Gary Doer defends Alberta oilsands

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fidel

And when conventional oil reserves run dry in Alberta in a few years' time, maybe we can buy dirty tar sands oil from Venezuela and have it shipped directly to the US. Maybe our old line party idiots can at least avoid paying carriage fees in abiding by NAFTA, the stupidest trade deal in the history of the world.

remind remind's picture

Nope, no one I know has ever gone to a going away, or retirement, party for someone whom they worked with, and didn't agree with on all things.

Never seen it before ever.

Afterall...they might just get painted with the same brush of the former collegue, by those who did not like him, even though they have lived thier lives in direct contrast to what said person who is leaving has espoused.

 

Frankly, I thought such small mindedness went out of progressive discourse, especially from those of us who have brethern that we do not agree with, perhaps on nothing even, but associate with anyway. And  we even go to going away parties for them, without worry that some would paint us like our departing brethern.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

You're ignoring the topic, remind. Doer gave a defense - and a misleading one, at that - of the filthy tarsands the day after his farewell party. The question I asked is how Layton feels about Doer's comments, the day after he celebrated an evening with Doer.

Fidel

Polunatic2 wrote:
But what is the NDP's energy policy now?

Quote:
Halt any new tar sands development until carbon emissions are capped, significant environmental and health impacts are addressed, and protected areas are set aside.

 
[url=NDP">http://www.ndp.ca/platform/otherpriorities/internationaltrade][=ora... Platform[/url]
Quote:

We must ensure that NAFTA is reformed in ways that meet our priorities:

  • Renegotiate NAFTA's Chapter 11, which unreasonably limits Canada's sovereignty in regulating foreign investment in the public interest.
  • Renegotiate NAFTA's Chapter 6, which unreasonably limits Canadian sovereignty over its energy resources and may prevent Canadian energy security.

The NDP's plan on energy is to actually have a made-in-Canada national energy policy written by Canadians and not dictated to us from corporate board rooms in America, the way it is now since Tory and Liberal trade betrayals wrt FTA-NAFTA.

remind remind's picture

And I said "why should he feel anything."

I stand by that.

We are not responsible for the sins and comments of others.

 

remind remind's picture

Nope,  not on my part, nor on most's, I suspect, but apparently you were, as you started this topic as if it were something new and amazing...

Unionist

Gary Doer was already in love with the tar sands while he was still the NDP premier. Earlier this year:

Quote:
At the Capitol Hilton in Washington, DC today, the Canadian-American Business Council held a high-profile forum on energy and environment. Speakers included Canadian Prime Minister Harper’s senior energy advisor, the Premier of Manitoba, and several U.S. members of Congress – as well as senior officials from Shell, Iogen, and TransAlta. (The entire event was sponsored by ExxonMobil.) Overall, it was a big chance for some big-time greenwashing of the Tar Sands – the world’s dirtiest source of oil, and a huge threat to Indigenous rights and climate change. [...]

So today, two RAN and ForestEthics activists, posing as oil industry representatives, surreptitiously planted themselves inside the conference for the keynote address by Manitoba’s Premier Gary Doer – who was singing the praises of Canadian natural gas, an increasing amount of which is now being funneled towards Tar Sands production. One of the protestors unfurled a hand banner reading “Tar Sands: Too Dirty to Be Greenwashed” and shouted out “all fossil fuels are false solutions!” Security guards grabbed him and roughly hustled him out. A RAN activist then stood up, unfurled another hand banner, and yelled: “Hey, Gary! We need a clean energy future! The Tar Sands are the world’s dirtiest oil source!” as he was being hauled out of the room by security.

[url=Rainforest">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/06/19/ran-disrupts-canadian-business... Action Network activist[/url]

Aristotleded24

Keep in mind that as Canada's ambassador Doer must put forth the position of the government in all Canada-US matters regardless of what his personal opinions are (not that I actually believe he has any). The real issue here is the policy of the Canadian government, and bashing Doer over this (much as I dislike him) is a distraction.

Anyways, as I said earlier, I don't think Doer has any strong beliefs. How else can his moves to protect the east side of Lake Winnipeg as a UNESCO heritage site be reconciled with his defence of the tarsands?

Unionist

You're right, A24 - but knowing that Doer will merely be a shameless mouthpiece for Harper, why would Layton sing the praises of this appointment (as opposed to just thanking him for his past service and wishing him well)?

