Continued from here
Post NDP convention fallout and the whole ball of ear wax continued
Sat, 2009-08-29 18:19
#1
remind
Post NDP convention fallout and the whole ball of ear wax continued
Sat, 2009-08-29 18:26
#2
M. Spector
"...the whole ball of ear wax"?? [IMG]http://i32.tinypic.com/oi5aw2.jpg[/IMG]
![http://i32.tinypic.com/oi5aw2.jpg[/IMG]](http://i32.tinypic.com/oi5aw2.jpg[/IMG]){kind=link}
Sat, 2009-08-29 18:31
#3
remind
I think remind was just expressing a personal wish there. Their support won't entirely collapse over this, obviously not, but if this trend of turning on their own activist base continues (which it most definietly will if other members don't start calling the brass on it) then the party is in trouble.Unlike the Liberals and CONs the NDP still relies on their activists between and during elections, and their voting base is still well ahead of John Q Public on such things -a base that is still their single largest demographic, by far. (that was probably obscured during the nineties, Layton just brought them back a bit closer to their historic norm) Guys like Stockholm no more reflects the average NDPer than, well, Fidel does. I'm quite sure that I'm closer to the average NDP centre on most issues.
Guys with more foresight than Layton better start looking beyond the next election, or their present illusions that theyre on the verge of winning it all.
Of course I was, however, debator can't stop himself from taking cheap shots at me. It is par for the course with him.
Now back to the topic, I take it you were using "guys" as a unisexual comment? ;)
But I agree with the general commentary you make in respect to getingt rid of their delusions and thinking.
As for stockholm's comments about no point to resolutions, it is damn right scarey, and peopel really need to be thinking!
Sat, 2009-08-29 18:34
#4
remind
Yep, I figure people must have a lot of wax coming out their ears given the lengthy discussion that has taken place, all those sound waves from typing and swearing, you know :D
Sat, 2009-08-29 18:34
#5
As for stockholm's comments about no point to resolutions, it is damn right scarey, and peopel really need to be thinking!
I may have been young and foolish, but as I'm sure I've mentioned many times here, the arrogant dismissal of convention decisions by the handful of party elite was one of the things (certainly not the only one) that drove me to leave the party in the 70s. That hasn't stopped me voting for it (and campaigning for it when the candidate was a decent person), but I couldn't voluntarily be a member in a pretend democracy. Let me know when it changes.
Sat, 2009-08-29 18:37
#6
As for stockholm's comments about no point to resolutions, it is damn right scarey, and peopel really need to be thinking!
Oh please. Stockholm posts lots of things in a way I find objectionable. But in this case what he was posting is called irony. Not a reflection of anything.
Sat, 2009-08-29 19:02
#7
remind
No sorry, BA, once upon a time I believed in such a fairy tale about stock, but no longer. I saw what he was posting, as well as others, before the convention about Dana, and it came to pass.
Sat, 2009-08-29 19:43
#8
No sorry, BA, once upon a time I believed in such a fairy tale about stock, but no longer. I saw what he was posting, as well as others, before the convention about Dana, and it came to pass.
I hope you are not suggesting he is some sort of NDP official. That I don't buy. Not for a second.
Sat, 2009-08-29 19:56
#9
Boom Boom
As much as I can't stand Brad Lavigne and even Layton is beginning to grate on me, what other party with seats at the federal level gives a voice to progressive politics?
Sat, 2009-08-29 20:00
#10
remind
Ya well, I think he is close to the inner circle, yep I do.
Sat, 2009-08-29 20:06
#11
As much as I can't stand Brad Lavigne and even Layton is beginning to grate on me, what other party with seats at the federal level gives a voice to progressive politics?
As long as my NDP riding association is running Bill Siksay I will be working hard to get him elected no matter how many times the party elite show themselves to be power hungry politicos with no principles. One good person is worth fighting for.
___________________________________________
Soothsayers had a better record of prediction than economists
Sat, 2009-08-29 20:13
#12
Boom Boom
As long as my NDP riding association is running Bill Siksay I will be working hard to get him elected no matter how many times the party elite show themselves to be power hungry politicos with no principles. One good person is worth fighting for.
