Jack Layton's sliding into irrelevance

121 posts / 0 new
Last post
Scott McWhinnie Scott McWhinnie's picture

I was just working with Heberts statement - not the numbers in Quebec or any particular riding - ours was a clobbering and Layton came here about 8 or nine times, part of that record number of kms clocked last time around. All those visits for 4th place. makes one wonder...

JimmyRiddle

Debator, you change the goal posts every time you get proven wrong.

Whichever way you have tried to argue it, posters have shown you (and Hebert) to be wrong on the polling. Today's article was about today's poll. Not one done yesterday, or last month, or last year. Today. So whether it is Ms Hebert, or you supporting her, something that undermines the crux of your argument sorta leaves your credibility in tatters. Journalism is about today's news, not which ever poll from the past that might fit your faulty hypotheses. You and Hebert can't have it both ways.

As for Francoise Boivin, Liberals love telling New Democrats to stand aside in races where the third place candidate is only going to elect a Conservative. Well, time for Liberals to take their own advice. MacKinnon is a parachute opportunist who will get massacred. But he could take enough votes to thwart Boivin's efforts to get rid of a do-nothing xenophobe. Boivin is already reaching out to Liberals AND Bloc voters who think they deserve better representation than Nadeau--or a Liberal led by a man whose values on the Quebec identity and our role in wars like Iraq and Afghanistan are so at odds with most Quebecers.

 

 

Bookish Agrarian

Debater wrote:

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

pppssst-- a little secret - hardly anyone votes, beyond a few partisan diehards, on "I'm mad because she switched parties".  Not in today's Canada.

There is a simple fact at play here.  Hebert and others are making shit up.  The poll out today shows the NDP sitting at 17% in Quebec.  That's almost double the Conservatives.  Since the last election it is clear Conservative and BQ support has slipped to both the Liberals and the NDP.  That my friend is the real story.

Hebert and her cohorts are either trying to manufacture a story about the the demise of the NDP to facilitate Liberal switching, or they are intellectually and otherwise lazy.  I suspect the latter is more likely the case, although never put it past the Ottawa chattering class to create a mythic love-in with the latest Liberal messiah.  Remember all those stories about Paul Martin potentially getting the biggest majority in history and burying the Conservatives, Bloc and NDP for a generation- how did that work out again?

Yes, but that is one poll and is the high-water mark this year for the NDP in QC.  Most of the other polls have had them below that.  What is also important is not just polls, but the sentiment on the ground as to how people are talking and planning to vote in QC.  Right now the NDP is not a hot item in QC the way the Liberals and Ignatieff are.  If the NDP can consistently start placing ahead of the CPC, then people will start to notice.

As for Paul Martin, he would have had a huge majority had the sponsorship scandal not happened.  He was at 56% in the polls before Sheila Fraser's report came out.  When it did, he dropped 20 points.  One doesn't have to have a PhD. in political science to see what happened.

 

You're so cute.  You are claiming that the polls, or poll is irrelevant because some people you know are excited about the Liberals again and thus that makes the NDP irrelevant.  Wow - what do you do with a rabbit, a hat, a calculator and a pencil crayon?

And Martin could have resuced himself from even that if he had a polictical clue.  He didn't.  It was imagined for him by the pundatry.  When Canadians got a look at the real thing they said- uh no thanks.  I predict the exact same thing will happen to this messiah that happened to the last two.  Hard to beleive I pine for the days of Chretien, but there you go.

Fidel

Next they'll be telling Canadians they must vote strategically if we're to have any chance at all of swapping this conservative government for another.

thorin_bane

Already happening. That is why the fire extinguishers are coming out on the NDP

remind remind's picture

Good one thorin!!!!! :D

Scott Piatkowski Scott Piatkowski's picture

Oh dear! Someone who has always held that the NDP was irrelevant is suggesting that they are sliding into irrelevancy. Whatever shall we do?