 

remind remind's picture

That has a very easy answer; not all Manitobans and NDPers, or even Canadians, are you.

genstrike

So, I take it criticizing Doer is still a sore spot for some, seeing as how Fidel came in to this thread with his usual off topic rants in a desperate attempt to derail it, and remind came in here guns blazing, accusing everyone of being Liberal and Conservative supporters.

I can't wait until Doer joins the Liberals.  I think it's the only way to kill the cult of personality around him.  It was the only thing which worked for Bob Rae

remind remind's picture

Actually, try rereading my posts, this time for clarity, I make no claims regarding Doer at all, the only thing pising me off is attempts to somehow suggest that what he does implicates the federal NDP and their supporters in some way.

All the while knowing pulling such nonsensical shit, is just going to create a brouhaha, is a just of big piss off, too. It is deliberate malice as far as I can see.

 

 

Fidel

If anyone is being persistent in baiting you remind, just install the ignore script. It's in the rabble reactions forum.

Polunatic2

Thanks for the link Fidel. I'm in general agreement with re-opening NAFTA.

Quote:
when conventional oil reserves run dry in Alberta in a few years' time
Isn't that yet another reason to demand a 20 or 50 year or permanent moratorium on new tar sand projects? 

Unionist

Genstrike, I would so much wish you to rephrase your thought without attacking Fidel or remind. It's not necessary, it's diversionary, it adds nothing to this important political discussion. I know you've had to endure Doer for 10 years, but we had to endure him in the NDP and prior to that in the union movement for far longer. At least you can feel some vindication in the arguments you've made by pointing to where this character has ended up.

 

Fidel

Polunatic2 wrote:

Thanks for the link Fidel. I'm in general agreement with re-opening NAFTA.

Quote:
when conventional oil reserves run dry in Alberta in a few years' time

Isn't that yet another reason to demand a 20 or 50 year or permanent moratorium on new tar sand projects? 

I'm not an expert on energy, so it's difficult for me to say. I think the way the NDP looks it, there have been billions and billions of dollars in oil and gas profits that were siphoned out of Canada along with the oil and gas. Some countries put Canada to shame wrt to sovereign wealth funds accumulated from their oil exports over the years. Some of that money should have been invested in r&d'ing renewable and sustainable energy technologies. Other rich countries are way ahead of Canada as far as energy conservations and efficiency, and alternative energy are concerned. Personally, I don't think there is one WOW! alternative technology but a combination of approaches will be necessary for a generation or two until such time as nuclear fuel cycle can be completed and that technology made safe and reliable. Or perhaps the second-rate wind and tidal power will become permament alternatives. Scientists say that the sun produces all the energy we need and if harnessed effectively by either solar radiation collectors or our own powerful reactors, there should be plenty of energy for everyone for a very long time. But technological advances take time and money. The profit motive and so-called free markets for energy have been working against us by what I can see.

Tigana Tigana's picture

Frustrated Mess wrote,

"Electing Conservatives and Liberals dressed in orange is no improvement."

Orange suits for the whole gang, hee hee hee!

 

Webgear

Fidel

You are correct, that we should visit NAFTA.

From my understanding the Mr. Doer and his NDP government has been planning for new oil and gas fields in southern Manitoba for several years now. 

Fidel

Webgear wrote:

Fidel

You are correct, that we should visit NAFTA.

From my understanding the Mr. Doer and his NDP government has been planning for new oil and gas fields in southern Manitoba for several years now. 

I really believe that the new oil sands projects should be cancelled, and existing production scaled way back. Serious money should be invested in r&d of renewable energy sources, conservation, and efficiency. The US under Obama is way ahead of Canada with investing in the future. The US is hoping to create 100 million green economy jobs over the next ten years or so. Green economy is the future, and other countries already have a head start on Canada. And that's good for them, but I think it would be a terrible irony for Canada if it turns out that we will rely on the US or other countries and buying advanced technologies from them in future so that we can avoid freezing in the dark. Or worse yet we could end up importing expensive oil and gas from other countries if that future technology is too expensive for Canadians to afford. Ontario implemented the first plan in Canada to deal with greenhouse gas emissions under Rae's NDP government. We've gone in the other direction ever since.