I agree. We had a great NDP guy here but he left for Gatineau I think. I wish we had a Bill Siksay here.
Sat, 2009-08-29 22:59
#13
Ya well, I think he is close to the inner circle, yep I do.
Relax. I know him. He is not an insider, and holds no position in the NDP. Just a knowledgeable observer.
Sun, 2009-08-30 01:00
#14
I doubt Stockholm is a party insider myself, but he does seem to represent a growing sentiment in the party on most issues. Not like he's the only one I've been finger wrestling with.
Sun, 2009-08-30 01:14
#15
Now back to the topic, I take it you were using "guys" as a unisexual comment? ;)
Was my own slight male-0-centrism peeking through today? What can I say, were all still part dog, some of us are just better trained than others. 
Sun, 2009-08-30 02:18
#16
Libby was at the convention friday I saw her on CPAC
neither she nor Bill said or did a thing to help dana
the greens can and will help
Sun, 2009-08-30 03:10
#17
the greens can and will help
That's nice.
Oh, by-the-way, what willl the Greens do to help again?
Sun, 2009-08-30 06:35
#18
Libby was at the convention friday I saw her on CPAC
False.
Sun, 2009-08-30 08:02
#19
She was at Convention, but got there late because she was coming back from Palestine.
Sun, 2009-08-30 08:06
#20
Yeah, but she wasn't there on Friday - we already figured that out by reading [url=http://rabble.ca/comment/1054582/madmax-wrote-%C2%A0-1000kms-or][color=b...'s blog in the other thread[/color][/url].
Sun, 2009-08-30 08:06
#21
Well, pmcl might have gotten the days mixed up. I have no idea when she got back.
Sun, 2009-08-30 08:12
#22
We have NDP loyalists saying everything done to Dana is fine, because the NDP did it.
Now we have another loyalist saying everyone connected with the NDP is against Dana (including Libby and Bill), while the Greens are wonderful.
There are a very few babblers who try to look at individual action and responsibility. I like to encourage that. Otherwise, this "my party is the best and the rest suck" reminds me, quite frankly, of racism, xenophobia, religious fanaticism, sexism, patriotism, and all the other isms which divide humanity into warring gangs.
That, perhaps, is why I overreact to posts like the one we are discussing.
Sun, 2009-08-30 08:20
#23
Yeah, I know what you mean. I hate that these threads get so polarized too.
Sun, 2009-08-30 08:40
#24
Forgive me, I have perhaps a superficial understanding of the Larson situation, but here's how I percieve it, and here's how I think it symbolizes what's wrong with the party I am a member of.
Larson ended up embarassing the party over the video thing. In true passive aggressive tradition, they found other ways to take it out on him.
Kinda predictable. The NDP leadership has since the beginning been struggling to put forward a respectable patina for the media. It's a culture within the party. Understandably. Over the decades the NDP is, compared to other parties, put under the moral and ethical side scanning electron microscope, while the media holds the telescope to their eye patch with the other parties.
Sven Robinson is out of politics.
Joe Volpe soldiers on.
People wonder why left policy isn't as popular as it should be. Little wonder in my mind when the only voice on the left has looked upon popularism as something dirty.
Every NDP convention is a hoot, whether I've attended it or watched it. A more self conscious bunch you couldn't find anywhere. Anal Retentive on the Projecting a Respectable Front Convention is what it should be called.
Thing is, trying to craft an image for the media is a mugs game because no matter what the NDP does the media is never going to be NDP friendly.
Gotta take a lesson from American politics and talk over the media's head to the people.
If the party is or was pissed with Larson because he provided some embarassment during the last election and they'd like him to please go away, that should be tackled head on.
But, that would take quite a change in culture.
Sun, 2009-08-30 08:42
#25
remind
Ya well, I think he is close to the inner circle, yep I do.Relax. I know him. He is not an insider, and holds no position in the NDP. Just a knowledgeable observer.
Well...if this was geared to make me "feel" better, it hardly suceeded.
Sun, 2009-08-30 09:23
#26
remind
Forgive me, I have perhaps a superficial understanding of the Larson situation, but here's how I percieve it, and here's how I think it symbolizes what's wrong with the party I am a member of.Larson ended up embarassing the party over the video thing. In true passive aggressive tradition, they found other ways to take it out on him.
