babble-intro-img
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.

Thomas Mulcair - Thread #7

NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

;;


Comments

NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

What say you Tom?

Saving the Conservative Soul

As Harper's toxic rule erodes our democracy, it's time for the right to recall its vintage value

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2012/04/14/Conservative-Soul/


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

doofy
Offline
Joined: Nov 11 2011

Can someone who subscribes to Le Devoir post

http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/347395/un-effet-mulcair-chez-le...

Thanks!


JeffWells
Offline
Joined: Dec 15 2003

I hate to say this, but I think Mulcair's French citizenship will be a bigger deal than we'd like to admit.

Of course there's the Conservatives playing to their anti-French, anti-cosmopolitan core constituency. They'll do that regardless of facts. But there's also Mulcair's concession that he will surrender his dual citizenship if he's elected. I have a problem with that if.

Even as Official Opposition, the NDP was always going to have huge obsticles to overcome in order to be perceived as a credible contender for government. The party, and Mulcair, have done amazing work doing just that. But I'm afraid it's undermined by Mulcair's conditional tone. If I'm elected only returns us to a position of doubt in the minds of the voters we need to convince. (It goes like this: If Mulcair isn't convinced he's going to be elected, how can he persuade me to vote for him?)

Still, I'm not suggesting that Mulcair should give up his citizenship. After all, he has a legitimate right to it, and the forces of ignorance and chauvinism would claim it as a victory. But it's a more complex and possibly thorny issue than I'd first allowed.


KenS
Offline
Joined: Aug 6 2001

He has a legitimate right to that citizenship. Unequivocally.

But does that mean its worth us paying a price for him to keep it.

In my mind, absolutely not. This is in the category of don't sweat the small stuff.

I'm frankly relieved to see him backsliding. He's not as suggested opening the door to attack, he's just acknowledging the inevitable.

He does not necessarily convince by sticking his ground on everything. We know that is not an absolute. The question is where the line is drawn. And no question in my mind HIS extra citizenship is a luxury.

The reason he did it in the first place is going to make backpeddaling straightforward. It was presented as a practical thing, he can give it up for practical reasons.... he can even explicitly SAY 'so that it does not become an issue'.

"When I am Prime Minister, I dont want questions over this."

I've been in axactly the same position as Mulcair by the way- my family having citizenship I do not. Actually doing something about it is an expression of middle class angst. Going into the EU, you are NOT going to be denied entry as your family goes in. Once in a dozen plus trips being seperated and treated different is weird and humbling. But thats life. Being white, there is never any doubt about getting in. I didn't do anything about it because its unecessary just for travel, and its expensive. [On top of that, French citizenship is an unbeleivably exhausting experience if you dont have secretaries or assistants doing most of the work for you. There is NO comparison to becoming a Canadian (or US) citizen.]


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

That "if" by Mulcair has been bothering me, too, and I voted for the guy in the leadership.


KenS
Offline
Joined: Aug 6 2001

And here is why it matters, and there is nothing complex about it.

There will always be the direct questions about that citizendhip. And its perception. Shades of grey degrees of effect- not all of it concious- on swing voters. We work hard on tipping points. Why let something so symbolic work against you.

Then there are the inevitable attck ads. Not only, or even mostly, explicitly bring up his citizenship as the main issue of attack.

Standing up for Canada in Quebec, or some such shit. The Sherbrook Declaration and the Clarity Act being the background substance. Throw in visual images identifying 'French' and Mulcair. Maybe even throw in deGaulle in Montreal. Could be anything.

Shitcan it.

Mulcair is already as it is going to have to wear suspicions among our voter universe in the the West. That is enough work cut out for him and the NDP.


KenS
Offline
Joined: Aug 6 2001

I thinking saying he will surrender it if elected is just another example of that habit he has to kill: de facto musing in public.

What he is really doing is conceding that its a problem. And then thinking out loud, what specifically to do about it.

 

I first thought it might be a trial balloon. But not a deliberate/deliberated one. Not the way he phrased it.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Yup. It was a misstep, for sure.