Polunatic2

Thanks for expounding on your thoughts Fidel. I'm not an energy expert either. The Harper government seems to be putting a lot of eggs in the carbon sequestration basket. If it's even seriously feasible, it will take many years to develop. In my mind, sequestration presumes continued growth of greenhouse gases - why not if you can just bury the stuff some time in the future? Yet more reasons not to seriously develop alternative energy production and infrastructure and continue to gobble up and destroy huge tracts of territory. Does the NDP have a position on carbon sequestration? The Green Party supports it. My suspicious gut feeling tells me that it's a huge scam. Can't Canada make do with the projects that are already underway in order to sustain demand? 

janfromthebruce

People are not responsible for the actions of others - and nor are people responsible for others words. It would appear in the line of thought and reason here that if one is associated with someone and they do or say something that "one is their brothers'/sisters' keeper.

Anyway, I will wait to see what more Doer has to say and what he does - before I jump to conclusions.

Fidel

I don't usually side with capitalist economists, but Jeffrey Sachs, a Harvard trained economist has an excellent article somewhere on the web. He says relying on cap and trade and other market gimmicks for reducing CO2 is folly. The answer is to invest in the future with massive spending on r&d for renewable energy technologies. Cap and trade and other gimmicks are like holding our breath and waiting for the problem to go away. We need real solutions, and the NDP says more or less the same thing. The NDP does support cap and trade, but Layton and the NDP also are calling for massive investments in green economy, research and development. Green technologies could represent made in Canada innovation, which all economists agree is vital to any country's prospects for increasing economic productivity as well as future standard of living. We've lollygagged our way through this old world economy exporting fossil fuels for too long and nothing in the kitty for a rainy day. And now it's raining cats.

Tigana Tigana's picture
M. Spector M. Spector's picture

janfromthebruce wrote:

People are not responsible for the actions of others - and nor are people responsible for others words. It would appear in the line of thought and reason here that if one is associated with someone and they do or say something that "one is their brothers'/sisters' keeper.

Anyway, I will wait to see what more Doer has to say and what he does - before I jump to conclusions.

You're missing the point. Doer was praised to the skies by Layton on his appointment as ambassador. Now that Doer is going to be shilling in Washington for the big oil companies who are raping the Canadian environment, Layton will have to distance himself and the party from Doer. It is Layton, not babblers, who has chosen to hold Doer out as a shining example of the best the NDP has to offer.

As the Canwest article notes, Doer "earned a reputation in Manitoba as a national leader on climate change." Don't you think a man with such a reputation should be held to a higher standard on issues like the tar sands?

And if you think that criticizing Doer for what he has already said about the tar sands is "jumping to conclusions" then you are letting your party loyalty trump your own better judgment. 

Fidel

You are woefully mistaken. The shilling and kow-towing to Washington was over and done with by 1994. It's all over but the crying. I realize that Mulroney's betrayal, and the Liberals' betrayal are difficult things for some Canadians to remember. I know it still a nightmare for me when I think too long on it. But our old line party fools sold us down the Mississippi R. with those two lopsided in favour of corporate America trade deals way back when. Remember that Muppets skit with the two old guys in the balcony, and one occasionally says to the other, "Ya old fool!"? Well that was our two old line parties when in government in the 80's and 90's. No fools like our old line party fools when they're on the take.

FF to today, we have no alternative energy sources to replace oil and natural gas. And there aren't very many good reasons why that's true since pumping billions and billions of barrels of oil and natural gas south of the border for decades. The two old line parties can't show us the money.

George Victor

remind:

"Actually, try rereading my posts, this time for clarity, I make no claims regarding Doer at all, the only thing pising me off is attempts to somehow suggest that what he does implicates the federal NDP and their supporters in some way.

All the while knowing pulling such nonsensical shit, is just going to create a brouhaha, is a just of big piss off, too. It is deliberate malice as far as I can see."

 

I see it more, remind, as coming from and being applauded by frustrated folks who are devoid of ideas for corrective action. And it is a damned shame to be reduced to a venue for bitter infighting by frustrated, otherwise well-meaning people because of it. New Democrats are an easy mark for snipers. But I guess to divert learned opinion here, we'd have to paint targets on the neo-cons who are laughing at our fratricidal ways.

Polunatic2

I don't think anyone has suggested that libs and cons didn't sell canada's resources down the river and continue to do so. Perhaps it is naive to suggest that the NDP may get some traction by challenging NAFTA and calling for an unconditional moratorium on further tar sands developments. 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

M. Spector wrote:
And if you think that criticizing Doer for what he has already said about the tar sands is "jumping to conclusions" then you are letting your party loyalty trump your own better judgment. 

Right on. I'm frankly shocked by this sycophantic 'my party (NDP), right or wrong' attitude that I'm seeing in a few posts here and elsewhere.

