Will Linda McQuaig be barred from running for the NDP?

46 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Will Linda McQuaig be barred from running for the NDP?

*

Unionist

First she said that some bitumen should be left in the ground. The Party "leadership" squelched that within 24 hours.

But now she's gone way too far:

[url=https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2016/08/22/elizabeth-may-shou... would take a leader with independence and courage to pressure Israel to end its military occupation – someone like Elizabeth May[/url]

Quote:

Some commentators have suggested that it’s OK to criticize Israel, but a boycott goes too far.

But how then to address this increasingly urgent situation?

For decades, Canada, along with most Western nations, has officially supported the UN’s endorsement of a two-state solution, but has done nothing to pressure Israel to stop building settlements on land designated for a Palestinian state.

This lack of pressure from the West has given Israel’s right-wing government, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, a green light to continue its expansion of settlements, which now house more than 500,000 Israelis, making the creation of a future Palestinian state more and more difficult.

Critics argue that a boycott would unfairly single out Israel, when there are many bad actors in the world.

True, but those nations don’t enjoy the high level of Western support that Israel does. Israel is hailed as a beacon of democracy by Western nations, including Canada.

Given Canada’s strong support, surely Canadians expect Israel to be held to the minimal standard of respecting basic human rights and complying with international law.

This is not an obscure years-old tweet or Facebook post. Several candidates have been dumped for far less than this. And Libby Davies was bullied into silence on Palestine (she hasn't uttered a word publicly since) for daring to suggest that BDS should be debated within the party.

Too bad, Linda, we hardly knew ya.

 

josh

She should be leader.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Unionist wrote:

First she said that some bitumen should be left in the ground. The Party "leadership" squelched that within 24 hours.

Strange how in 2008 Layton flew over the tar sands calling for a moratorium on all new development.  Did that not mean leaving the gunk in the ground? Its those kinds of flip flops on important environmental issues that allowed the Liberals to appear more progressive. 

Debater

I don't think she has any interest in running for the leadership.

Based on the piece she wrote a few months ago about her experience running for office, I'm not sure she will even run for MP again:

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2016/03/17/what-i-learned-fro...

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Good on Linda McQuaig for savaging the bourgeois idea of voting as shopping.

I wouldn't want to join those trained seals and Parliamentary cretins that pass for the leading lights of Canadian democracy. Rot your brain.

Unionist

[url=https://www.honestreporting.ca/star-columnist-linda-mcquaig-defends-bds-... Columnist Linda McQuaig Defends BDS in Smear Attack Against Israel[/url]

In case the NDP forgets her crime, we have the Israel lobby McCarthyite "Honest Reporting" service which will remind them at the appropriate time.

 

Notalib

josh wrote:
She should be leader.

yup

 

swallow swallow's picture

Link says:

Quote:
According to McQuaig, a self proclaimed “journalist and author”

I love lines like that. "We hate her, so she can't possibly be a journalist or author." Even though she is paid to do journalism and has published some books, which seems to make her by definition botha  journalist and an author.

I'm not too keen on Ezra Levant, but he is clearly a journalist and author, no scare quotes needed. 

Unionist

swallow wrote:

Link says:

Quote:
According to McQuaig, a self proclaimed “journalist and author”

I love lines like that. "We hate her, so she can't possibly be a journalist or author." Even though she is paid to do journalism and has published some books, which seems to make her by definition botha  journalist and an author.

Well, can't expect much better from Humorously-Allegedly-Honest Reporting.com.

motown68

Linda has said in an older piece that she will not run again. It would be a pleasant suprise if she did seek the NDP leadership.

A few weeks ago a "Tar Sands Exec" came out and said that some of it should be left in the ground. Last summer when Linda spoke the truth, I did an online check of the Alberta newspapers. It was suprising to find them tilting in favor of Linda.I am no expert on the affairs in Israel....but I do know west bank settlements started right after the 1967 war when Nasser threatened to wipe Israel off the map. In order to survive, Israel had to launch its only option, a pre-empt air stike.

Having read everyone of Linda McQuaig's books, I can tell you that she is NOT some "self proclaimed journalist and author."