Scott McWhinnie Scott McWhinnie's picture

well Jack got some time of his own in the Star today...public health care is awesome! he will be telling Washington. He might stop evoking TC Douglas at every turn if Fox News digs up Tommy's eugenics paper -

http://www.katewerk.com/tommy

a very disturbing read...

thorin_bane

Yeah yeah...he was so terrible he wanted people to be able to get treatment for illness. I suppose that is a lot worse than most other who shared his view on eugenics but felt only the rich wasps should be cared for Undecided

Debater

JimmyRiddle wrote:

As for Francoise Boivin, Liberals love telling New Democrats to stand aside in races where the third place candidate is only going to elect a Conservative. Well, time for Liberals to take their own advice. MacKinnon is a parachute opportunist who will get massacred. But he could take enough votes to thwart Boivin's efforts to get rid of a do-nothing xenophobe. Boivin is already reaching out to Liberals AND Bloc voters who think they deserve better representation than Nadeau--or a Liberal led by a man whose values on the Quebec identity and our role in wars like Iraq and Afghanistan are so at odds with most Quebecers.

Francoise Boivin split the vote and allowed the BQ to get elected in Gatineau last time.  A friend of mine wrote to her before the election and predicted that would happen if she ran and it turned out to be true.  She now appears to be running again regardless of whether or not it is a good idea to risk the same thing happening a 2nd time.  Oh well.

By the way, I'm not sure if Steven MacKinnon is going to be the Liberal nominee in Gatineau - he hasn't even entered the race yet as far as I know, so there may be other candidates that come forward as it is a winnable riding for the Liberals based on last year's results.  I'm not sure why you think he would do badly - perhaps you know more about him than I do.  I don't know him myself, but I have heard he is fluent in French anyway.

remind remind's picture

Ummm...so what if the Bloq got elected, it is better than either the Liberals and the CONs winning.

thorin ignore scott, what he wrote has as much relevance as Trudeau's  running about the country with Swatiska's and his penchant with Nazis philosophy, he is just hoping that people are stupid enough not to look further than what he wrote, and linked to, to see his typical corrupt Liberal smearing motives.

Bookish Agrarian

Debater wrote:

Francoise Boivin split the vote and allowed the BQ to get elected in Gatineau last time.  A friend of mine wrote to her before the election and predicted that would happen if she ran and it turned out to be true.  She now appears to be running again regardless of whether or not it is a good idea to risk the same thing happening a 2nd time.  Oh well.

By the way, I'm not sure if Steven MacKinnon is going to be the Liberal nominee in Gatineau - he hasn't even entered the race yet as far as I know, so there may be other candidates that come forward as it is a winnable riding for the Liberals based on last year's results.  I'm not sure why you think he would do badly - perhaps you know more about him than I do.  I don't know him myself, but I have heard he is fluent in French anyway.

 

 

It is times like these that the mind blowing arrogance of the Liberals stuns me.  Boivin came in second. She received 13,612 to the Liberals 13,193. In other words, if you really believed the vote spitting BS it is the Liberals who should step aside. Of course the Liberals sense of entitlement would never allow them. Arrogance from one end to the other. Unbelievable. I'll wait for you to post your letter advising the Liberal candidate to back out shall I?

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

remind wrote:

Ummm...so what if the Bloq got elected, it is better than either the Liberals and the CONs winning.

thorin ignore scott, what he wrote has as much relevance as Trudeau's  running about the country with Swatiska's and his penchant with Nazis philosophy, he is just hoping that people are stupid enough not to look further than what he wrote, and linked to, to see his typical corrupt Liberal smearing motives.

Ummmm... That's a right winger's wet dream you've repeated there. It was a WW1 Kaiser era uniform. There were no swastikas involved.

Debater

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Debater wrote:

Francoise Boivin split the vote and allowed the BQ to get elected in Gatineau last time.  A friend of mine wrote to her before the election and predicted that would happen if she ran and it turned out to be true.  She now appears to be running again regardless of whether or not it is a good idea to risk the same thing happening a 2nd time.  Oh well.