Unionist

janfromthebruce wrote:

Anyway, I will wait to see what more Doer has to say and what he does - before I jump to conclusions.

Do you think Doer hasn't been clear enough in his views on the tar sands and natural gas - his alliance with Big Oil both before and after his life change? Ignatieff has had less to say on the subject, but I liked how you cut to the chase last month when we were [url=talking">http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/whose-afraid-election][col... about Alice Klein[/url]:

janfromthebruce wrote:

One has to laugh at her - last election she was all about votefortheenvironment and what wonderful things the libs were going to do for it. I wonder how she is going to square that peg with Iggy "I love the tarsands".

Maybe thevotefornottheenvironment will just be honest next time out when they crank up their webpage and put truth to advertising:

voteforliberals - we decided to go with truth and forget about the environment last time - now we "voteforthetarsands" - what a dork.

And:

Quote:
The favour of last election was the environment - now they will need to change that cover to votefortarsands.com

And:

Quote:
Alice goes on about the environment but picking liberals is never going to get to her dream of environmental sustainability - not with Iggy being all goo-goo eyed with the tarsands.

You didn't say "let's wait and hear more from Iggy on the tar sands before jumping to conclusions". You were dead right. Why are you applying a different standard to Gary Doer - especially now that he's gone to work for Harper?

 

George Victor

And the easiest course of action is the one from a purely moralistic position. 

 

Actually defining what ANY political party should be proposing for the Tar Patch, for instance, is out of bounds for the frustrated in attack mode. And of course, the critic has never had to assume a creative role in the theatre of the absurd.

 

An example of a "damn the torpedoes" proposal for positive action (beyond carping):

 

From a recent discussion on economics in a related thread - "Okay, but the Canadian situation in 2009, with distinct differences in position between East and West (they are two economies in conflict with one another, the Tar Patch benefits from a loonie on par with the greenback, the industrial exporting sectors require a loonie at about .85 cents to the greenback) , is not to be settled immediately by replicating 1930s Spain.

This observer is ready to say to hell with the Tar Patch (knowing full well the political implications of that postion) because of its complete lack of concern for anything or anyone out of the fossil fuel loop. Surely the rest of Canada could be brought to understand the need to get serious with them, for environmental reasons, the fate of the grandkids, weighing more importantly than the harm being done to the domestic economy."

 

I would only add that the completely impractical but moral tone of that recommendation fits exactly with the tone of this thread. (But it proposes something.)

 

Polunatic2

Quote:
 Actually defining what ANY political party should be proposing for the Tar Patch, for instance, is out of bounds for the frustrated in attack mode.
That simplifies things. The only acceptable policies are the ones that are on the books or espoused by the leader. No other opinions or proposals necessary. 

George Victor

And even the frustrated, apparently partyless, hue to the line about not proposing anything hereabouts, not just the Great Misled.

remind remind's picture

George Victor wrote:
I see it more, remind, as coming from and being applauded by frustrated folks who are devoid of ideas for corrective action. And it is a damned shame to be reduced to a venue for bitter infighting by frustrated, otherwise well-meaning people because of it. New Democrats are an easy mark for snipers. But I guess to divert learned opinion here, we'd have to paint targets on the neo-cons who are laughing at our fratricidal ways.

What community do the snipers belong to? ;)

melovesproles

Doer is just a great example of how right the NDP is willing to move in order to get to power and it is illustrative that Layton holds him up as the ideal NDP leader and representative.  Until Canada gets a party with roots outside of the current clique leading all of our major parties, electoral politics in Canada is mostly a waste of energy and at best a matter of trying to make the system as deadlocked and unworkable as possible.

Unionist

Message to Gary Doer from [url=a">http://rabble.ca/babble/environmental-justice/tar-sands-hell-2#comment-1... babbler[/url]:

Tigana wrote:
Canada is going to make a lot of enemies if it continues to mine the tar sands - and not just in the environmental sector. Oil from Canada helps fuel America's wars.

 

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

George Victor wrote:

New Democrats are an easy mark for snipers.

Far too easy, in my opinion. Yet the official babble fanbase™ seems wholly unconcerned.

remind remind's picture

Oh yes, we should all follow you and unionist into status quo.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

I think the proof will be not what Doer does while he is Canada's ambassador to the U.S., (that's completely predictable) but rather what he does after his term is finished.

Similar things were said about Stephen Lewis when Brian Mulroney appointed him Canada's ambassador to the United Nations.

But, during his term at the UN, I suppose Lewis developed all kinds of contacts etc. that enabled him to do alot of excellent work after he left that post.