Her publishers list the many praises of her work on each of her books. They come from newspapers , journalists and politicians  from around the world. Go to any library accross Canada and sign out one of her books and see for yourself.

motown68

Linda has said in an older piece that she will not run again. It would be a pleasant suprise if she did seek the NDP leadership.

A few weeks ago a "Tar Sands Exec" came out and said that some of it should be left in the ground. Last summer when Linda spoke the truth, I did an online check of the Alberta newspapers. It was suprising to find them tilting in favor of Linda.I am no expert on the affairs in Israel....but I do know west bank settlements started right after the 1967 war when Nasser threatened to wipe Israel off the map. In order to survive, Israel had to launch its only option, a pre-empt air stike.

Having read everyone of Linda McQuaig's books, I can tell you that she is NOT some "self proclaimed journalist and author."

Her publishers list the many praises of her work on each of her books. They come from newspapers , journalists and politicians  from around the world. Go to any library accross Canada and sign out one of her books and see for yourself.

Pondering

Debater wrote:

I don't think she has any interest in running for the leadership.

Based on the piece she wrote a few months ago about her experience running for office, I'm not sure she will even run for MP again:

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2016/03/17/what-i-learned-fro...

She is unfortunately wrong about this:

Back in my perch in journalism (with no plans to run again), I’m wondering if we’re well served by a conventional wisdom that has reduced the voter to a simple-minded consumer who’s only out for herself.

Could it be that the voter is actually hungry to be treated as a citizen — that is, treated as someone (to paraphrase Canadian author Gilbert Reid) who’s an adult, has an attention span, some knowledge of history and empathy for others, is patient, open to debate, and even willing to make sacrifices for the common good?

While voters don't want to be percieved as simple-minded consumers they are not patient and willing to listen to long debates and complicated explanations and they don't want to make sacrifices either. Nor should they be, trade-offs maybe, but not sacrifices unless they are self-directed. Framing things as sacrifices turns them into a negative and supports Conservatism. Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society (Oliver Wendal Holmes). People have attention spans but not for politics.

That doesn't mean people don't understand the benefits of "common good". That is why Canadians are so supportive of Medicare.

All in all Canadians are pretty satisfied with Canada and with good reason. This is a pretty great country. Number one requirement for the federal government is that they are good administrators of Canada as is. It is very true that in Canada governments defeat themselves. it is also true that it generally takes 10 to 15 years for that to happen.

Trudeau, like Harper, will have bad polling days when the public wants to send a message but that doesn't mean on voting day they will choose someone else.

Like it or not, most of the people who are swing voters want the Coles Notes version in the final weeks of the election and see no point in paying attention at any other time. That doesn't make them simple-minded. They rightfully know that paying attention makes no practical difference unless the issue is enormous and even then maybe not. For example, C-51, there was lots of opposition to it but not enough to impact the election because during the election they were looking first for the strongest economic manager and administrator.

The arguments that convinced Quebecers to support universal daycare were not altruistic they were economic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/08/22/canada-missed-the-boat-on-econom...

California has the fastest-growing economy in the United States despite putting a price on carbon emissions, but Canada has failed to recognize that this is not a "false choice" with a negative economic impact, Orbinski said Monday.

"For Canada, we have been stuck in this paradox," he said. "We are lagging behind economically in terms of the kind of advances that other nations like Germany, Spain, the nations of continental Europe, the U.K., China even, the kind of policies that they're engaging in terms of dealing with the effects of climate change."

The development of alternative energy sources, such as solar and wind power, has fuelled a knowledge- and technology-based economy in California, which has experienced a fifth year of drought driven by climate change, Orbinski said Monday.

Now there is the winning argument. That we would also be doing the right thing for fighting climate change is the bonus that makes people feel righteous, but it is not the driver.

The free market will kill off the oil sands. Alberta is like the horse and buggy workers of history insisting that cars will never take over because horses are more dependable and never run out of gas and rarely breakdown.

The world has yet to reduce overall use of fossil fuels but it will get there because the technologies to reduce their use are developing expotentially and can easily compete economically over the long run. Electric vehicles will reduce air pollution in cities which will lead to cost savings on everything from cleaning to health care. Even without climate change it is economically superior.

