go unchallenged?

May is all about getting attention. Aside from this, I think running against Mckay shows poor judgement. The best thing she could do for her party is win a seat. Currently the Greens are nothing more than a lobby group.

[normanchateau]

the irony is that Elizabeth May, Jack Layton, Stephane Dion et al, had they been in government at the time, would've been firmly behind Chamberlain, with their noses appropriately pressed to his posterior.

I doubt it but neither of us can prove it one way or the other.

What can be said with far more certainty is that if Harper had been Prime Minister when the US invaded Iraq, today Canadian forces would be dying in Iraq. Evidence:

"In my judgment Canada will eventually join with the allied coalition if war on Iraq comes to pass. The government will join, notwithstanding its failure to prepare, its neglect in co-operating with its allies, or its inability to contribute. In the end it will join out of the necessity created by a pattern of uncertainty and indecision. It will not join as a leader but unnoticed at the back of the parade."

- Stephen Harper indicating that, if elected, Canada will join the US occupation of Iraq, Hansard, January 29th 2003.

"We support the war effort and believe we should be supporting our troops and our allies and be there with them doing everything necessary to win."

- Stephen Harper supporting the US-lead war on Iraq, Montreal Gazette, April 2nd 2003.

"Nay."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper voting against a motion urging the Canadian government not to participate in the US military intervention in Iraq, March 20, 2003.

[sharkman]

Harper supporters?

The NDP/rabble.ca crowd direct a venom at May that is worthy of a Stalinist/Trotskyite purge, show trial, axe.

The NDP mistakenly gave up its union, leftist vote and sought the social liberal (gay), environmental, alternative, "none of the above" vote. The effort failed. May and the Greens are a better alternative.

May will get the alternative, anti-politics-as-usual vote. The NDP won't. Layton's too glib and too polished. He's too 1980s.

More generally, traditional politicians ignore May and the Greens at their peril. She's the future of western democratic politics. (Look at the leading edge of Sarkozy and even Dumont.)

No kidding? I had been expecting Jack and May to form some kind of left wing alliance. I was surprised to see the Liberals do so.

[southerncomfort]

If a Liberal government was in power, do you think they would have let the comment go unchallenged?

May is all about getting attention. Aside from this, I think running against Mckay shows poor judgement. The best thing she could do for her party is win a seat. Currently the Greens are nothing more than a lobby group.

I am with you on that one, they sure wouldn't let it go, wouldn't let her religious comments go either. Have to agree that Dion has shown poor judgement on this and could sure live to regret it. Guess its Harper's fault tho LOL

[normanchateau]

Harper supporters?

The NDP/rabble.ca crowd direct a venom at May that is worthy of a Stalinist/Trotskyite purge, show trial, axe.

The NDP mistakenly gave up its union, leftist vote and sought the social liberal (gay), environmental, alternative, "none of the above" vote. The effort failed. May and the Greens are a better alternative.

May will get the alternative, anti-politics-as-usual vote. The NDP won't. Layton's too glib and too polished. He's too 1980s.

More generally, traditional politicians ignore May and the Greens at their peril. She's the future of western democratic politics. (Look at the leading edge of Sarkozy and even Dumont.)

No kidding? I had been expecting Jack and May to form some kind of left wing alliance.

May left wing? She's an antiabortionist who has more in common with Harper than Dion.

[Catchme]

While I personally deplore her position on a number of issues, I am astonished at the venom directed at her by Harper supporters.

Harper supporters?

The NDP/rabble.ca crowd direct a venom at May that is worthy of a Stalinist/Trotskyite purge, show trial, axe.

This rhetoric is a bit over the top, and beyond the pale actually. If you choose to use this style of discourse, then stating that the way Harper and the CPC attack the Liberals is of Hitler, Mussolini and the fascist regime shows trials and mass murders, of those 2.

The NDP mistakenly gave up its union, leftist vote and sought the social liberal (gay), environmental, alternative, "none of the above" vote. The effort failed. May and the Greens are a better alternative.

Well you can't really have it both ways now can you?

I mean first off you liken the NDP to communists, then in the next breath you say they left the union leftist behind, which is it? Oh yes, it is pure rhetoric designed to provoke emotions rather than, actual critical thinking dialetic analysis.

May will get the alternative, anti-politics-as-usual vote. The NDP won't. Layton's too glib and too polished. He's too 1980s.

More rhetoric designed to promote an emotional derogatory mental image that is inacccurate to the nth degree. After all, just what is "too 80's"?

But you are correct May is nothing more than a representative of a lobby group in heading the greens, just as she was when she headed the Sierra Club. There is no bleeding off of the NDP to Green Party, as such, that comment is purely internal belief constructs.

More generally, traditional politicians ignore May and the Greens at their peril. She's the future of western democratic politics. (Look at the leading edge of Sarkozy and even Dumont.)

Oh yes, let's compare the ROC to how the French in France and PQ are feeling! Especially when it is evident that everyone is pretty much split on how they are feeling. There are no majorities of thought action going on.

Plus, the Greens are after all doing oh so well, now they're back down to their 7%, which is actually more like 3% when push comes to shove at voting time. everyone knows the NDP are by far ahead of the Green Party environmentally speaking, as well as every other level. Those who do not viote NDP will be voting Liberal, not Green.

In one area the Greens make grow and that is with, disenfranchised from the CPC, Albertans, who may actually park their votes with the Greens though, as there is actual bleed off there.