The Shotgun Blog
« Good News From Iraq | Main | Selective Tsunami »
Monday, April 11, 2005
Slow down there boys
Some conservatives are extremely excited about the latest Ekos poll (reported on by the Toronto Star here) which shows the Conservatives with a double-digit lead over the Liberals nationally. Several things to think about.
* It's only one poll.
* The poll reflects respondents' intention of how they would vote if an election were held today. The election is not being held today.
* The numbers come at the worst possible moment for the Liberals and may (probably) exaggerate the depth of their fall and/or the height of the Conservative increase.
* Just 15% of respondents said having an election now would be a good idea compared to 62% who said to wait until the Gomery Commission of Inquiry issues its report later this year and 21% who said the issue is not important enough to call an election over. This signals 1) an open-mindedness about Adscam that the Liberals can use to their favour and 2) the issue really is just not registering with the vast majority of Canadians.
*As I note in my book Jean Chretien: A Legacy of Scandal (introduction by WS publisher Ezra Levant) the Liberals over the past decade often seem vulnerable because of scandal but always pull it off. I argue in my book that Chretien set the bar so low that subsequent scandals would not register the outrage necessary to have the country want to oust him from office ("All parties do it" or "They they go again").
Conservatives must develop a strategy to overcome the cynical and disgusted voter who is so turned off by the Liberals that he (or she) stays home rather than vote to defeat the Liberal government. Looking at the declining percentage of eligible voters who took part in each election from 1993 to 2004 it seems that the Chretien strategy (Martin benefited in 2004 from Chretien's influence on politics) of driving voters out of the political process seems to have paid dividends; many of those disgusted voters should have voted for a Liberal alternative. (I don't believe that the disunity on the right can explain non-voting.) The Ekos poll results are good news but we should beware premature euphoria.
Posted by Paul Tuns on April 11, 2005 in Canadian Politics | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d8343fb35153ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Slow down there boys:
Comments
Public Works Minister Scott Brison tries this dubious counterattack: "There were profiteers in Canada's war effort," he said on CTV's Question Period. "That doesn't mean the war effort of Canadians was bad."
It is an interesting point and since Brison brings it up, we can look at the last real war that Canadians fought, World War Two. We see that the patron saint of the Liberal 'war' on separatism, one Pierre Trudeau, sat that one out at Harvard University. Of course, war profiteering has many variants and some might say the Liberals have been dining out, literally and figuratively, on their purported battle against the ever more prosperous 'enemy'. The real terms of engagement are now shockingly revealed by the Gomery Inquiry.
Posted by: Barry Stagg | 2005-04-11 9:28:18 AM
Like so many other Westerners, while I find the latest poll to be heartening, I can't help but feel that you're right, Paul. The Liberals have been able to pull so many rabbits out of their hat that you'd think the starship Enterprise was beaming the damn things *into* their hat in the first place.
To borrow a turn of phrase from the TV show "The West Wing" from a few seasons ago, Paul Martin could shoot Stephen Harper in the head during Question Period, stride out of the House, walk across the street to a hot dog vendor, order one with everything, and eat it, all on national television, and *still* get elected with a majority. *That's* the real scandal here -- our collective moral sense has become so dulled we'll let them get away with anything, just so long as they pander to our (mostly Ontario's) short-term, limited-horizon desires. If the Liberals are indeed returned to power after this, nothing could be more dire for the long-term health of the Confederation. I fear that 2005 will be the watershed year that historians look upon, several decades hence, as the point when the fate of "Canada" was finally sealed, when the breakup of the Confederation became historically inevitable. Those historians may be based in new countries, for all we know -- countries such as Cascadia, the Republic of Quebec, and the Commonwealth of Newfoundland and Labrador, for instance.
No matter what happens, "Canada" is in deep trouble.
Posted by: Garth Wood | 2005-04-11 9:34:31 AM
The year 2005 will be the year that Canada finally reversed the American tsunami. Ralph Klein will be gone by the end of the year, either because he quits, or because he is pushed.
When that, Canadians will have finally put out the fires that the firebug Brian Mulroney lit aboard the Canadian Ship of State.
With Scott the Separtist in Calgary fuming over this irreversible and strategic loss, he may be temped with some of his American buddies to start an insurrection and start placing some of Mr. Alfred Nobles' invention into Calgary Mailboxes. That would of course bring about a massive response from the Canadian Army, turning Calgary into an updated version of Montreal.