By the way, I'm not sure if Steven MacKinnon is going to be the Liberal nominee in Gatineau - he hasn't even entered the race yet as far as I know, so there may be other candidates that come forward as it is a winnable riding for the Liberals based on last year's results.  I'm not sure why you think he would do badly - perhaps you know more about him than I do.  I don't know him myself, but I have heard he is fluent in French anyway.

 

 

It is times like these that the mind blowing arrogance of the Liberals stuns me.  Boivin came in second. She received 13,612 to the Liberals 13,193. In other words, if you really believed the vote spitting BS it is the Liberals who should step aside. Of course the Liberals sense of entitlement would never allow them. Arrogance from one end to the other. Unbelievable. I'll wait for you to post your letter advising the Liberal candidate to back out shall I?

The NDP and Liberals basically tied for 2nd in Gatineau.  The difference between them was less than 1%.  In the next election, the Liberal vote is likely to overtake the NDP vote because of the large increase in support the party is getting in Quebec.

Anyway, I used to like Francoise Boivin.  A few years back I spent a bit of time working with her on the pro-SSM campaign.  I'm just a bit disappointed with the way things have turned out in the riding.

remind remind's picture

Hardly LTJ, have you not read Young Trudeau?

Quote:
Since his death in 2000, Trudeau's legacy as a modern father of Confederation, the philosopher-king who remade Canada into a shiny multicultural mosaic, has been burnished to a high polish. Young Trudeau, authored by Max and Monique Nemni, cuts a scratch on that polish, exposes a dark underside to Trudeau's political legacy long hidden from public view.

The Nemnis' book, a model of scholarly rigour and research, reveals that as a youth and young man in the 1930s and early 1940s, Trudeau was no champion of democracy and individual freedoms. He was instead an ardent Quebec nationalist who, during the worst of the war years, admired fascist dictators, regarded reports of Nazi atrocities as British propaganda, plotted treason against the Canadian state and actively promoted a revolution to establish an independent Quebec solely for Catholic French Canadians.

As the Nemnis put it, Trudeau in his youth "was remarkably different from what we and everyone else had assumed."

For example, while still attending the Jesuit-run school, College Jean de Brebeuf, Trudeau wrote a play that described Jewish merchants in a derogatory fashion. In 1936, at age 17, he wrote in a school text that he was willing to use terrorist tactics against Canadian military facilities. The teenage Trudeau also predicted he would return to Montreal 40 years later -- in 1976, no less -- at the head of an army "to declare the independence of Quebec." (The Parti Quebecois under Rene Levesque won its first election in 1976.)

In 1942, the 23-year-old Trudeau was a member of a "secret" revolutionary organization calling for a "national revolution." "The nation that will be reborn from the revolution" would be Catholic and French. Even in 1944, when reports of Nazi atrocities could no longer be dismissed as propaganda, Trudeau was full of admiration for the writing of the now infamous French anti-Semite Charles Maurras.

This cannot be regarded as "youthful stupidity," as one academic has suggested. Other Canadians Trudeau's age, and younger, were scattered across battlefields around the world, fighting what Trudeau was promoting. Many were francophone. They had figured out right from wrong.

What was wrong with Trudeau?

Quote:
This book shines a light of devastating clarity on French-Canadian society in the 1930s and 1940s, when young elites were raised to be pro-fascist, and democratic and liberal were terms of criticism. The model leaders to be admired were good Catholic dictators like Mussolini, Salazar in Portugal, Franco in Spain, and especially Pétain, collaborator with the Nazis in Vichy France. There were even demonstrations against Jews who were demonstrating against what the Nazis were doing in Germany.

Trudeau, far from being the rebel that other biographers have claimed, embraced this ideology. At his elite school, Brébeuf, he was a model student, the editor of the school magazine, and admired by the staff and his fellow students. But the fascist ideas and the people he admired – even when the war was going on, as late as 1944 – included extremists so terrible that at the war’s end they were shot. And then there’s his manifesto and his plan to stage a revolution against les Anglais.

