Ya, I think she forgets herself sometimes when even she described Chretien and Martin budgets as 'conservative' in various Post articles. And since the Liberals received one of their worst shellackings in recent history in the October election, she's been careful not to metion Liberal and conservative in the same sentence.
Jack Layton's sliding into irrelevance
Thu, 2009-06-04 16:56
#102
Thu, 2009-06-04 16:59
#103
"potential relevance" LMAOOOOOOOOO
How do you know she is the most watched BTW?
I didn't say the most watched. I said one of the most watched. I choose my words carefully - you might wish to do the same. 
Thu, 2009-06-04 17:06
#104
I don't know if you could even say Hebert is one of the most watched. But watched she is.
And for the same reason that she is being watched here: she's good at getting attention.
Thats it.
Thu, 2009-06-04 17:26
#105
remind
Awww debator spitting hairs eh!
Thu, 2009-06-04 17:27
#106
Cueball
Better sentimental voting, than voting for reasons of greed, or not voting because of apathy and stupidity.
Not voting for these clowns has nothing to do with being apathetic. Its about not embarassing oneself in public.
Thu, 2009-06-04 17:36
#107
Better sentimental voting, than voting for reasons of greed, or not voting because of apathy and stupidity.
Not voting for these clowns has nothing to do with being apathetic. Its about not embarassing oneself in public.
No one is obligated to reveal who they voted for. This isnt El Salvador or Afghanistan.
So if you dont want people to vote Liberal or Tory same old story, then just say so.
Thu, 2009-06-04 17:37
#108
remind
Frankly others opinion me is none of my business and embarrassment is based upon one's own fragile ego concerns and personal opinion.
If I was the type to be embarassed, it would be over advocating that others waste their democracy and bow to corporate interests when doing so.
Thu, 2009-06-04 17:41
#109
If I was the type to be embarassed, it would be over advocating that others waste their democracy and bow to corporate interests when doing so
Oh theyre not embarrassed by it at all. They can't make sense of the old line party economic and political agendas, so they have no alternative but to resort to cherry picking and US-style smear tactics. Theyre so full of shit most of the time they never think to change their diapers. And if they only knew how it smells. Pee-yew!
Thu, 2009-06-04 18:07
#110
Cueball
Better sentimental voting, than voting for reasons of greed, or not voting because of apathy and stupidity.
Not voting for these clowns has nothing to do with being apathetic. Its about not embarassing oneself in public.
No one is obligated to reveal who they voted for. This isnt El Salvador or Afghanistan.
So if you dont want people to vote Liberal or Tory same old story, then just say so.
It is possible to be embarassed in front of ones own conscience. In anycase no strategic voting for me, as NDP'rs have been pointing out, voting strategically dilutes the political process, so demanding that people vote just to keep the "other guys" out is just another sign of how much political principle has been diluted in the NDP.
On another track, i was asking you the other day, what concrete steps have been taken in the leadership vetting process to prevent the frequent appearance of right wingers such as Dosanjh and Rae in key leadership position in the NDP. Anything?
Thu, 2009-06-04 18:27
#111
It is funny to me how the biggest closet partisan continues to claim to be no such thing and then goes on to continue to steel wool the same axe he/she has been grinding for as long as I've been on babble. Isn't the world magical.
By the way if you were to actually grind an axe the way it is shown in that picture, before too long you would find yourself an accident statistic.
Thu, 2009-06-04 18:48
#112
Cueball
It is funny to me how the biggest closet partisan continues to claim to be no such thing and then goes on to continue to steel wool the same axe he/she has been grinding for as long as I've been on babble. Isn't the world magical.
That's an ad hominem smear. Not that its worth discussing or reporting to the moderators, because it ain't. It only shows how incapable some NDP'rs seem to be of entering into any kind productive discussion beyond personal attacks, and so on.... Axe grinding, in other words... zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
I asked a very simple question: what has the NDP done in the leadership vetting process to prevent the NDP leadership being taken over by the right, in the light of defections by Dosanjh and Rae, and so on. I could name some other suspects, but wont for the sake of decency. Anything. There is always a lot of talk about vetting candidates, but the executive and leadership seems to get under the wire.
Thu, 2009-06-04 19:04
#113
Not voting for these clowns has nothing to do with being apathetic. Its about not embarassing oneself in public.
Not embarassing oneself in public is a good idea.
Voting for the NDP is at best voting for a sentiment.
And not voting for a sentiment for a mere sentiment is another good idea.
Our cup runneth over with good ideas of what not to do.
What would you recommend as the unsentimental progressive alternative?
Good question.
Thu, 2009-06-04 19:11
#114
In anycase no strategic voting for me, as NDP'rs have been pointing out, voting strategically dilutes the political process,
I can count the number of rightwing political parties in Canada on two fingers that would benefit by an anti-democratic, non-progressive strategy that encourages people to abstain from voting. Apparently Liberal stooges in Ottawa arent the only non-progressives who advocate tuning out and dropping out when they abstain from voting against the other wing of the property party.
Thu, 2009-06-04 19:47
#115
It is funny to me how the biggest closet partisan continues to claim to be no such thing and then goes on to continue to steel wool the same axe he/she has been grinding for as long as I've been on babble. Isn't the world magical.
That's an ad hominem smear. Not that its worth discussing or reporting to the moderators, because it ain't. It only shows how incapable some NDP'rs seem to be of entering into any kind productive discussion beyond personal attacks, and so on.... Axe grinding, in other words... zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
I asked a very simple question: what has the NDP done in the leadership vetting process to prevent the NDP leadership being taken over by the right, in the light of defections by Dosanjh and Rae, and so on. I could name some other suspects, but wont for the sake of decency. Anything. There is always a lot of talk about vetting candidates, but the executive and leadership seems to get under the wire.
Oh please do crybaby. You certainly are capable of dishing it out but not taking it. You always attack other babblers as a group dismissing anything said by them as individuals because they are not your kind of partisan.
What I posted was an observation of your posting history. There is no attack involved. I am also capable of seeing the absurdity of your postings. Nor am I willing to engage in your games because you ignore anything you don't like and then move the goalposts. Your routine is getting old.
I have no idea what type of partisan you are - or care. However, someone who posts as vociferously and in such an attack-dog fashion against one particular party has a partisan skeleton in their closest somewhere.
Thu, 2009-06-04 20:30
#116
I think what he's been trying to tell us since 2004 is that: Liberals and dippers are the same slippers - Bob Rae!! - the moustache!! - it was the NDP who sold Omar Khadr, and the oil, and the gas, and the hydropower, and the softwood down the Mississippi - what's NAFTA, seriously? - and some other really sticky barbs concerning the NDP.
Thu, 2009-06-04 20:41
#117
The generally used and understood sense of "partisan" is 'supporting some party'... which Cueball does not.
That said, there is still a substantive logic to your overall criticism of him. He has a stake in a position. And discursively acts as does a partisan.
My comment would be that there is a certain rough justice that someone who comes into threads like these only with a negative critique gets mistaken as a partisan.
Thu, 2009-06-04 20:50
#118
If youre a non-partisan in Canada, you spend at least some time criticizing the Liberals and Tories whove run this country for the last 140 years from a couple of pubs in downtown Ottawa. I mean, why dedicate anywhere from 60 to 75% of your posts to attacking the fourth political party in Ottawa? Are the NDP that much of a threat to the future of the Liberal Party?
Fri, 2009-06-05 09:45
#119
I don't know if you could even say Hebert is one of the most watched. But watched she is.
And for the same reason that she is being watched here: she's good at getting attention.
Thats it.
Well obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion of her. But from what I can tell, she has emerged as one of the most-respected political commentators in Canada these days. She is fluent in both languages and has insight into both the English and French Canadian perspective. If you do a search you will see that many reviewers of her work comment on her intelligence, and as the only woman on the CBC At Issue panel, she does a great job of holding her own.
I happen to think she is right more often than she is wrong, but there are times when I disagree with her and I have e-mailed her at The Star on occasion to say so.
Fri, 2009-06-05 10:13
#120
I know a lot of very intelligent people who frequently say very stupid things- in the strong suits of their knowledge/intelligence no less.
You keep coming back to her intelligence even after it has been granted. Its irrelevant.
We are looking at the same animal. You see "one of must respected". I see "one of most talked about."
How about we leave it there?
Fri, 2009-06-05 10:18
#121
Maysie
Didn't see this long thread until now. Closing.
Pages
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3