And no doubt, we will see the fifth columists streaming out of Calgary back to the US as Canada re-establishes order in that troubled city.
No doubt, like the mad bombers in Montreal, Scott will be seeking asylum, most likely in Ayn Rand's Colorado where the other pirates live.
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-11 9:58:02 AM
"To borrow a turn of phrase from the TV show "The West Wing" from a few seasons ago, Paul Martin could shoot Stephen Harper in the head during Question Period, stride out of the House, walk across the street to a hot dog vendor, order one with everything, and eat it, all on national television, and *still* get elected with a majority."
In the last federal election you may remember that Paul Martin did not receive a majority.
Posted by: donald | 2005-04-11 10:38:54 AM
"Conservatives must develop a strategy . . ."
The only sensible strategy is to deny the validity of special status for Quebec. If Quebec cannot accept that, then they should be allowed to separate. The balance of Canada cannot be held hostage to the idea of preserving a semblance of "union." There can be no true union so long as Quebec is permitted to hold a sword of Damocles in its hand.
Contrast Canada's position with that of the US, where claims of a "right" to secede were proven false in armed conflict 140 years ago. We have made other errors, but we got that one right.
Posted by: Texan | 2005-04-11 10:41:51 AM
Wow.
After reading that last missive by "Joe Green," I can only agree with Rebecca over at Hitherby Dragons: "The noise dreams of signal" indeed! ;-)
donald: Pure pilot error. I'm sure voting just slipped the minds of some Ontario voters. After they saw the election results, they probably slapped their foreheads in unison while shouting "D'oh! KNEW I forgot to do something today!"
Posted by: Garth Wood | 2005-04-11 10:54:09 AM
Texan wrote:
"Contrast Canada's position with that of the US, where claims of a "right" to secede were proven false in armed conflict 140 years ago. We have made other errors, but we got that one right."
Actually the right of self determination is a fundamental right of people recognized around the world, except in the United States.
Canada is a Confederation, not an "indesolvable union". Provinces can leave, or they can join, subject to the proper, lawful and democratic processes laid down by the Supreme Court.
Canada has unity because it desires it, not because there is an Army with fixed bayonets ready to kill anyone who has another idea.
Canadians need to understand that "union" with the US is the embrace of a python. Once caught, you can NEVER leave. And like a python, it will grip you, like it gripped Oklahoma, until there was no life left.
And for you Texan, let me say this directly. Go home and fix your own problems before coming up here and meddling in Canada's affairs. Take Bush, Rove and the other lunatics with you and pick up your guns at the border.
And if you wish, Scott is looking for a free ride, you might pick him up in Calgary.
But you are not going to Fu*k with Canada anymore then your whiskey peddlars tried to Fu*k with the NWMP.
Is that clear enough????
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-11 10:54:59 AM
"I'm sure voting just slipped the minds of some Ontario voters."
Yes well I'm sure any statistician would back up that claim.
Posted by: donald | 2005-04-11 10:57:56 AM
I don't care what pessimistic spin you wanna put on this, this is great news. The first Conservative lead in a national opinion poll in who knows how long. 12 years, I'm guessing. And it's a double-digit lead at that.
It's only one poll, sure, but it's supported by last week's polls showing Conservative momentum as the publication ban was about to be lifted. And of course an election still has to be fought. But if this poll is accurate the Conservatives are going to form the next government, provided they get on with the campaign. They won't blow a lead this big -- the only question is majority or minority.
This could even be the tipping point in Quebec, where the Conservatives come to be seen as the only real federalist option in the province, something which would spare us all the annoyance of watching them try to make their mark as the soft-sovereignists of Quebec politics.
Posted by: Taka | 2005-04-11 11:12:39 AM
"Is that clear enough????
No, Joe, it's not clear "enough." In fact, it's decidedly opaque, given that Canada doesn't have the military or moral strength to counter Peru, let alone the US.
Posted by: Texan | 2005-04-11 11:13:36 AM
Texan wrote:
"No, Joe, it's not clear "enough." In fact, it's decidedly opaque, given that Canada doesn't have the military or moral strength to counter Peru, let alone the US."
Go ahead. Make my day. Go for it. Draw. You can start with a 750 Kiloton burst over the Bridge at Windsor. You don't need Detroit anyway.