This is astonishing material – and it’s all demonstrably true – based on personal papers of Trudeau that the authors were allowed to access after his death.What they have found has astounded and distressed them, but they both agree that the truth must be published.

http://www.mcclelland.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780771067495

Quote:
Trudeau's pro-fascism was part and parcel of Quebec's nationalism at the time. Certainly Quebec nationalists did not hold England in high regard. Not only did they back Salazar and Mussolini, they also embraced the pro-Nazi Vichy regime of Marshall Pétain in occupied France.

This is the same Pétain that sent the Nazis thousands of Jews and thousands of Frenchmen to do forced labour in Nazi factories.

Trudeau was pro-Pétain because his regime was run on corporatist Catholic lines. Trudeau disliked the Third Republic because it was against the Catholic Church and had ties to international Jewry.

In all this, Trudeau was really being pro-church and anti-democracy and anti-liberalism. Trudeau thought liberalism was British. Trudeau felt World War II was a British war. He opposed the war because he felt it was helping Britain at French Canada's expense.

Trudeau even founded a secret society to come up with his dream of a French Catholic Laurentie. Trudeau also read Trotsky on how to stage a revolution to get that Laurentian state.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_zolf/20060613.html

 

Quote:
I noticed how prompt Trudeau was to cover for his youthful mentors, like André Laurendeau and François Hertel. I didn't know then that he was covering up for himself too.

 Catherine Pomeyrols kept the best for the end of the lunch : she told Trudeau she had a copy of a petition he has signed when he was 13 years old in support of Les Jeune-Canada, a youth group extremely close by Lionel Groulx. He was surprised and said : «Pas vrai!». He seemed amused by it. A few days later, I brought a copy of the document to his office at the law firm Heenan Blaikie. I had joined a short note : «As evidence that when Pomeyrols and I look for something, we find it.»

 A few months later, in early 1996, Trudeau invited to lunch to talk about «des choses sérieuses et moins sérieuses.» I declined. By then I was immersed in the writing of Sounds and Silence and I knew that by meeting him privately I would jeopardized my objectivity. I would become tempted to explain away, to dismiss the lies and omissions that bothered me in his Memoirs.

 A seasoned retired detective and a bright lawyer told me that Trudeau had accepted to discuss his youth with students and that he had invited me to lunch afterwards because he wanted to know what I and Pomeyrols knew. He was fishing for information. Maybe. It is plausible.

 I was unaware of how politically charged this issue was until Jean-Louis Roux lost his job as lieutenant-governor when it was revealed in the the widely-read L’Actualité November 15 of 1996) that he had wore a swastika on his right arm while studying medicine at Université de Montréal. Luc Chartrand explained that he had been led to that information by Gérard Pelletier who had suggested he asked Jean-Louis Roux what he was doing in 1942. I sometimes wonder if Gérard Pelletier had not made that unkind suggestion at the instigation of Pierre Trudeau in order to divert the attention from Trudeau himself. By way of prevention, Roux was put under the spotlight.

http://www.barricades.ca/articles/2_4/Hidden_in_Plain_Sight.htm

More here below in a PDF

http://www.springerlink.com/content/u4743tr7351jqnh7/

But all this does is indicate my point, people change over time, as they grow and become aware of the world through life experiences and associations.

Nor do I believe the misinformation about the WWI uniform and one does not have to be right wing to realize Trudeau's love of fascism in his youth.

 

Bookish Agrarian

Debater wrote:

The NDP and Liberals basically tied for 2nd in Gatineau.  The difference between them was less than 1%.  In the next election, the Liberal vote is likely to overtake the NDP vote because of the large increase in support the party is getting in Quebec.

Anyway, I used to like Francoise Boivin.  A few years back I spent a bit of time working with her on the pro-SSM campaign.  I'm just a bit disappointed with the way things have turned out in the riding.

