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
So, the argument is that Mulcair is paranoid, abrasive and angry. Clearly these are traits that couldn't possibly get you into the PMO. :| It's not like the only two Tory candidates to win comfortable majorities of English Canada since WWII exemplified those characteristics or anything.
The NDP is already a leader-centred, top-down party that blacklists and exlcudes dissidents. The only difference I can see between a Mulcair leadership and Topp's is that Mulcair wouldn't be cuddly about it and would actually bring some honesty and emotional authenticity to the party's already-existing muscular, autocratic, authoritarian structures.
Maybe it's just personal bias but it was Topp not Mulcair who showed up on babble to defend the party's right to blacklist any member from seeking a party nomination indefinitely without explanation, appeal or accountability. The fact that he does this kind of thing with a soft voice doesn't make a whit of difference to me.
In other news, any word on Pat Martin's pro-merger candidacy?
I would take "Grizzly" to be a rather positive portrayal.
But I could also imagine adopting "bonhomme" as a campaign mascot if they didn't think they would get grilled by the Saint Jean Baptiste society (or whoever has rights to it?)
oops - I forgot about the Bonhomie winter carnival mascot!
Heh, you gotta love polysemy. Péter (to fart) also has examples on Wiktionary such as Le ballon a pété or Je me suis pété la jambe au ski. You're not literally saying that you farted your leg while skiing, but rather substituting a word that already means "to break (wind)" for a more neutral verb to make it more colourful.
Sort of like how the verb foutre (technically can be translated "to f**k") can also be used to make more vulgar a sentence that would otherwise have faire, placer or mettre. So Qu'est-ce que tu fous à New York is more like a mild "WTF are you doing in New York"?
I just watched QP on CTV. Topp firmly rejected the idea of a merger, but said he could be open to the notion of either coalitions or accords, because political parties are expected to work together. Mulcair firmly rejected the idea of a merger with the liberals as well. I think both Mulcair and Topp did very well in their respective interviews. It's getting increasingly difficult for me to pick one of the two if it came down to that, because both candidates are excellent.
ETA: QP said Nathan Cullen will announce a significant 'policy platform' this Tuesday coming. Should be interesting - the first policy discussion so far!
Interesting. The same people who supported Adrian Dix in the BC provincial leadership race (aside from Brar who endorsed Farnworth). Cumulatively, they have major clout with the large Surrey Indo-Canadian membership.
I'm still dumbfounded that no one of any significance from BC has endorsed Mulcair (aside from Michael Byers).
In case you really want to know:
http://www.ndpsocialists.ca/Events.html
Every person on that list is a person who I had suspected was likely to support Julian were he to have run.
You may not be familiar with the party's dynamics, Boom Boom, but bashing the Socialist Caucus hardly amounts to bashing socialism. The SC is practically a one-man show and a very marginal presence in the party - howevermuch the one man in question makes himself out to be an insider. Certainly no serious party leftist I know - including many of those still most insistent on the label "socialist" vice "social democrat" - is connected to the SC or takes it very seriously.
As a matter of fact, the only people I know who take the SC seriously are the small number of people who belong to it.
The amazing thing is that such a small group can be so factional in its own functioning.
I wonder where they'll be meeting. Since the advent of the cel phone, phone booths have become a thing of the past.