Kinda predictable. The NDP leadership has since the beginning been struggling to put forward a respectable patina for the media. It's a culture within the party. Understandably. Over the decades the NDP is, compared to other parties, put under the moral and ethical side scanning electron microscope, while the media holds the telescope to their eye patch with the other parties.
Sven Robinson is out of politics.
Joe Volpe soldiers on.
People wonder why left policy isn't as popular as it should be. Little wonder in my mind when the only voice on the left has looked upon popularism as something dirty.
Every NDP convention is a hoot, whether I've attended it or watched it. A more self conscious bunch you couldn't find anywhere. Anal Retentive on the Projecting a Respectable Front Convention is what it should be called.
Thing is, trying to craft an image for the media is a mugs game because no matter what the NDP does the media is never going to be NDP friendly.
Gotta take a lesson from American politics and talk over the media's head to the people.
If the party is or was pissed with Larson because he provided some embarassment during the last election and they'd like him to please go away, that should be tackled head on.
But, that would take quite a change in culture.
I concur for the most part and especially about the media mugs game.
As for projecting an aura of respectability, they need to get their self esteem in order and grab a reality check.
If people were worried about respectability when they vote, they would not be voting for either the Liberals, nor the Conservatives, ever.
They have both gone so far beyond respectability that the NDP would need 140 years to catch up.
Moreover, as that poll last week, about people's perceptions of the parties, showed, the majority of people think the NDP is honest, kind, caring and compassionate, can't get much more respectable than that. However, they apparently also see those attributes as weak.
So perhaps the NDP need stop being embarrassed over sfa, in compare with the truly embarrassing actions of the Cons and Libs, that actually impact our lives.
Sun, 2009-08-30 09:33
#27
Maysie
Just popping in here to tell everyone that speculating on babble about any babbler's true identify, if said babbler is choosing to post anonymously, is NOT OKAY. Everyone who's doing this, about Stockholm in this case, needs to stop it. Now.
Also, no speculating about what job or employment an anonymous babbler may have.
Thank you.
Sun, 2009-08-30 10:00
#28
remind
Frankly maysie NO ONE was speculating on who he is, or what job he has.
Sun, 2009-08-30 11:26
#29
I say again
I and my wife both watched Libby on CPAC on friday.
She was with two others after ed broadbents speech (about an hour after)
I was away for the week end and did not watch any more.
But for you sceptics accusing me of lying I just checked the hotel and she checked in that thursday.
Its easy you call as their assistant and check the billings.
What I meant by the greens is they already have shown guts and said they will re- legalize cannabis and this time it will be heard.
Have a nice day.
Sun, 2009-08-30 11:30
#30
So, the NDP says it wants toi decriminalize marijuana and the greens say the same. Remind me what the difference is?
If the Green Party extends any sort of open invitation to Dana Larsen to join it and have a high profile and perhaps be a candidate for them - please let us know.
Sun, 2009-08-30 11:39
#31
So, the NDP says it wants toi decriminalize marijuana and the greens say the same. Remind me what the difference is?
None. The closer they get to power, the dimmer the memory will be. Except in the NDP's case, tragically, they didn't even wait till they got close.
Sun, 2009-08-30 11:53
#32
So, the NDP says it wants toi decriminalize marijuana and the greens say the same. Remind me what the difference is?
The current NDP policy is to decriminalize marijuana, but Green policy is marijuana legalization. The resolution proposed by Dana Larson (and supported by many others) is marijuana legalization.
The decriminalizing marijuana just makes it less illegal to possess small amounts of pot. There a lot of juistriction that have done this, including some US states. Marijuana legalization usually involves government controlled distribution of marijuana to anyone who want it (over 18). It would be similar to how alcohol is distributed. Unlike decriminalization, legalization will put a huge dent in the money made by and activies of organized (and disorganized) crime.
Mon, 2009-08-31 02:17
#33
Decrim is a liberal invented word nothing more
It is a joke meant to bamboozle like many here do openly...eh?
It does absolutely nothing to address supply.
Imagine if alcohol was treated this way and if you are smart its easy to see.