There may be trade-offs, but that is not the same thing as sacrifice. People are willing to trade a lot for water they can swim in and drink without fear.

Government is a tool through which we can buy collectively to reduce costs, like a co-op. You want to call that socialism, fine, whatever. I just call it common sense.

 

swallow swallow's picture

Any sane person admits some oil has to be left in the ground. The position that all oil must under all circumstances be extracted is impossible on any number of levels. The rest is "tone." 

Linda McQuaig can't be "leader" of the NDP since she doesn't speak French, but if party members were willing to think of leadership differently, she could be the co-spokesperson with (say) Alexandre Boulerice or Romeo Saganash, even without a seat in parliament. (This is the Quebec Solidaire model of leadership - a party "leader" with no effective power, plus two co-spokespersons, one woman and one man, one with a seat in the legislature and the other a social movement activist without a seat). 

Sean in Ottawa

swallow wrote:

Any sane person admits some oil has to be left in the ground. The position that all oil must under all circumstances be extracted is impossible on any number of levels. The rest is "tone." 

Linda McQuaig can't be "leader" of the NDP since she doesn't speak French, but if party members were willing to think of leadership differently, she could be the co-spokesperson with (say) Alexandre Boulerice or Romeo Saganash, even without a seat in parliament. (This is the Quebec Solidaire model of leadership - a party "leader" with no effective power, plus two co-spokespersons, one woman and one man, one with a seat in the legislature and the other a social movement activist without a seat). 

Given the NDP suffers from a "lost generation" in that those who ought to be leaders now would normally have come to the party during those years when the party had nobody coming in, this type of model could be a creative solution.

I like Saganash particularly and others. During the last leadership I supported Saganash until he dropped out and then, unfortunately backed Mulcair.

Here is a question: Does Wab Kinew speak French? He is one of the most powerful communicators I have seen in English.

I still rather like Dr. Liu of Doctors without Borders (MSF) -- I do not know how long the terms of the presidency of that organization last so do not know if she might be available. She is another option that might be good -- if she is interested.

The co-leader model should not be dismissed as a credible option for the NDP now.

Unionist

Does this thread have to duplicate all the "who should be the Glorious Leader of the NDP" threads? Really?

I opened this thread because the invisible shits in the NDP back-room banned many good people from candidacy for modest support for the rights of Palestinians. And I was speculating that the same might be the case for Linda McQuaig.

I admire Linda McQuaig, but why in God's name would we debate whether she should be NDP leader? Might as well have that debate about Naomi Klein. Or Jill Stein. These pointless discussions belong in another thread.

As for Saganash, I like him a lot, but my biggest disappoinment was when he ran, then dropped out, without explaining either decision in a persuasive fashion. Let alone supporting Mulcair. I came to the personal conclusion that he gets easily influenced by others.

motown68

The question really should be, "Does Linda McQuaig want to be involved with the NDP?" She gave it her best shot twice to be elected? The NDP were blown out of Toronto. mainly due to the "Anyone but Harper" tidal wave. As a journalist, she does not have to tow to the party line. Her voice is one of experience and  ability to create ineresting dialoge on current Canadian/World events. What more can anyone ask from a very proud Canadian citizen.

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Well, if she could lead the charge to "Storm the [Canadian] Bastille", and screw the electoral process, ...

 

I'd follow her into Hell.

takeitslowly

i wish shes the NDP leader

Rev Pesky

Just a note on the California economy, seeing as someone has posted on it already:

From Wikipedia:

Quote:
Agriculture (including fruit, vegetables, dairy, and wine production) is a major California industry. Airborne exports of perishable fruits and vegetables amounted to approximately $579 million in 2007. By way of comparison, California exported more agricultural products by air that year than 23 other states did by all modes of transport.

That's green?

 

takeitslowly

i voted ndp all my life, i will probably stop voting for any party because of how they treat people like linda and their failure as a party.

Unionist

takeitslowly wrote:

i voted ndp all my life, i will probably stop voting for any party because of how they treat people like linda and their failure as a party.

That goes for me too - that's how I feel, anyway. And great to see you back in these parts, my friend!