God you are THICK. And DUMB. Just like your President.
One wonders when thinking went so out of fashion south of the 49th. Go ahead Texas, show us how big yours is. Then we will show you ours, eh?
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-11 11:19:50 AM
I like that Brison line: it's the Canadian version of "fake but accurate"--corrupt but worth it.
As Steyn pointed out, the Sponsorship program, like the gun registry, "sends the right message" (WS, 12 March 2004). The trouble is that the guys sending the right message are Groupaction: in this case, sending the right message takes a back seat to paying the right people (who knew that Liberal supporters were a distinct society?).
But then again, isn't that the beauty of it? To keep the country together, the sponsor-shop opened for business—and so what if a few eggs were broken (and a few palms were greased)?
Thus, the Canadian catch-22: you can only have the values of Canadian democracy if you vote for the Libs, but if you vote for them, you must accept them as benign despots rather than public servants.
Paül is right about the poll--the big winner here is voter apathy. Come election time, expect a majority of voters to lie back and think of Canada.
Posted by: Eponymous | 2005-04-11 11:23:37 AM
Joe has officially lost his mind. Not that a leftist ever one to begin with.
Posted by: jhuck | 2005-04-11 11:23:56 AM
"Joe has officially lost his mind. Not that a leftist ever one to begin with."
That has now become beyond true. Our apologies, from probably the majority here, to Texan for a total idiot for a what's suppose to be a citizen.
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-11 11:34:46 AM
Some things to think about re: poll
* CONS lead Liberals in Quebec.
* The only income group in which Canadians would vote Liberal: Those earning over $100,000
* CONS lead among women and men.
* Atlantic Canada and Ontario have seen the biggest shift in voting patterns.
* Alberta: now a70% Conservative country.
Posted by: Jonathan M | 2005-04-11 11:36:19 AM
I agree with Mr. Tuns. As soon as the Liberals fire up the "hidden agenda" rhetoric, the Conservative fortunes will take a turn for the worst. We'll get another minority Liberal government, albeit weaker than current. The conservatives will pick up seats, but they will still be in opposition.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2005-04-11 11:44:29 AM
Our apologies, from probably the majority here, to Texan for a total idiot for a what's suppose to be a citizen.
No need to apologize for remarks that aren't yours.
But, I would like to hear from Canadians on my point that the schism in Canada is firmly rooted in the threats of separation coming from Quebec.
As I see it, virtually everyone seems to side-step the primary issue.
Posted by: Texan | 2005-04-11 11:50:27 AM
Listen all. The rot at the core of the Liberal tyranny is just starting to be exposed. Read Greg Weston's article from yesterday's Sun (the bulk of federal advertsing budget also went to the same firms whose principals have admitted payoffs to the libs, or are about to) - tally up those numbers are you are likely looking at a 1.05 Billion dollar budget the libs plundered, not just .250 billion. AND that's not even counting the HRDC scam, the gun registry scam, the Canada lands scam, the secret foundations scam, all of which have the same cast of lib-elite's grubby fingerprints all over them. And probably a dozen other scams you haven't ever heard about yet, only to be revelaed with a change in government.
Canadians, including the delusional in Ontario and the bought in the MAritimes (the last remaining bastions of lib support) now have the true nature ofthe corrupt liberal regime to consider. And the consequences of returning these brigands to office one more time (hint - the size of the scam attempted increases with each election victory).
Result - massive public outrage as the libs have destroyed the healthcare system, reduced canada to an international joke, reinvigorated separatism and tarred federalism as a corrupt enterprise in a way that the Pequistes could only dream of, and taxed you to death, all in order to plunder the treasury for themselves and their cronies. And Mr Dithers is in the thick of it, its sticks to him like glue - he can't plead ignorance - this is the source of the libs' electoral prowess (taxpayer funds, not donations, propelled them). Its an ugly picture for the libs. And rightly so, they should be in jail, not parliament.
SO the final result, if Harper lets the Gomery dance of the 7 veils slow exposee play out until say early summer, is massive liberal defeat (a la mulrooney). Some clues to watch for - 1 the conservatives start raising BIG volume donations from corporations and the public. 2 - the conservatives attract "star" candidates (like Bob Dechert), to complement their already excellent caucus. 3 - martin plots a safe escape to Bermuda, to play with his ships,4 other libs disappear to places where no extradition treaty exists. 5- queen adrienne and the royal consort clean off the old CV, head back to the CBC, only to find its privatized and the only jobs available for a person of such "talents" is toilet cleaner. Oh to dream...