If not well maybe listen to your parties experts.
Uness you castrated those and left them out to hang and dry ?Maybe?
Yes I await Stockholm's apology.....I wont hold my breath as he of course is more equal than others just like many in the ndp.
I say again this issue will now cost the ndp big time but I guess we will all just have to wait and see that but trust me I will remind you.
Your obvious fear of alienating people who would never in a million years vote for you is and will be your undoing.
Mon, 2009-08-31 02:49
#34
Pogo
I remember back in my university days NORML was the big organization and it was clearly for decriminalization. My memory of a lot of my conversations is a bit foggy, but a lot of the discussion was that the extra step of legalization was not welcome. Of course this when pot was sold in tobacco cans by the lid and potency was not a science. Still I see little value for government getting deep into the business of distribution and quality control.
Mon, 2009-08-31 03:52
#35
I remember back in my university days NORML was the big organization and it was clearly for decriminalization. My memory of a lot of my conversations is a bit foggy, but a lot of the discussion was that the extra step of legalization was not welcome. Of course this when pot was sold in tobacco cans by the lid and potency was not a science. Still I see little value for government getting deep into the business of distribution and quality control.
Yep..in those days if they would of just left well enough alone and let folks puff on their weak joints the fad would of probably faded away..but No they had to create a booming underground tax free economy that is breaking the bank to fight...destroying countless lives in the process ,and creating a drug problem where none really existed till they started with the prohibition mantra. The media was used as the propaganda tool also to generate fear in the populace....remeber the chromosone scare....it turned out that milk and orange juice as well as gunk from a floor did more than lsd did. Yeh the media was used like a rag.
Now they must bare the burden of responsibility when it comes to educating , supplying and medically treating what they created. You can even trace the potency of black market pot...very little when it first came out and then the same logic that makes brand "B" better than brand "A" took over...resulting in stronger and stronger pot. Of course this went on with everything else too..till you ended up with ecstacy dusted with pcp(angel dust) ..then more and more mixtures till finally they found out ..hell crystal meth sells better...so now litlle tommy isn't dancing with a soother in his mouth...he's on death row so to speak. so the big problem facing society is how do you prevent future tommy's from falling into the pit of despair when you have lost the war...there is only one real alternative and it will happen some day. Till then the government is guiltier than a pig in shit when it comes to the drug probem.
Remember paraquat poison..the idea here was to poison peoples kids that smoked pot by spraying the fields in Mexico the pot grew in that was destined for North american consumption...how many children died? Why is it secret? So besides being guilty of the drug problem there guilty of drugging or even worse yet premeditated murder.
Dana tried to help the NDP deal with these problems and got kicked out....and it doesn't matter about the you tube video ..the right wing media will find a way to scare support or discredit the NDP anyways if they jump in the polls. Even if they have to make there own videos to do it. Which they do..it's called TV. The real opiate of the people.
Mon, 2009-08-31 09:06
#36
I say again this issue will now cost the ndp big time but I guess we will all just have to wait and see that but trust me I will remind you.
Your obvious fear of alienating people who would never in a million years vote for you is and will be your undoing.
So, I guess you think that the average 20-something voter is scratching their head saying
"Like, gee, like, all that matters to me in life is smoking up and getting some good dope. There's gotta be someone to vote for that's a really cool dude who's going make it easy for me and my friends to smoke up by making it as easy to buy a joint at a corner store as it is now is to buy some smokes. I guess the NDP isn't that party because they dumped that cool dude who was on youtube smoking 30 joints at once and then driving a car. That's so, like, UNFAIR. Maybe the Green party will be better. I mean they named their party after the colour of weed - so I guess they must be the pro-weed party!"
I give young people credit for being a lot smarter than that.
Mon, 2009-08-31 09:51
#37
The NDP apparatchiks have a problem with control - they're addicted to it. Whether they were burying the resolution on marijuana or the proposal to at least discuss the name change, their message was the same. The members can't be trusted to debate substantial or controversial issues. Consequently, we were left "debating" apple pie resolutions which didn't require any debate at all. Presumably that was why they didn't make a fuss about whether delegates spoke at the pro or con mikes.