Pondering

Rev Pesky wrote:

Just a note on the California economy, seeing as someone has posted on it already:

From Wikipedia:

Quote:
Agriculture (including fruit, vegetables, dairy, and wine production) is a major California industry. Airborne exports of perishable fruits and vegetables amounted to approximately $579 million in 2007. By way of comparison, California exported more agricultural products by air that year than 23 other states did by all modes of transport.

That's green?

No, that isn't green but it doesn't negate the following:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/08/22/canada-missed-the-boat-on-econom...

California has the fastest-growing economy in the United States despite putting a price on carbon emissions, but Canada has failed to recognize that this is not a "false choice" with a negative economic impact, Orbinski said Monday.

"For Canada, we have been stuck in this paradox," he said. "We are lagging behind economically in terms of the kind of advances that other nations like Germany, Spain, the nations of continental Europe, the U.K., China even, the kind of policies that they're engaging in terms of dealing with the effects of climate change."

The development of alternative energy sources, such as solar and wind power, has fuelled a knowledge- and technology-based economy in California, which has experienced a fifth year of drought driven by climate change, Orbinski said Monday.

We are still going to be using fossil fuels for some time. We don't need to increase capacity. We have enough. We need to develop other aspects of our economy because oil is going to be a smaller and smaller part of it. Alberta needs to understand that other provinces are not willing to risk catastrophe. That California flies out it's produce is immaterial.

quizzical

lol what other provinces?

every province already has pipelines including QC.

 

motown68

NDP leadership reaction last summer to Linda's public statements was shallow and non supportive. My gut feeling has always

been this was a harbinger of things to come. The obliteration of the NDP in Toronto.

 

quizzical

i gues it tells us how shallow Torontonians are if we didn't already know.

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

lol what other provinces?

every province already has pipelines including QC.

Not that contain bitumen and just because we have some doesn't mean we have to accept more. We can choose to limit our exposure, and that is what we are choosing to do.

 

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

quizzical wrote:

lol what other provinces?

every province already has pipelines including QC.

Not that contain bitumen and just because we have some doesn't mean we have to accept more. We can choose to limit our exposure, and that is what we are choosing to do.

 

Correct. Fully agree with that. 

But this thread was about Linda McQuaig supporting Palestinian human rights, and thus disqualifying herself from running again for the NDP.

 

motown68

It was pointed out earlier here that Linda has said she is not going back into politics. Whoever started this thread must not be a regular reader of Linda's newspaper articles.I had read that in one of her first return articles in the Toronto Star as well.  It really is a non-issue, unless she has had a change of heart lately.

swallow swallow's picture

Non-issue for her. It's a major issue for the NDP, though: will it continue to exclude candidates who believe Palestinians are entitlted to human rights? 

Unionist

motown68 wrote:

It was pointed out earlier here that Linda has said she is not going back into politics. Whoever started this thread must not be a regular reader of Linda's newspaper articles.I had read that in one of her first return articles in the Toronto Star as well.  It really is a non-issue, unless she has had a change of heart lately.

I started this thread.

The issue isn't Linda McQuaig's personal life goals.

It's about anonymous NDP officials banning the candidacy of anyone who stands up for Palestinian rights - like Paul Manly, Jerry Natanine, Morgan Wheeldon, Syed Hayder Ali... - and refusing to publicly disclose the reasons.

Not sure if you heard about those cases. Hope you now understand why I opened this thread. People of conscience should stand up and condemn this practice. Agreed?

ETA: Crossposted with swallow.

Sean in Ottawa

Unionist wrote:

motown68 wrote:

It was pointed out earlier here that Linda has said she is not going back into politics. Whoever started this thread must not be a regular reader of Linda's newspaper articles.I had read that in one of her first return articles in the Toronto Star as well.  It really is a non-issue, unless she has had a change of heart lately.

I started this thread.

The issue isn't Linda McQuaig's personal life goals.

It's about anonymous NDP officials banning the candidacy of anyone who stands up for Palestinian rights - like Paul Manly, Jerry Natanine, Morgan Wheeldon, Syed Hayder Ali... - and refusing to publicly disclose the reasons.