You get funnier by the moment with your twists and turns.  The simple fact is the Liberals placed 3rd.  That's 2 places behind the BQ.  If you really believed the logical outcome of your arguments you would be chastising the Liberals for trying to allow the BQ to win again.  Since your rhetoric, like all Liberal strategic voting rhetoric is just code for vote Liberal everywhere, it is hardly surprising you show no shame in being caught with your rhetoric pants down.

Debater

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Debater wrote:

The NDP and Liberals basically tied for 2nd in Gatineau.  The difference between them was less than 1%.  In the next election, the Liberal vote is likely to overtake the NDP vote because of the large increase in support the party is getting in Quebec.

Anyway, I used to like Francoise Boivin.  A few years back I spent a bit of time working with her on the pro-SSM campaign.  I'm just a bit disappointed with the way things have turned out in the riding.

You get funnier by the moment with your twists and turns.  The simple fact is the Liberals placed 3rd.  That's 2 places behind the BQ.  If you really believed the logical outcome of your arguments you would be chastising the Liberals for trying to allow the BQ to win again.  Since your rhetoric, like all Liberal strategic voting rhetoric is just code for vote Liberal everywhere, it is hardly surprising you show no shame in being caught with your rhetoric pants down.

I already explained above that the NDP and Libs basically tied for 2nd place and that the Libs are likely to be even higher next time.  I'm not going to change what I said as I have already explained the numbers.

Incidentally, Francoise Boivin, despite having a huge amount of support and attention from the NDP, barely finished ahead of the Liberals at a time when the Liberals were disorganized and running low in the polls in QC.  It is therefore very likely that now that the Libs are about 10 or more points higher than they were then will have the best chance of winning next time.

Bookish Agrarian

There is no such thing as basically tied in our political system.  You either win or you don't.  The placing was 1 BQ  2 NDP 3 Lib.  Anyone with an ounce of integrity would admit that the NDP candidate was able to move from historic returns to almost winning and it was in fact the Liberals who split the vote. 

By the way could you help me find the goal posts?  You keep moving them and I've lost track of where they are.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

remind wrote:

Nor do I believe the misinformation about the WWI uniform and one does not have to be right wing to realize Trudeau's love of fascism in his youth.

You've done nothing to prove that my information is false, nor that your unsubstantiated claim is true. Instead, you've demonstrated that in his youth he was a conventional nationalist/separatist of the day. Bravo.

remind remind's picture

No actually, what I was attempting to demonstrate and did demonstrate, that Trudeau changed his philosophy later in life, much the same as Tommy Douglas did. They way we all do to some extent, as a matter of fact.  Trudeau was not just a "separatist" he definitely leaned, or resided in fascist beliefs/ideology. Again please do read Young Trudeau, which was written by friends of his.

It was in response to post # 58, btw.

remind remind's picture

Bookish Agrarian wrote:
You get funnier by the moment with your twists and turns.  The simple fact is the Liberals placed 3rd.  That's 2 places behind the BQ.  If you really believed the logical outcome of your arguments you would be chastising the Liberals for trying to allow the BQ to win again.  Since your rhetoric, like all Liberal strategic voting rhetoric is just code for vote Liberal everywhere, it is hardly surprising you show no shame in being caught with your rhetoric pants down.

Exactly correct BA, the Liberals, as third place finishers, according to their own ideology, should be standing down and not splitting the vote in Gatineau, if they are so worried about the Bloc getting in again.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

remind wrote:
Trudeau was not just a "separatist" he definitely leaned, or resided in fascist beliefs/ideology.

But the followers of Lionel Groulx and his Catholic/fascist beliefs were the mainstream of Quebec nationalism in the Forties, as I pointed out.

Which, BTW, is entirely peripheral to your swastika claim.

 

remind remind's picture

And as I pointed out, time changes people, in rebuttal to scott's attempt to smear Tommy. 

And I still believe he did, and it was buried just like his fascist leanings.

ottawaobserver

If you don't mind me returning to the original point of the thread for a second, I think Layton's made himself *quite* relevant in the final month of the Parliamentary session.