The chair's performance during the "name change" section was particularly embarrassing. On the rules of order, she flip-flopped like a stranded fish on a Halifax harbour in order to please the party establishment. It was a cynical, unethical and undemocratic exercise and was one of the lowest points for me as a member of this party.
I felt badly for the many younger members of the party, many of whom seemed to be enthusiastic about having a real debate of the issues. The message from the party appeared to be "Thanks for coming, now sit down and don't talk back to your elders." If we don't want to lose these people to the Greens, we'd better start addressing the democratic deficit in our party.
Mon, 2009-08-31 09:57
#38
Snert
That 20-something stoner always has the Marijuana Party to vote for, if that's the single most important world issue they can think of. Mind you, the Marijuana Party's proposed foreign policy is "make a big bong in the shape of Africa". But hey, if the ONLY thing that matters is getting baked legally, there's that.
Mon, 2009-08-31 11:51
#39
In the previous thread and this one there was very little opposition to the idea of investigating treatment of Dana Larson and the marijuana resolution.
I've never been to a Federal Council meeting. When and where is the next one? More importantly, what is the procedure for getting something like this discussed and voted on?
Mon, 2009-08-31 12:07
#40
doublemint post
Mon, 2009-08-31 12:08
#41
I was at a riding executive meeting last night. The delegates from our riding, who of course knew nothing about babble and the 'big controversy', expressed their absolute dismay at the way things traspired in the panel deciding resolutions. The words they used were things like 'hijacked' and 'took over'. They said that a lot of people were feeling a great deal of frustration at the priotiy ranking panel on this topic area on the Friday. And guess what it wasn't directed at party officials but the advocates for this resolution. This was all in their report to the membership so it was their honest and heartfelt opinions.
They described how resolutions important to them on other issues were treated as meaningless and that the advocates for this resolution dominated the mics and would not let any other discussion take place. People there to support other issues were frustrated because this issue was treated like only it mattered. In fact because the panel was tied up by this group it almost came to pass that not a single other resolution would have been able to come out of it until someone came up with the idea of passing an omnibus motion to put forward a number of resolutions at once right at the very end. The problem was there was no chance to debate rankings of any of those resolutions. It was a desperate attempt by rank and file members to rescue something out of the situation. Our deleagtes, who are by the way in support of drug policy reform, were disgusted with the behaviour of those delegates and felt they made the system very undemocratic and controlling.
So let's be realistic. There is plenty of blame to go around. Rarely in life is a story all one sided, or is there not fault on all sides.
Mon, 2009-08-31 15:11
#42
If you think this is about the right to get high you should put down that tasty beer and watch what I and others are doing.
But keep larsen he burned his bridges here long ago by the way.
And I have much much more faith in young people than you do obviously.
Union preassure is really what this about as thousands benifit by beating your children and grand kids.
By the way the marijuana party was already absorbed formally by the green party although I have a few stragglers I am still moving.
Blair Longley and I do have a back up plan to be implemented in the new year and will use this latest gift from the jack layton ndp to ensure its success.
Thanks jack
How do you think we the greens went up by 41 % last election as you crumbled in vote numbers?
It seems to not be known that actually the most feared policy we greens have is in fact the cannabis issue?
Ask harper or layton obviously.
Look at what you just did and how it looks if you are that naive. I mean really you must be in a vacuum.
This is about freedom some thing one would think ndp members would be aware of yes freedom even just to put down our beer and pick up a bong.
But by doing the work involved it has turned out to be greater than its parts and exposing the horrible corruption ignored by the dinosaur parties.
Just wait and watch please.
But I do see big tears coming down the pipe for some here or this country really under martial law and no ones rights mattering.
Mon, 2009-08-31 17:24
#43
remind
Shavluk what are you doing back here?
Mon, 2009-08-31 18:46
#44
hmm, i think it's a big miopic to see this as anti democratic. the trick is that a name change will require a lot of groundwork. this pretty much sums it up:
http://thedeerfieldmystery.blogspot.com/2009/08/ndp-name-change.html
you can't just decide that suddenly. you need to move slowly.