Best possible outcome - massive conservative majority, massive re-engineering of the Cdn political structure to prevent such outright corruption from ever removing Cda's democracy again (ie institution of real checks and balances) and an end to massive federal spending and interference in areas of Provincial responsibility whic provides both the lucre / grease for the liberal corruption machine and is the separatists's only source of legitimate complaint (delivered equally amongst the provinces).
BUT I think canadians would be satisfied by nothing more than institution of real checks and balances and a real restructring of the way the civil service operates (ie privitize it all). Massive program reviews, huge tax cuts...
Only perplexing thing is why is Jack Layton so useless at generating support from the lefty side of the liberal coalition of the stupid? Even they should be outraged but Layton's just no picking up much...a lightweight unfortunately.
SE
Posted by: SEchappe | 2005-04-11 12:14:18 PM
The attitude, in the west anyway, if Quebec wants to go, let them go, we don't really care one way or the other. We don't agree with being held hostage in the name of national unity. It's just plain garbage to give into that sort of mentality.
If Quebec does go, however, you'll probably see Canada break up into 3-4 separate countries, as the west isn't going to put up with dictatorship tactics from the east either. As for me, well, I would prefer it to happen sooner then later, as it's been to costly a venture to try and support the current situation, and all it's doing is making the decention worse between the areas.
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-11 12:16:16 PM
One other thing Texan, if the Libranos or NDP get in, you will see a huge swell of separation in the west that would probably occur in the next provincial elections.
The west does not like gov. control and dependency so there would be a massive rejection to the NDP. If the Libranos get in, then the current situation will never change, and to the libs would be acknowledgement for there scandals. This would also cause a huge movement to separation.
Another words, were mad as hell and ain't going to take it no more.
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-11 12:22:17 PM
The latest out of Ottawa?!?!
Say, has anyone out there heard rumours of a major split within the Conservative caucus over whether to cause an election or not? About evenly divided, hot hot tempers and Harper kind of stradling the fence even within the party confines? Everyone, or at least many, getting fed up with his indecision? Has anyone else heard that or can they confirm that?
Posted by: Ted Lawrence | 2005-04-11 1:39:31 PM
Texan - you are right; we should "just let Quebec go" if that is their wish. The problem is that:
1) They don't really want to go - they separatists really just want extra money and lots of TLC. They know they they are huge net beneficiaries of the Canadian confederation (although they educate their schoolchildren otherwise, so better to stoke the righteous rage of humiliation), and;
2) The Libranos don't want them to go. Until the last couple of elections, the Libs could count on 55-60 seats in Quebec, just for showing up (sort of like $200 for passing go). In a ~300 seat legislature, that is an overwhelming lead: it was rare indeed for the Libs to not form a majority government. With the rise of the BQ the automatic seats are reduced, but the Libs have deftly finessed this into another winning hand - they now claim that they are the only party that can "manage" the "Quebec problem." In truth, they are just playing the same old knife-to-the-throat game as the BQ, but it is good for scaring up another couple of dozen seats among "concerned federalists" outside of Quebec.
We are not in a head-to-head confrontation between Quebec and the rest of the country - we are in the grip of a conspiracy, with both "sides" in the supposed dispute having more to gain by a continued close stalemate than by an outright victory for either side, or even identifiable move off the status quo.
Cheers,
Dean
Posted by: Deaner | 2005-04-11 2:01:43 PM
Texas wrote while meddling in Canadian political affairs:
""Our apologies, from probably the majority here, to Texan for a total idiot for a what's suppose to be a citizen."
No need to apologize for remarks that aren't yours."
Well this just goes to show that "neocons" love to genuflect to Americans.
I am tired of the bullies. Eventually you have to stand up to bullies. Like Texas for example. Or George Bush. Or the lunatic he has appointed to the UN.
Well, Texas. Draw! What are you waiting for? Do it! Drop it on the Bridge! And while you will reduce Windsor to a large hole in the ground, think of what you will accomplish in Detroit!
OF course, like I said, you are too dumb to figure out that displaying your nuclear "might" is of no consequence in this circumstance.