Not sure if you heard about those cases. Hope you now understand why I opened this thread. People of conscience should stand up and condemn this practice. Agreed?

ETA: Crossposted with swallow.

Sometimes it takes a conversation to really make a question clear and I think you and Swallow have articulated the question and issue.

It is attached to a wider social question that goes beyond the NDP which is the silencing of any protest on this topic as being unacceptable for discussion.

We should be able to respect debate on these things-- would BDS make things better or worse? -- how about other types of international protest? (take your pick). But when we classify one as beyond discussion we are doing something else. We are censoring a discussion in Canada about something taht is not even Canadian. We don't permit censorship of debate about Canada why would we allow that you cannot debate soemthing like Canada's (and others) response to Israel or BDS.

I respect those who disagree with BDS and I think most people here do. What is causing the difficulty are those who say BDS cannot be up for debate and any one who raises it must be purged from the conversation or political process.

We cannot say in a democratic process that you cannot even have debates like this. We don't have to agree to debate agreement with fundamental rights or equality or historical facts. But BDS is not that. BDS is a debate about a reaction to a behaviour by another country.

Put another way -- yes, Unionist, agreed.

Unionist

And in fact, none of the previous banned candidates had gone remotely so far as supporting BDS. Nor had Libby Davies in 2010.

So the malady afflicting the NDP runs far deeper than BDS. Time to treat it.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Unionist wrote:

And in fact, none of the previous banned candidates had gone remotely so far as supporting BDS. Nor had Libby Davies in 2010.

So the malady afflicting the NDP runs far deeper than BDS. Time to treat it.

If I remember correctly Libby made the unforgivable mistake of using the wrong date for the start of the occupation and instead used the date of the Nakba. It was an off the cuff remark to a reporter after she had marched in a protest and spoke from the podium about Palestinian rights. She didn't make that mistake in her speech. I think we used to have a link to the video of that interview in an old thread. Her gaff was used against her and her health portfolio including safe injection sites was put on the line by the Leader's office, just to ensure her silence.

The NDP's membership in my part of the world is very pro-Palestine rights. Unlike most of the country we consistently elect NDP MP's who are then banned from speaking for them on the Palestine occupation, in any forum. Apparently the views of NDP operatives somewhere in Central Canada are the only ones that count, even if they are electorally incompetent.

Pondering

An interesting dynamic here is that both the Conservatives and the Liberals allow MPs to be more outspoken concerning their personal stance and even the party can take a position not in accordance with the leadership.

The Liberal Party Convention was permitted to vote in favor of guaranteed minimum income even though the party has not adopted it as official policy. They also voted in favor of marijuana legalization which was eventually voluntarily adopted by leadership. The Conservative party has allowed individual members to express their anti-abortion views even if it prevented them from bringing it up in parliament.

I would not call either the Liberals or the Conservatives democratic parties but they seem more democratic than the NDP and more true to their members.

If the NDP loosened the leash a little maybe they would gain more support from traditionally leftist or progressive Canadians.

Maybe this is part the disconnect between the identity members and supporters assign the party versus the way the general public, meaning people like myself, perceive the party.

The party has spent decades deliberately cultivating a centrist public identity so that is how I see them. There were no individual MPs speaking up for marijuana legalization. None speaking out against Israel for their settlement policy. The liberal candidate that condemned Israel's bombing of civilians wasn't forced to retract or resign. Conservative anti-abortionists were permitted to bitterly oppose their party's position and agitate for bills in parliament even if they were prevented from presenting any.

The NDP's message discipline gives insiders and outsiders a very difference perception of the party. NDP supporters condemn me for supporting the Liberals because I see little difference between the NDP and the Liberals, but that is exactly what the NDP's goal has been for decades; to show that the NDP is as centrist as the Liberals. When people have noted how similar the parties are the NDP defence has been along the lines "but we will follow through" basically admitting that the parties are extremely similar.

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

An interesting dynamic here is that both the Conservatives and the Liberals allow MPs to be more outspoken concerning their personal stance and even the party can take a position not in accordance with the leadership.

When it comes to pandering and bootlicking to the Israel lobby, the Conservatives and Liberals are second to none.

