Comment by Elizabeth May

[normanchateau]

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.

Might explain the unprecendted attacks on May by CPC supporters on this thread.

[Catchme]

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.

Might explain the unprecendted attacks on May by CPC supporters on this thread.

Yes, in part, I am sure, as well, as the comments against fundamentalist Evangelicals. There is a clear split occuring, in that area, and Ms May wedged it further open.

[betsy]

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.

Maybe not prove, but the odds that they would have appeased Hitler, based on their behaviour today...are overwhelmingly in my favour!

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.

Yes!

And if he had been the Prime Minister of England, he wouldn't have appeased Hitler!

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.

Evidence? Well-researched. Good job! And I agree with every word he said.

That's why I'm proud of him! He knew enough that the government ought to do the right thing.

But he knew Chretien would fail dismally!

[normanchateau]

And if he had been the Prime Minister of England, he wouldn't have appeased Hitler!

...anymore than he appeased Quebec or the Quebecois.

[betsy]

And if he had been the Prime Minister of England, he wouldn't have appeased Hitler!

...anymore than he appeased Quebec or the Quebecois.

Touche'....in a way.

Appeasing your countrymen is different from appeasing your enemy. At least, in the mind of a Conservative.

Cheers, Norm! I'm taking a break.

[normanchateau]

Appeasing your countrymen is different from appeasing your enemy. At least, in the mind of a Conservative.

Not all Conservatives. My favourite Conservative of all time is Sir Winston Churchill. He appeased neither.

Unfortunately, he paid the price in the 1945 election when his ungrateful citizens voted him out.

[M.Dancer]

Appeasing your countrymen is different from appeasing your enemy. At least, in the mind of a Conservative.

Not all Conservatives. My favourite Conservative of all time is Sir Winston Churchill. He appeased neither.

Unfortunately, he paid the price in the 1945 election when his ungrateful citizens voted him out.

...then they voted himback in.

He was a great war time PM but only a run of the mill peace time leader. He was in the unfortunate position of leading a nation that wanted change on a great scale. They saw the advances that nations like the US and Canada could do with people of merit, and they wer asking quite rightly, why is birth and class impeding our ambitions.

Churchill, as a conservative could not address those questions.

[normanchateau]

Churchill, as a conservative could not address those questions.

But in 1951 they did vote him back in. He will always be my favourite Conservative.

[M.Dancer]

Churchill, as a conservative could not address those questions.

But in 1951 they did vote him back in. He will always be my favourite Conservative.

He my favourite conservative too...right beside Flora Mc, Babs McDougal and Joe Clark

[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.."

"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.

Fair enough! What you say is apparently true on the surface, but, I largely respond in kind to the what I have experienced for an entire lifetime of decades in this society and what I detect veiled behind careful language here. There is also a good deal of humour and satire in this holding up of the mirror. I'm a racist in the same way Andrew Dice Clay was sexist. Perhaps I am too subtle for mainstream mentality to grasp these nuances. I offer another example satirizing a classic "defence" to your accusation.

Hell no! I'm not racist! Some of my best friends are non-aboriginals.

Those who know me in real life, both abo and non-abo would be rolling around on the floor at the above. Taking umbrage at such satire indicates a lack of capacity to grasp the real nature of racism and division. To varying degrees we all wear masks, play roles, at these forums. I'm OK with playing the bad guy, making myself the target, to draw others out on this issue of racism (especially under an alias or avatar). Its a very useful and productive role if you can stand the heat. You should take more care in interpreting the comments of those who operate outside your own cultural context.

Returning to the context of the thread, yeah, the political parties are all the same with very few real differences in ideaology or culture. Witness the recent "sweetheart" arrangement between Dion and May. The Tories think changing a few light bulbs is an effective address of greenhouse gas emissions while Jack Layton thinks everyone installing a 15 to 20 thousand dollar solar power system on their roof is is a feasible solution. To the last person, every politician in every political party at every level of government, despite it being a significant social and economic issue, has carefully avoided raising poverty and disparity in Canada as an election issue for the past 30 years of so. Why? Because their limited feudal mentality cannot even conceive of a mechanism or method to address the issue! Any real solutions would be far too disruptive to the way this shabby copy of feudal European society operates!