The way this EI bill is coming together, it's forcing other parties not only to respond to the NDP's agenda, but also raising the stakes significantly for any party (like, say the Liberals who seem to be suddenly feeling their oats and believing their own rhetoric) who might be thinking of bringing down the government.  Because if they did so before the disposition of this bill, then the rationale for going to an election would be weakened (thus playing right into the Conservatives' ads ... "he's just in it for himself").

The NDP is not in a situation of having to passively decide if it will support others' non-confidence votes.  It now has a proposition of its own: one it's prepared to work with others on and that others have to respond to, because there is no other vehicle for amending the EI legislation at this late stage of the Parliamentary session, nor could one be put into place at this point by any other party.

Meantime ... and normally my bullshit meter goes off whenever ANY politician starts saying that "canadians don't want an election" ... in this case, I really do think that if the Liberals go ahead and try to provoke an election, they may be making a huge mistake ... and with nothing to show for it.  In particular, if they try and provoke things while the EI bill is still viable, then it really does undermine their case that they're some kind of champions for fixing EI.  Canadian Press is reporting a Harris-Decima poll tonight saying there is popular support for some kind of EI improvements, but not for a summer election.  Not that we're likely to see too many polls favouring an election, but I do think the public might not react well to a summer election not 9 months after the last one and in the middle of massive layoffs and dislocations.

Anyways, I think there are going to be a lot of procedural twists and turns in the next few weeks, and I certainly expect the government to try and time all the votes in order to up the ante and keep the opposition divided.

But it should be very interesting to watch ... and Layton (plus Carol Hughes of course, whose bill it is) deserve a lot of the credit for creating these opportunities.

[Not that he'll get any credit for it from certain columnists ;-).]

janfromthebruce

Thanks Observer. I love how the MSM particularly the Star tries to play up that the liberals are pushing the EI agenda when in fact, it's the NDP.

Cueball Cueball's picture

ottawaobserver

Ah yes, but whose head with it be "off with", Cueball?

Webgear

Cueball, I do not believe that is the correct way to sharpen an axe.

 

 

peterjcassidy peterjcassidy's picture

"We've got new generals our leaders are new
They sit and they argue and all that they do
Is sell their own colleagues and ride upon their backs
And jail them and break them and give them all the axe

Screaming in language that no one understands
Of the rights that we grabbed with our own bleeding hands"

Homage to Marat

thorin_bane

Generally you want more control like using two hand, and it depends on the function of the axe. If it's for splitting it doesn't even really need to be sharp. I suppose removing useless appendages would have to cut through bone so you would want to hone the blade to a fine edge. Axes can be sharpened well even with a sander(belt or disc...not orbital). In medieval times a footpumped stone wheel was the ideal choice. Oh and  you always have the wheel push towards the edge, safety first :)

Cool pic cue!

 

 

KenS

ottawaobserver wrote:
The way this EI bill is coming together, it's forcing other parties not only to respond to the NDP's agenda, but also raising the stakes significantly for any party (like, say the Liberals who seem to be suddenly feeling their oats and believing their own rhetoric) who might be thinking of bringing down the government. 

Very minor side point on the probable nature of Liberal intentions. Being as Iggy continues to say that they are weighing whether they should pull the plug and will decide next week.

I don't think there is anything more to this than using the time to solidify erasing the memory of all those votes with the government. Nifty trick since it includes Iggy in January and February. And its a meme where they can at least talk if they are the ones doing the driving.

If the NDP is going to succeed at taking centre stage, the Liberals will will ready the scipt that still has them in charge.

Scott McWhinnie Scott McWhinnie's picture

boy, this could be dangerous being here using my real name and all, unlike most...I dont think I am wooly sweatered enough to be here anyway. Getting called a fascist by a complete stranger is disheartening, not unlike Douglas' paper when I first found out about it.