Winston
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2007

No...somebody with a subscription to ledevoir.com is NOT going to post the text of the article on the forum, thus breaking copyright rules, Rabble policy and circumventing Le Devoir's whole reason for requiring subscriptions in the first place.  

BUT...someone with a subscription might be tempted to PM the text to you, IF you would change your Rabble preferences to allow private messages!

doofy wrote:

Can someone who subscribes to Le Devoir post

http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/347395/un-effet-mulcair-chez-le...

Thanks!


doofy
Offline
Joined: Nov 11 2011

Winston,

I did not know that Babble policy forbids psoting material behind firewalls. The QC wesbite www.vigile.net frequently posts "firewalled" material from le Devoir. Unfortunately, being sovereitnsits, the webmasters are not very interested in Mulcair's accomplishments...

As for Mulcair's French citiznenship, I am actually disappointed that he appears to be baclktracking and pledging to abandon his citizneship should he become PM. That was not the impression he left during leadership campaign.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/01/16/ndps-mulcair-will-keep-french-citiz...

This is just a reflection of English Canadains' francophobia. It would not have been an issue if our PM was a dual British citizen. (Admitedly, now that the precdent has been established, things will be different....)

 


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

doofy wrote:

This is just a reflection of English Canadains' francophobia.

Layton, in reference to Dion, said a leader of a political party should not hold two citizenships.


flight from kamakura
Offline
Joined: Nov 24 2006

this guy is just the best, can't wait til he's pm

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120415/mulcair-quebec-canada-poll...


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Boom Boom wrote:

doofy wrote:

This is just a reflection of English Canadains' francophobia.

Layton, in reference to Dion, said a leader of a political party should not hold two citizenships.

Boom Boom, remind me what Layton's reasoning was in that regard?

 


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Unionist wrote:
Boom Boom, remind me what Layton's reasoning was in that regard?

I have no idea. I think it was just a partisan shot at Dion, which was odd, because in another place Layton also said Dion was a decent fellow.


Winston
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2007

I do believe that it is Rabble policy to avoid re-posting copywritten material in its entirety on these forums, regardless of their source or whether they were behind a "firewall" (from a paid subscription site).

To quote an article or excerpt from it is okay, but to post an article in its entirety, I was led to believe from prior posts, is a no-no.  Perhaps the moderators can chime in...

That said, I pay a monthly fee to subscribe to Le Devoir and would be more than willing to "violate" copyright to share the article with you, but I will not do so by posting it, in its entirety, on this forum.

doofy wrote:

Winston,

I did not know that Babble policy forbids psoting material behind firewalls. The QC wesbite www.vigile.net frequently posts "firewalled" material from le Devoir. Unfortunately, being sovereitnsits, the webmasters are not very interested in Mulcair's accomplishments...


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Mulcair calls Tories dishonest and bad managers in speech to Ontario NDP

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/mulcair-calls-tories-dishonest-a...


Stockholm
Online
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Can I make a suggestion that when we have the indevitable 8th Mulcair thread we entitle it Tom Mulcair - Thread #8 - seeing as he is now going by Tom in English...and i like the fact that Tom sounds more informal and "HOAG"-ish (Hell Of A Guy)


Caissa
Offline
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Did Jack ever have these many threads?


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

We haven't had a Mulcair Mania thread yet. Frown


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Just don't expect too many Liberals to participate BB. Laughing

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Mulcair, Harper allies in plotting Liberals' demise NDP's new leader looks to reshape Canada's political landscape

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/03/25/pol-vp-weston-mulcair.html


Brachina
Online
Joined: Feb 15 2012
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/04/15/david-frum-on-obama-les... This makes me think of Jack Layton and Mulcair. The analogy of Jack as JFK and Mulcair as Johnson, isn't perfect of course, had Jack lived he would have made a great Prime Minister, and both are very much to the left of the American Presidents, but at the end of the day it will fall to Mulcair to find away to make,Jack's dreams a reality.

Ippurigakko
Offline
Joined: May 30 2011

 

:D


Boze
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

Screw JFK, the mythology around that man is ridiculous. If Obama were to be assassinated in office I have no doubt he would be built up into the same kind of figure and he has been a craven servant of power, what an utterly useless president.