[normanchateau]

Returning to the context of the thread, yeah, the political parties are all the same with very few real differences in ideaology or culture.

There are some similarities but they're not all the same. For example, only one party has a leader who happens to be a social conservative. Yet most Canadians I suspect are not social conservatives which is why it's inconceivable that the Conservatives under Harper will ever receive a majority unless they can fool more people than they have so far.

[geoffrey]

Norman, were you the guy that designed the fear ads of the last election?? I've never heard such irrational nonsense in my life.

[normanchateau]

Norman, were you the guy that designed the fear ads of the last election?? I've never heard such irrational nonsense in my life.

The only irrational nonsense is your response. What other party has a leader who is a social conservative?

[betsy]

deleted. Wrong post.

[M.Dancer]

Norman, were you the guy that designed the fear ads of the last election?? I've never heard such irrational nonsense in my life.

The only irrational nonsense is your response. What other party has a leader who is a social conservative?

The jury is still out on whether Harper is a social conservative. I think though, that he has courted their vote and has managed to giove them noting in return, which only reaises his esteem in my eyes.

[normanchateau]

Norman, were you the guy that designed the fear ads of the last election?? I've never heard such irrational nonsense in my life.

The only irrational nonsense is your response. What other party has a leader who is a social conservative?

The jury is still out on whether Harper is a social conservative. I think though, that he has courted their vote and has managed to give them noting in return, which only raises his esteem in my eyes.

I'm not sure if the jury is still out but there's certainly no shortage of evidence based on previous statements and voting behaviour. There's no evidence which I'm aware of to suggest that those previous statements and votes no longer reflect his current beliefs.

[M.Dancer]

The jury is still out on whether Harper is a social conservative. I think though, that he has courted their vote and has managed to give them noting in return, which only raises his esteem in my eyes.

I'm not sure if the jury is still out but there's certainly no shortage of evidence based on previous statements and voting behaviour. There's no evidence which I'm aware of to suggest that those previous statements and votes no longer reflect his current beliefs.

Voting behavior? How many votes has there been on sociual conservative issues?

[scribblet]

The jury is still out on whether Harper is a social conservative. I think though, that he has courted their vote and has managed to giove them noting in return, which only reaises his esteem in my eyes.

I agree with this, he certainly has not pandered to any social conservatives, other than the one vote to revisit the issue of SSM, which I'm sure he knew would not pass.

There is nothing socially conservative about Harper. This is flogging a dead horse, someone repeating the same old lies doesn't make it so. Besides, comments such as those and others are nothing but baiting and trolling, best to ignore.

cheers

[normanchateau]

The jury is still out on whether Harper is a social conservative. I think though, that he has courted their vote and has managed to give them noting in return, which only raises his esteem in my eyes.

I'm not sure if the jury is still out but there's certainly no shortage of evidence based on previous statements and voting behaviour. There's no evidence which I'm aware of to suggest that those previous statements and votes no longer reflect his current beliefs.

Voting behavior? How many votes has there been on sociual conservative issues?

When Harper was leader of the Official Opposition, he voted against making it a hate crime to advocate or promote the killing of homosexuals. The Liberals, NDP and BQ voted for Bill C-250 which made that a hate crime. Even some members of Harper's own party voted for C-250. Harper voted against it even though he has no problem with hate crime legislation per se when it applies to religion and race.

[M.Dancer]

When Harper was leader of the Official Opposition, he voted against making it a hate crime to advocate or promote the killing of homosexuals. The Liberals, NDP and BQ voted for Bill C-250 which made that a hate crime. Even some members of Harper's own party voted for C-250. Harper voted against it even though he has no problem with hate crime legislation per se when it applies to religion and race.

It's already a crime to promote murder. Why anyone would tag on a law that would be easily quashed in a courtroom, and consider it a vitory is beyond me, but the opponents of this add on were more concerned about denate chill than actually confusing the courts.

Point in fact though, C-250 never uses the term homosexual. It says sexual orientation, which could lead some wooly headed Crown charging an gay man with the killing of a straight, and call it a hate crime...stupid really....