I've heard Lewis joke that he's "probably the only person in Canada who owe's Brian Mulroney a favour".

 

 

 

 

 

 

Polunatic2

http://www.stephenlewisfoundation.org/news_item.cfm?news=210

Quote:
THIS TIME THE CALL summoning Lewis to public service came from an unexpected source — Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. He was offering Lewis the job of Canadian ambassador to the United Nations. Though Lewis had received exploratory calls from Bill Davis and Joe Clark, he says, "I was still nonplussed and hesitant while my family was instant and positive — I had been driving them crazy with my moodiness." Mulroney joked, "You have to promise you won't quit the first time I test a cruise missile." Lewis countered, "You've got to promise you won't fire me the first time I publicly disagree with you." Mulroney chuckled, "Steve, you and Michele are going to like the digs!"

remind remind's picture

:D

George Victor

For anyone with TV not watching parliamentary affairs last night, a friend informs me that Jack Layton was speaking about the need to move his environmental bill out of committee to move it to third reading.

Any guesses as to its chance of leaving committee in the term of this Parliament?  Any comments from the "New Democrat watchers" about the morality of THAT party or its camp followers? (I'm sure that the NDP leadership has somehow played it wrong - or at least to the dissatisfaction of the watchers and its not the neocons at fault - by some act of convoluted logic).

remind remind's picture

OH george, don't spoil the fun. It is much more interesting and amusing to deal with hypotheical juxtapositions and oblique smears of  complicity by "alleged" failings to disown another's words.

.

Unionist

radiorahim wrote:

I've heard Lewis joke that he's "probably the only person in Canada who owe's Brian Mulroney a favour".

He forgot [url=http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/parties_leaders/clips/10665/]Ed Broadbent[/url].

Back to Doer. I had little use for his economic or social or labour policies. It should not be forgotten, however, that in earlier years in office, Doer was one of the most vocal proponents of Kyoto - not just in words, but even in some policy measures and in his dealings with U.S. state governors. Manitoba and Québec were the two provinces that had carried the torch while the federal Liberal government was extinguishing it through neglect - and finally Harper drowned it.

Doer appeared to be an environmental leader next to NDP-ruled Saskatchewan, for example, where GHG emissions grew by well over 60 percent since 1990, leading to the highest per-capita emissions in Canada.

I'm not sure how recently Doer's discourse started to change, nor why - perhaps others here have more familiarity. Nor would I blame the Manitoba NDP for foolishness uttered by its ex-leader. Doer is clearly speaking for Harper now, and nothing different should be expected. I just think Jack Layton should be careful in his praise and call things by their true name, regardless of nostalgia.

Sean in Ottawa

There is a pile of over the top comments here-- some seem to want to be exaggerating what is being said in order to make some unrelated point.

There remain a few issues:

1) it does not matter if Doer speaks for the NDP the association is there. I raised the concern that the comment he made can damage an impression of the party especially on the issue of the environment. I did not even bother to get into whether I think that damage is fair or not-- it does not matter since I was speaking of political effects not cosmic justice. I did not think it was required for me to once again say how I support the NDP's position on the environment to observe that this is a political problem.

2) An ambassodor (or even a GG for that matter) is in fact a communicaitons position not a policy one. By taking that job from Harper, he needed to accept he will be speaking for Harper. It is too late to have concerns about individual messages after you take the position. We should not expect or want our ambassador to another country to perform some kind of opposition to the government.

3) After thinking about this over the last few days, when I think about his support for the tar sands as ambassador I actually do not have trouble with it-- that's his job. He is reflecting the position of the government of Canada. I do, however, then, have a huge problem with him agreeing to be the communicator for an outfit (the federal Conservative government) that is at war with just about everything I believe in. An ambassador is not just ceremonial. Like it or not this is a floor crossing and NDP members ought to consider that when mulling over offers for employment from political opponents. Doer is not an ambassedor for his own opinions-- his is the spokesperson for the most right wing federal government that we have ever had, one that does not believe in democracy nevermind any social values.

4) In light of the above-- I think it is fair to say on the one hand Doer's current pronouncements ought to be considered reflective only of the federal Conservatives not of the NDP and the issue is not with his individual comments on anything right now but his apparent floor crossing to such a right wing outfit.

5) The crossing from the NDP to the Conservatives is a huge betrayal of the NDP not because the party is the same as the others but precisely because it is different. Those screaming the loudest about this betrayal are more likely to be loyal New Democrats as those of other parties.

6) As for my own loyalty to the NDP-- I feel that I am more loyal by criticizing and trying to expose and resolve issues than by pretending they do not exist-- at election time I support the party but the party is weaker where people feel that dissent is unwelcome. This is a place where people ought to be respected for sharing honestly held opinions without being accused of being disloyal for doing so-- and there is no requirement to be loyal to the NDP-- we welcome people of other political parties-- or of no political party. I, for one, believe that the left intellectually is well strong enough to survive and thrive in the light of criticism, dissent and differences of opinion and will do better than narrowing the field such that everyone must agree on everything or be singled out for abuse for being disloyal. In this case I think what Doer did looks bad and said so-- since I truly believed what I said I do not apologize for it.

As for those running around saying what they do not tolerate and equating dissent as being like or akin to being mysogynistic. that's a scary tactic of intimidation. I think it smacks of attacking everyone you disagree with using whatever insult or word you believe is the nastiest.

As for what Layton might be feeling-- well he has personally put so much effort into a clear set of policies on the environment that separate the NDP from the others that I would imagine he is feeling quite unhappy about it. It is clear that he does not support this opinion so no doubt he is upset. It is fair and relevant to point that out. Why anyone could think that's an insult to Layton, I don't know- if you think about it, it's a compliment to a person who has worked hard enough on the environment to feel that as betrayal coming from a fellow New Democrat with whom he has shared many stages.

George Victor

sean:

"5) The crossing from the NDP to the Conservatives is a huge betrayal of the NDP not because the party is the same as the others but precisely because it is different. Those screaming the loudest about this betrayal are more likely to be loyal New Democrats as those of other parties."

 

Yes, Sean, if they were screaming/moaning/snickering/guffawing about the betrayal by an individual - and there have been sellouts over the years - they could be loyal New Democrats. But they are screaming, moaning, snickering and guffawing about the fact that it is a former NDP premier doing the betraying. Does that distinction mean a damn thing to you?

Sean in Ottawa

George-- I don't get your point-- it is the fact that this is a former premier whose seat is still warm going off and doing this. New Democrats have a right to be pissed without being called disloyal. I don't see many here saying that the NDP is bad because he did this-- although there is justified concern about the optics in a political world where appearances matter more than reality.

I don't really get that concerned about some individual-- but when I get betrayed by someone I may have banged in signs or made phone calls for that distinction, as you call it, makes it worse. I do not live in Manitoba but if I had ever worked on one of his campaigns I'd want to give him a call-- not because he is just anyone but because he got to that position because of the effort of many people who cannot relate to what he is doing now.

NDPers understand collective and public goods. The name Doer is a collective good-- it was built by thousands of workers who believe in things other than the tar sands. His name would not rate the back page of a paper never mind consideration for a prestige job without the efforts of all those people. It is outrageous to suggest that their complaints now could be disloyal. I'll go further-- since he decided to wear the NDP banner to victory-- in a good job-- anyone who has worked for the NDP brand and philosophy has a right to be upset at him and to vocalize it without being told they are disloyal.

remind remind's picture

I do not see it like that at all, Sean people in MN elected him over and over, apparently because they like his positions, that have long been known, contrary to some's expressed surprise here.

My cousin comes to mind here, who got the right to turn a northern Manitoba lake into an acidic ecosystem in order to write her environmental science MA.

Not one NDP voting person in her family would take issue with Doer's alleged stance on the tar sands.

Those who vote NDP are NOT universal in their beliefs.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

If Harper had appointed a Reformatory hack to the post, we'd all be complaining about what a Tory hack the new ambassador to the U.S. was.

But every now and then, a PM has to throw a bone to partisans of other parties just to show "how non-partisan" they are...and then we all denounce the "leftie" they appointed for "selling out".

Fidel

What can Doer do as ambassador, sell the environment to Exxon-Imperial and other energy companies? Gong! It's already been done.

Years ago.

Sorry, Gary, they beat you to it in '89 and '94.

 

NDPP

selling out the peoples' political positions  by 'representatives' is a critical problem. It should be recognized and denounced not denied and protected. Furthermore if, as it appears with the NDP, there is a culture within that continues to produce these sellouts - it must be rooted out and corrected. If that is not possible and the rot is too entrenched, then it should be abandoned or better yet euthanized. Time is running out  and too precious to waste on vehicles that don't begin to take us in the direction we need to go, because the hustlers and parasites take it over for personal and political gain.

Pages

Topic locked