My first reaction to those who feel a PM should not have dual citizenship was "why is country so full of backwoods ignorant chawbacons?" Then I was asked how I would feel if Mulcair, or Harper, or Brian Mulroney, was also an American citizen and I had to pause and consider my own attitudes, but I came to the conclusion that it shouldn't be any different. I will be disappointed if Mulcair does renounce his French citizenship, not in him, but in the country that expects it of him. What a bunch of fucking rubes.


Life, the unive...
Offline
Joined: Mar 23 2007

Nothing better than a good old rural stereotype and put down to make your progressive point.


Dostoyevsky
Offline
Joined: Dec 19 2011

What leader of any country anywhere has held citizenship in a different country at the same time?  What these oh so sophisticated citizens of this hypothetical country must think of us.  The shame.


Stockholm
Online
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Brachina wrote:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/04/15/david-frum-on-obama-lessons-in-robert-caro-s-lyndon-johnson.html This makes me think of Jack Layton and Mulcair. The analogy of Jack as JFK and Mulcair as Johnson, isn't perfect of course, had Jack lived he would have made a great Prime Minister, and both are very much to the left of the American Presidents, but at the end of the day it will fall to Mulcair to find away to make,Jack's dreams a reality.

The analogy gets even better...if you see Layton as JFK and Mulcair as Johnson...that leaves Stephen Harper to play the role of Richard Nixon!!


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Seems even Canadian progressives cannot think out side of the American propaganda box.  Gee are there no Canadian comparisons?

The problem I see is that Tom is likely to go even further than Jack in the cult of personality and that means that we will never see a reduction in the PMO and its control of our elected parliamentarians.  We don't elect a President and seeing our party leader as a President-In-Waiting is a complete bastardization of our electoral system and does not bode well for our democracy.  The checks and balances built into a parliamentary democracy like ours are useless in a Presidential system.  Harper has proven that.  Maybe we should be getting back to the team approach to parliament not the hierarchical model the Liberals started and the Conservatives have enhanced. 

I don't want to play in a game that elects back backbenchers who are expected to toe the party line and not speak on behalf of their constituents. I am old school and prefer electing people of courage who will speak truth to power.


Brachina
Online
Joined: Feb 15 2012

Stockholm wrote:

Brachina wrote:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/04/15/david-frum-on-obama-lessons-in-robert-caro-s-lyndon-johnson.html This makes me think of Jack Layton and Mulcair. The analogy of Jack as JFK and Mulcair as Johnson, isn't perfect of course, had Jack lived he would have made a great Prime Minister, and both are very much to the left of the American Presidents, but at the end of the day it will fall to Mulcair to find away to make,Jack's dreams a reality.

The analogy gets even better...if you see Layton as JFK and Mulcair as Johnson...that leaves Stephen Harper to play the role of Richard Nixon!!

Ironically the NDP just compared the Tories latest scandal to Watergate.

Boze
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Seems even Canadian progressives cannot think out side of the American propaganda box.  Gee are there no Canadian comparisons?

The problem I see is that Tom is likely to go even further than Jack in the cult of personality and that means that we will never see a reduction in the PMO and its control of our elected parliamentarians.  We don't elect a President and seeing our party leader as a President-In-Waiting is a complete bastardization of our electoral system and does not bode well for our democracy.  The checks and balances built into a parliamentary democracy like ours are useless in a Presidential system.  Harper has proven that.  Maybe we should be getting back to the team approach to parliament not the hierarchical model the Liberals started and the Conservatives have enhanced. 

I don't want to play in a game that elects back backbenchers who are expected to toe the party line and not speak on behalf of their constituents. I am old school and prefer electing people of courage who will speak truth to power.

I agree with this completely. I hope for and expect the NDP to be the party of democratic reform, but we have no credibility on this issue and make no mistake, it does turn people off and drive them often to the Greens.  People who are looking for a party that is different than the others, which are so obviously corrupted by the political process itself, are exactly the people we should be trying to win over. Half the country doesn't even vote for pete's sake.

In NZ and, until recently, Australia, when the Labour party is in government, the caucus elects the cabinet. The caucus elects the cabinet! Can you imagine it??


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments