babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Also, regarding interaction with politicians, is my experience unique? I mean, do we sometimes want to put these people on pedestals they didn't necessarily ask us to do?
Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg
Arthur you may be surprised, but our most anti-zionist posters are in fact Jewish..so it isn't anti-semetic. Though I won't speak for them directly Examples are unionist and I believe cueball. Even Stockholm who is sometimes on the fence agrees that Gaza and lebannon attacks are a disgrace. Facts on the ground are hard to dispute. No one here is pro rocket attacks. We all condemn them. But mainstream media covers those for more than the 10-1 death ratio being suffered by Palestinians. .
Its the same as how we criticize Canadas role in afghanistan and the injury of innocent afghans by our troops, wither by bombs or bullets or malfeasance. It doesn't make me anti-canadian. When we accidentally drop a bomb on a wedding in afghanistan its a war crime full stop. Its not an accident. I find it funny when people post how cowardly using IEDs are...but I guess missiles and bombs launched from ships a couple hundred miles offshore is somehow brave. It isn't.
If you have a vast amount of power it is incumbent on you to be better and more morale than your opponent and to grant mercy when possible. You will never win any struggle by taking the low road. It gives your enemy much to show how insincere you are.
At least that is my stance.
I don't diagree the Isreailis have a responsibility to restrain themselves. They do, and as I said above, they are close to acting in the same way the South Africans. However, while on this board it may indeed be Jews who are the most voracious anti-Zionists, my life experience has never been the loudest anti-semitic voices have come exclusively from Jews; I dont think you are saying that, but I think it warrants mentioning.
I don't feel comfortable with the way these kinds of threads always go, and when they do, I feel real dismay, as it leaves me almost no where to go. I don't really want to beat up this thread on this aspect of conversation; all I wanted to do was say I felt uncomfortable.
Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg
I don't diagree the Isreailis have a responsibility to restrain themselves. They do, and as I said above, they are close to acting in the same way the South Africans. However, while on this board it may indeed be Jews who are the most voracious anti-Zionists, my life experience has never been the loudest anti-semitic voices have come exclusively from Jews; I dont think you are saying that, but I think it warrants mentioning.
I don't feel comfortable with the way these kinds of threads always go, and when they do, I feel real dismay, as it leaves me almost no where to go. I don't really want to beat up this thread on this aspect of conversation; all I wanted to do was say I felt uncomfortable.
Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg
Arthur, as Life, the universe put it, way back in post #6 : " buck up ".
There are lottsa good folks hereabouts. Stick around and see. As me old mom would put it, Rome wasn't built in a day.
I agree with "bucking-up". But, I am not feeling really optimistic. Here's hoping you are right. Given the election of Liberal MP, Kevin Lamoureux in my riding of Winnipeg North, who voted in support of Rod Bruinooge's anti-choice "anti-coercion" law, I am truly worried for what may be upcoming.
Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg
And also, on the back of its surprisingly solid second-place showing in '06, the Conservatives smelled open-seat blood...
There is a difference between expressing your sentiments in the fashion you just did and calling people "loony lefties."
And I agree with that. I don't think I called anyone loony leftie; I don't think I have ever used that language, as far as I know. But I will call people extremists. That is different. Left or right, it is always bad.
Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg
You did not, nor did I intend to suggest or imply that. I'm sorry if I came across as accusatory. Pat Martin, however, did.
Fair enough.
Is this a Manitoba provincial poll we are talking about?
hummm, yes, I see now.... insinuate that some one should do something to someone else, or something happen to them, just not yourself doing the deed.. Nice ;)
they will split the vote just enough to give many to tghe cons.
i predict even without Quebec Harper will get a majority. The libs are finished. I also think Chairman Harper will pick up 3-6 BC seats.
Re the whole Pat Martin controversy: anyone think he could have fared better against Sam Katz than Judy W-L did? (Though maybe "for all the wrong reasons", in the eyes of some Babblers)
For many years, he has been pushing a Private Member's Bill to introduce a "loyalty oath" for members of parliament which (he hopes) would prevent Bloc members from taking their seats by forcing them to swear allegiance to Canada (not a current requirement).
Besides making him an enemy of the people of Québec, that puts him in the league of Joseph McCarthy as far as I'm concerned.
Then, of course, there is his narcissistic need to be heard and read, no matter how big a lie and how scurrilous the gossip he needs to invent. Example: Here is an entire recent thread based on a sick delusion that he shared with a reporter that Harper and Duceppe had made a mutual support deal involving House votes and the Québec hockey arena.
His running of interference for Israel and Afghan-mission-loving are disturbing, but not unique. Neither is his Québec bashing. Nor his pathological lying and publicity-seeking. But the whole package, tied up with a ribbon, stinks.
Hope that answers your question.
ETA: Arthur, to understand Pat Martin's xenophobic contempt for Québec more fully, have a look at this 2008 article on his website where he said:
Imagine talking about Jewish voters in that way, and you'll get a feel for the pathology I've been talking about.
Given all of that, the name 'Pat Martin' alone should be enough for anyone to seriously reconsider their affiliations and loyalties.
Without the name 'Pat Martin,' you have plenty of other litmus tests to answer that question for you.
Litmus tests? We're talking about the absence of an elementary sense of decency here.
Actually, I saw your post, but somehow missed the one by Unionist that you were following up.
Worse that that, mind/perception tricks: I thought your cryptic comment was by Unionist.
Since I put my foot in it, I'll add this: insitutions like political parties and trade unions are big tents. There are bufoons in the tent. And people who are prone to act like buffoons. [I think Pat Matrin is the latter, but I wont quibble about which.]
I don't get to decide about whether the buffonery allows them to be in my tent. There are people who have been delegated to have at least some power over that. Sometimes I wonder why they don't do something about buffoon or buffoonery X. But there is no forum for that, and it is not on my critical list of things I am going to find about anyway.
Ok, that is enough for me; he is a disaster. However I know as a Jew based on mailings I get for which I never asked anyone to include me, and the odd discussions I have with other Jews, , Martin is not the only MP sucking up to Israel; there are plenty of Tories, and more so Libs, who do this. Frankly, in my city alone, here are plenty of Winnipeg area MPS who are just as quilty of this kind of blind support, though less pugnacious in their commentary. And although all of this is true, if Martin can't be beat at nomination, then New Dems are stuck with him. This is the reality of politics. It sucks but it is true. I'll still never vote Lib; "better dead then Red".
Anyway, can we please move off Martin and Israel, and back to the central theme of this thread, which I started, which is how things look for the New Dems? We could always open up another thread to deal with Martin and Israel, etc. I figured this thread would get hijacked by this. Again, this isn't why I started this thread.
So to ask again, anyone have any new insight where things stand for the New Dems as the year starts?You guys don't have to listen to me if you don't want to of course, but I would really appreciate it if you would consider letting this thread get back to where it was originally intended to dwell, so to speak.
Truly repsectfully to all, with my apologies for any possible offense these comments my unintentionaly afford.
Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg
Not to belabor the point, but misery loves company apparently. This thread has informed us that like the other two federal parties, apologists and buffoons are running at the mouth with impunity in the NDP. Not that there's anything particularly new to this insight. Nevertheless, this is where they stand.
He's still there and no one has said squat in the public domain, at least anything that would serve as a counterbalance to statements that should never have seen the light of day, let alone form the basis of privately held opinions. Isn't that enough information to go on about what they're doing about it?
Sounds easy to you. But if you go demanding action or 'inquiries' into the words or actions of someone in the tent... and you get it... that becomes a lisence for more, some of which you are not going to like at all where it is pointed.
That does not mean that you let everything go by. But it is not as easy as you put. Everyone draws their lines. In the first place, that universal drawing of lines is not acknowledged. On top of that, it is no surprise that people who could never be in the tent are going to be unhappy with what is tolerated inside it.
Probably not. Whatever of Judy's weaknesses he covered up for, he would have had his own.
Opinion Polling for the 41st Canadian Federal Election - wiki
Hi:
Succinct for sure, but don't know if I buy that. I am not sure polls always reflect what is occuring on the ground, which is why I come here. Personally, I still say the NPD are going to get shellacked; I don't think you can underestimate the stupidity of the Canadian voter, especially with the idea of strategic voting again rearing its ugly hear.
Sorry, I think that the average Canadian voter is pretty damn stupid, so I don't see any reason not to expect the worst.
Sorry guys, still a pessimist.
Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg
You need to take the advice I gave you in another thread as an andedote to that pessimism. Unless of course you are only interested in wallowing in it- which is what floats some peoples boat.
Some like to splash around in that thing called reality.
File this away for reference later Arthur:
The consensus view is that there is only an outside chance the NDP will get shellacked. You think it is being realistic. [And Slumberjack agrees. No comment on whether he cares.]