The Conservatives are far more religiously loyal to the anti-Palestinian line than anyone in Israel, including Netanyahu. No Con candidate would ever dream of saying anything critical of Israel. Anti-Jewish, sure, but not anti-Israel.

Likewise for the Liberals. They are the second-best friends of Israel. You apparently have forgotten Lesley Hughes, a legendary Winnipeg investigative journalist and progressive, and Holocaust educator, who was turfed by Stéphane Dion in 2008 because he was too stupid and scared to understand an article she had written about 9/11.

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/liberals-ask-candidate-to-step-down-over-9... ask candidate to step down over 9/11 comments[/url]

To the resounding applause of the Canadian Jewish Congress, of course. Thanks, Stéphane, mission accomplished.

So the reason I hound the NDP non-stop over this issue is simple. We have a right to expect better of the NDP. The same cannot be said of the Liberals or Conservatives.

Pondering

Unionist wrote:

Pondering wrote:

An interesting dynamic here is that both the Conservatives and the Liberals allow MPs to be more outspoken concerning their personal stance and even the party can take a position not in accordance with the leadership.

When it comes to pandering and bootlicking to the Israel lobby, the Conservatives and Liberals are second to none.

The Conservatives are far more religiously loyal to the anti-Palestinian line than anyone in Israel, including Netanyahu. No Con candidate would ever dream of saying anything critical of Israel. Anti-Jewish, sure, but not anti-Israel.

Likewise for the Liberals. They are the second-best friends of Israel. You apparently have forgotten Lesley Hughes, a legendary Winnipeg investigative journalist and progressive, and Holocaust educator, who was turfed by Stéphane Dion in 2008 because he was too stupid and scared to understand an article she had written about 9/11.

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/liberals-ask-candidate-to-step-down-over-9... ask candidate to step down over 9/11 comments[/url]

To the resounding applause of the Canadian Jewish Congress, of course. Thanks, Stéphane, mission accomplished.

So the reason I hound the NDP non-stop over this issue is simple. We have a right to expect better of the NDP. The same cannot be said of the Liberals or Conservatives.

I was not saying Liberal policy is any better than Conservative or NDP policy on Israel. I was referring to this:

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/gen-andrew-leslies-frank-talk-...

Retired lieutenant-general Andrew Leslie was last seen making Conservative and Sun News heads explode with criticisms of Israel’s “indiscriminate” and “dumb” bombing of civilians in Gaza. But on Saturday at the general meeting of the Liberals’ Ontario wing in Markham, during a foreign policy session for delegates, Mr. Leslie did not talk like a man on a leash.

Andrew Leslie, as a Liberal candidate, was able to openly criticize Israel. When challenged Trudeau stated that Leslie could speak for himself. He did not criticize Leslie much less cut him lose. Have I missed an NDP candidate or MP speaking out against Israel and getting away with it?

Like you, my expectations of the Liberals are not high. They are a centrist establishment status quo party. Unlike the NDP they have never been anything else.

 

Sean in Ottawa

Let's stop having a double standard here and expect the same from all parties. If some parties never live up then so be it. It is tiresome having nonstop criticism of the NDP and when anyone points out that it is hypocritcal the Liberal boosters just admit the double standard that there are higher expectations of the NDP.

Really there should only be the same standard for all.

It is ridiculous that we get the tortured logic that the NDP is worse than the Liberals becuase while they really are better than the Liberals, we don't expect as much from the poor Liberal Party.

Let's stop that here, now.

 

 

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Let's stop having a double standard here and expect the same from all parties. If some parties never live up then so be it. It is tiresome having nonstop criticism of the NDP and when anyone points out that it is hypocritcal the Liberal boosters just admit the double standard that there are higher expectations of the NDP.

Really there should only be the same standard for all.

It is ridiculous that we get the tortured logic that the NDP is worse than the Liberals becuase while they really are better than the Liberals, we don't expect as much from the poor Liberal Party.

Let's stop that here, now.