It was probably this and the divestment of the word "socialism" by the NDP that led me to not renew my card with a party I had faith in at one point. Try and find that word at ndp.ca. They/you dont even apply it to Douglas anymore. Its all about Jack's pretty headshots.

 

The axe shit is pretty disturbing as well.

 

see ya!

KenS

Based on your posts here, never would have guessed you were someone for whom the NDP wasn't socialist enough.

ottawaobserver

And speaking of irrelevance, Garth Turner claims he's being wooed to run again, and he just might do it too, to rescue the Canadian economy:

Quote:

"...somebody asked me if I'd be running again for Parliament. It's something I'm getting a lot these days.

And the news is certainly interesting. The Conservative who defeated me seven months ago, now a cabinet minister, left her secret briefing book in a TV studio. Then forgot about it. Then blamed her staffer, who was instantly fired. Sad stuff. No heroics here. And so much for ministerial accountability.

But were I to lose my mind once again and seek a seat in the House, it wouldn't be the result of one woman's folly. Instead, it would be to try and help rescue this sputtering nation before it gets blown out of the sky".

Irrelevance AND arrogance. It's a twofer.  Gotta love those "progressive" Liberals ...!

Cueball Cueball's picture

Scott McWhinnie wrote:

boy, this could be dangerous being here using my real name and all, unlike most...I dont think I am wooly sweatered enough to be here anyway. Getting called a fascist by a complete stranger is disheartening, not unlike Douglas' paper when I first found out about it.

It was probably this and the divestment of the word "socialism" by the NDP that led me to not renew my card with a party I had faith in at one point. Try and find that word at ndp.ca. They/you dont even apply it to Douglas anymore. Its all about Jack's pretty headshots.

 

The axe shit is pretty disturbing as well.

see ya!

It is. The purely partisan politics free axe grinding that makes up the majority of the posts of these NDP threads, leaves me cold.

remind remind's picture

Oh yes, distill them down to your own perceptions of worth, cue, but fair enough as your anti-democracy positions leave me cold.

Fidel

And the non-partisans are critical of federal and provincial NDP parties in about 90% of their posts. Interesting. It almost makes me wonder if they really are non-partisan. I highly doubt it. It not only leaves me cold, it's a creepy feeling as well;-

Fidel

Scott McWhinnie wrote:

It was probably this and the divestment of the word "socialism" by the NDP that led me to not renew my card with a party I had faith in at one point. Try and find that word at ndp.ca. They/you dont even apply it to Douglas anymore. Its all about Jack's pretty headshots.

Here's a clue, Scott. The NDP has been a party of social democrats for a long time. Laissez-faire capitalism died in 1930's North America, and so social democrat parties around the world had less reason to be as far to the left politically with the advent of mixed market economies throuhout the western world. Capitalism doesnt work without heart and soul, and social democrat parties like the NDP should appeal to the broadest range of voters. And if our obsolete electoral system could be updated sometime in the next 20 years, there might be enough of Canada to preserve from Liberal and Tory sellouts to big business and US interests.

Our Liberals and Tories thought they would reinvent laissez-faire capitalism in Canada with the second-hand neoliberal wafting over the border since 1984. And our two old line parties are like the worst carpenters youve ever seen - they shouldnt be trusted to nail a board on a shithouse, so to speak. Laissez-faire in all its forms doesnt work. The two old line parties still dont understand this immutable fact, but they realize it when electioneering and trying to mimick social democrats with promising to maintain health care, jobs, and the environment. They tell colossal lies to get themselves elected and re-elected, but sometimes a phony majority of voters prefer to be lied to.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

remind wrote:

Oh yes, distill them down to your own perceptions of worth, cue, but fair enough as your anti-democracy positions leave me cold.

There isn't anything democratic abour partisan axe grinding, stonewalling or deflection. In related news, a former Argos cheerleader friends of mine posted the "I mad, I am angry, and I am not going to take it anymore" clip from the movie Network, on her facebook site.

remind remind's picture

It is only axe grinding as far as you are seeingit, or spinning, and one could say you grind axes more than others even, anyway not going to get into bickersons with you over your personal pet peeves, and lack of thought positionings.

ottawaobserver

OK, well if the axe-grinding thing was directed at me, I was just trying to lay out what I saw as the outlines of the rest of the Parliamentary sitting, and point out that ... as always at the end of the sitting ... Layton's moves are not so irrelevant as the pundits would have you believe.  If that makes me partisan, well I guess I'll have to wear it.  I'm not losing too much sleep over the label, but it's not like I don't reserve the right to my own opinion.

Cueball Cueball's picture

It wasn't directed at you. In fact, not anyone. I only glanced over the thread and saw the same old same old. Other than that I agreed with the thread title, and really wasn't paying attention.

Chantal Hebert is also pretty irrelevant. I don't know why you bother, really.

Uncle John

The NDP is useful to the Conservatives, as they draw off enough votes from the Liberals to allow the Conservatives to win.

The NDP helps that process by saying that the Liberals are the same as the Conservatives. This means that Liberals can switch to the Conservatives without feeling guilt, and it allows the Conservatives to say that they are just as moderate as the Liberals. If that were not true, it would mean the NDP has been lying, which is obviously not possible.

Pretty good system, if you accept the inevitability of Tory and Liberal majority and minority governments.

If Hebert (a Tory-Liberal supporter) is saying the NDP is being bombed into irrelevance, it means she thinks the Liberal wing of the Establishment will win.

The real truth is that the NDP are part of that establishment, especially now they have bought into the Tory "Hang 'em High" justice policies, and the neoliberal concept that budgets must always be balanced.

If the NDP are elected anywhere, the rich people will move their money out, so they can "prove" the NDP are "bad for the economy", even though there is no economic evidence that changing the mix in a given economy does harm or good.

remind remind's picture

Too bad they did not move themselves out, as opposed to their money. And that is quite the spin.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Uncle John wrote:

The NDP is useful to the Conservatives, as they draw off enough votes from the Liberals to allow the Conservatives to win.

The NDP helps that process by saying that the Liberals are the same as the Conservatives. This means that Liberals can switch to the Conservatives without feeling guilt, and it allows the Conservatives to say that they are just as moderate as the Liberals. If that were not true, it would mean the NDP has been lying, which is obviously not possible.

Pretty good system, if you accept the inevitability of Tory and Liberal majority and minority governments.

If Hebert (a Tory-Liberal supporter) is saying the NDP is being bombed into irrelevance, it means she thinks the Liberal wing of the Establishment will win.

The real truth is that the NDP are part of that establishment, especially now they have bought into the Tory "Hang 'em High" justice policies, and the neoliberal concept that budgets must always be balanced.

If the NDP are elected anywhere, the rich people will move their money out, so they can "prove" the NDP are "bad for the economy", even though there is no economic evidence that changing the mix in a given economy does harm or good.

Simple and clear. Voting for the NDP is at best voting for a sentiment.

Peter3

Cueball wrote:

Simple and clear. Voting for the NDP is at best voting for a sentiment.

What would you recommend as the unsentimental progressive alternative?

Fidel

Uncle John wrote:
The NDP helps that process by saying that the Liberals are the same as the Conservatives.

And in some cases, theyve governed even further to the right than Tories.

In much of Europe, voters discovered long ago that the differences between Liberal and conservative parties are anywhere from superfluous to non-existent.

Liberal, Tory, it's the same old story.

Debater

Cueball wrote:

Chantal Hebert is also pretty irrelevant.

Well who knows who is relevant and who is irrelevant.  I suppose it depends upon what type of influence we are talking about.

In any event, Chantal Hebert is one of the most-watched political commentators in Canada right now so she probably has more potential relevance than most of us.

remind remind's picture

Better sentimental voting, than voting for reasons of greed, or not voting because of apathy and stupidity.

remind remind's picture

"potential relevance" LMAOOOOOOOOO

How do you know she is the most watched BTW?

Pages

Topic locked