Mon, 2009-08-31 18:48
#45
So, I guess you think that the average 20-something voter is scratching their head saying
"Like, gee, like, all that matters to me in life is smoking up and getting some good dope. There's gotta be someone to vote for that's a really cool dude who's going make it easy for me and my friends to smoke up by making it as easy to buy a joint at a corner store as it is now is to buy some smokes. I guess the NDP isn't that party because they dumped that cool dude who was on youtube smoking 30 joints at once and then driving a car. That's so, like, UNFAIR. Maybe the Green party will be better. I mean they named their party after the colour of weed - so I guess they must be the pro-weed party!"
I give young people credit for being a lot smarter than that.
Young people understand that getting high isn't the whole issue when it comes to marijuana legalization and can easily see past deflections and generalizations like yours. So you don't give them even close to enough credit.
This is a problem for the NDP, they seem to be stuck in a timewarp when it comes to connecting with younger voters. This should be the NDP's bread and butter judging from average income but they clearly don't get it. The Green party for all its faults is a much more viable vehicle for the next political generational shift in Canada.
I know so many people in their twenties and early thirties who should be natural NDP voters but who get so turned off by the messaging that they have given up on the party. This includes third generation NDP voters and professions who are most closely allied with the party.
Credibility means something to young people and the NDP has sadly squandered it to a point where they have become just one more dinosaur.
Mon, 2009-08-31 20:03
#46
"But I do see big tears coming down the pipe for some here or this country really under martial law and no ones rights mattering."
Who was the pot-smoking illiterate who first defiled that old saying "coming down the pike" and made it "down the pipe"? Of course they don't know what a pike was. They never read enough to find out. And now they put forward garbled messages from some space above their head, muttering something about "you keep Larsen"? Jesus, your variety of homo sapiens could make that a welcome gift.
Mon, 2009-08-31 22:42
#47
hmm, i think it's a big miopic to see this as anti democratic. the trick is that a name change will require a lot of groundwork. this pretty much sums it up:
http://thedeerfieldmystery.blogspot.com/2009/08/ndp-name-change.html
you can't just decide that suddenly. you need to move slowly.
I had never seen this blog before - but I like it! I like it!
Tue, 2009-09-01 03:47
#48
Shavluk what are you doing back here?
He's working on his punctuation...
Tue, 2009-09-01 04:01
#49
Cueball
"But I do see big tears coming down the pipe for some here or this country really under martial law and no ones rights mattering."
Who was the pot-smoking illiterate who first defiled that old saying "coming down the pike" and made it "down the pipe"? Of course they don't know what a pike was. They never read enough to find out. And now they put forward garbled messages from some space above their head, muttering something about "you keep Larsen"? Jesus, your variety of homo sapiens could make that a welcome gift.
Is there anyway we can convince you to stop smugly athorizing your views by suggesting other people are illiterate and don't read books? Asserting the existence of knowledge is not an expression of it. If you are going to be convincing, you had better start expressing, instead of asserting. There is a difference. In this case you should know that language and in particular allegorical sayings shift as fast as quicksilver, a well read person should know this, and only the stagnant resent the process.
Tue, 2009-09-01 04:04
#50
That 20-something stoner always has the Marijuana Party to vote for, if that's the single most important world issue they can think of. Mind you, the Marijuana Party's proposed foreign policy is "make a big bong in the shape of Africa". But hey, if the ONLY thing that matters is getting baked legally, there's that.
I think the only ones calling themselves "stoners" today would be among your own generation of boozers. I do believe some hold steady jobs now and would like to enjoy their own after hours vices without doing hard time for it. If the establishment elders have come up with anything else of substance (something they don't want controlled) this ex-pot head would be happy to read about that too.
Tue, 2009-09-01 09:47
#51
"But I do see big tears coming down the pipe for some here or this country really under martial law and no ones rights mattering."
Who was the pot-smoking illiterate who first defiled that old saying "coming down the pike" and made it "down the pipe"? Of course they don't know what a pike was. They never read enough to find out. And now they put forward garbled messages from some space above their head, muttering something about "you keep Larsen"? Jesus, your variety of homo sapiens could make that a welcome gift.
George, once again, I'm going to ask you to stop personally attacking people here. I'm going to get tired of doing this soon.