They aren't worse than the Liberals they are the same as the Liberals. I expect better of the Liberals than of the Conservatives. There are some things the Conservatives would never do that the Liberals will. For example, I didn't expect the Conservatives to accept drug injection sites. I do expect it of the Liberals. The Liberals promised to looking into bulk buying of drugs on behalf of the provinces. The Conservatives would never do such a thing.

But yes, I did learn not to expect anything more of the NDP than I would of the Liberal party. That's why I had no trouble supporting Trudeau particularly once he committed to marijuana legalization.

If I cannot expect better of the NDP then they are redundant.

mark_alfred

Quote:

Non-issue for her. It's a major issue for the NDP, though: will it continue to exclude candidates who believe Palestinians are entitlted to human rights? 

That's a fair question.  I feel a part of the NDP's renewal process should be to review its vetting process for elections. 

As an aside, I do gotta say that when I first saw this thread I thought terrytowel had returned, given the hypothetical construct of it. 

Unionist

Pondering wrote:
Have I missed an NDP candidate or MP speaking out against Israel and getting away with it?

Yes, you have. His name is Alexandre Boulerice.

You know, if you weren't such an uncritical advocate of one of the parties (as are many of our NDP "my party right or wrong" champions), you might be able to see more clearly. 

Unionist

mark_alfred wrote:

As an aside, I do gotta say that when I first saw this thread I thought terrytowel had returned, given the hypothetical construct of it. 

Thanks for sharing that delusion with us, buddy.

Now maybe you can share your thoughts as to the NDP anonymous inner-circle despots arbitrarily shutting down honest and progressive folks that refuse to stay silent about Israel's crimes.

Any thoughts on that?

 

mark_alfred

Oh don't be angry Unionist, I'm agreeing with you.  Given the renewal process, now is the time for riding associations to make some clear demands that future election candidates will not be vilified for past reasonable expression of ideas.

Unionist

mark_alfred wrote:

Oh don't be angry Unionist, I'm agreeing with you.  Given the renewal process, now is the time for riding associations to make some clear demands that future election candidates will not be vilified for past reasonable expression of ideas.

Thanks for the partial reply. What if that reasonable expression of ideas is present? Like, if some candidate or MP (like McQuaig or Boulerice) refuses to bow down and kiss the Leader and His Inner Circle in supporting Israel, right or wrong? Should they be vilified?

This is a very serious question. Because now that the Green Party has dared to endorse BDS, progressive people have a duty to question whether the NDP will continue to operate as the branch plant of Likud?

 

mark_alfred

I often feel like I'm about to be sternly scolded wheneven I have these fun exchanges with you as you grill me with questions.  But I digress.  Anyway, absolutely, yes, or present.

Regarding the Green Party, it seems to me that they completely knuckled under due to May's pressure.  Just my impression.

ETA:  I do apologize for my initial kinda over-the-top expression of my feeling  --> alas, 'twas a stream-of-consciousness thing that in retrospect was not appropriate (I did edit the above).  I'm a kinda placid laid back guy of average intellect, and so the deep almost unbridled passion (coupled with encyclopedic grilling) that you put into these discussions sometimes does occasionally weird me out.  That said, I respect you expressing your ideas, and doing so in whatever fashion you see fit.

Pondering

Unionist wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Have I missed an NDP candidate or MP speaking out against Israel and getting away with it?

Yes, you have. His name is Alexandre Boulerice.

You know, if you weren't such an uncritical advocate of one of the parties (as are many of our NDP "my party right or wrong" champions), you might be able to see more clearly. 

Except I am not. The Liberals are wrong on C-51, wrong on trade deals, especially on CETA. If the Liberals would agree the most offending section of CETA could simply be removed. It's only between us and the EU so we are the ones standing in the way. TPP is much more complicated but he is actively supportive of the deal and has zero criticism of it.

I'm against Trudeau's decision not to hold a referendum on democratic reform.

I'm not happy about the increase in military action.

I agree they should decriminalize immediately but that they won't do it.

I have stated I don't think Trudeau is all that impressive as a man or as a leader. He won big and is continuing to win big based on marketing and lack of competition not merit.

I think if the NDP had won this election their future as a centrist party would be cemented. Now there is at least a chance that the moderate left of the NDP can have some impact.