You were the a$$hole that made the threats, and I challenged your threats directly, which is how you deal with bullies.
Well Texas, show us how big you are, and blow your own balls off, because that is the consequences of what you threaten. Only you need a higher IQ than six over plant life when the Sun is shining in order to figure that one out.
You clowns have embarked upon a course of action that is going to draw much more than just critical words from Canadians like me.
And then you are going to come here and ask stupid questions like "why do they hate us"?
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-11 2:24:55 PM
Dean,
I understand that the separatists really don't want to go. What they want to do, it appears to me, is realize a "yes" vote on separation, and then enter into "negotiations." The thrust of those negotiations, from their perspective, will be to solidify their "special" status, while preserving the semblance of union. They speak of a "partnership" arrangement.
My point is that everyone seems to be dancing around the real issue.
Posted by: Texan | 2005-04-11 2:59:40 PM
"Until the last couple of elections, the Libs could count on 55-60 seats in Quebec"
This is not true. The Liberals have not been able to count on a large majority of Quebec seats since after Trudeau.
Posted by: donald | 2005-04-11 2:59:55 PM
Hahahaha Joe, you kill me! I have always remarked that stupid people have an IQ of 3 below plant life...seems you proved me correct by looking up to "6 over plant life" as the minimum.
Posted by: Spike | 2005-04-11 3:09:28 PM
(Judge Gomery) "Inquiry: Chretien's office approved deals"
cnews.canoe.ca
Deals? Deals? Deals?
How will PM PM ,aka Mr. Dithers, Brushman, attempt to spin this?
Canadians! Rise up! Throw the Liberals out!
Vote for Stephen Harper!
Posted by: maz2 | 2005-04-11 3:09:46 PM
Texan, it's really great to see another citizen of the Lone Star State posting up here.
I've been up here a couple of years and I've exchanged posts with some of the greatest people you'll ever hope to meet. Most of them you would love to have as a neighbor, and would not hesitate to share a foxhole with.
Regrettably, there are a very few who are pathetic ambassadors, harmful to Canada and the Canadian people.
Posted by: Greg outside Dallas | 2005-04-11 3:10:38 PM
Conservatives should enjoy this news, but please don't lose sight of your conservatism; be rational. People are upset at the Liberals but the rise in the Conservatives is not out of support but out of anger. Harper MUST see if these numbers stabilize in Ontario and the Atlantic before an election can be called.
ALSO, he must fight for a majority. A minority Conservative government is no good. It will be powerless and most likely would be evicted in a year to yield to a Liberal majority.
I live in Toronto and most Torontonians vote Liberal out of culture, tradition and default. They are very ill informed about facts and believe whatever the headline on the CBC is that morning. They rent F911 from Blockbuster and believe they are enlightened. They watch poor quality sex-ed programming on Showcase television and believe they are sophisticates. Remember the poll that came out a few weeks ago that said most Canadians agree with Conservative policies but vote Liberal anyway?
Harper has a shot, but unfortunately, a Liberal win is still not out of the question. Other than on Adscam, Martin will get a free ride on every issue by the Toronto media/academic elites. Harper will be grilled tooth and nail on everything to SSM, abortion (no it won't go away), cutbacks to social programs and relations with the States. I suspect they will also wonder aloud the implications of a PM who likes AC/DC. Does that make him a hypocrite on SSM?
We are closer than we have been in all my adult life...but we are still verrrrry far away indeed.
Posted by: Nicole D. | 2005-04-11 3:44:06 PM
"Conservative deputy House leader Jason Kenney reiterated that the official Opposition Conservatives will not let the separatist Bloc set the political agenda for the country, confirming it would not support the [BQ] motion."
This is a politically astute move. If the Conservatives are perceived to be in collaboration with the BQ, they will be playing into the hand of the Libs. They need to permit the Libs to twist in the wind for awhile.
Posted by: Texan | 2005-04-11 3:48:47 PM
"Joe Green": Dude, you really have to stop doin' a bowl, or a line, or whatever the Hell it is you're doin' prior to logging on. Never thought I'd be a witness to someone doing a "Tony Orlando" online.
Ted Lawrence: Nope, haven't heard any such rumours yet. I'm usually scoping out aggregators like Bourque and Nealenews, and several of the better-known MSM web sites, and so far, nuthin'. Could change, though, could change... (and wouldn't be all that surprising, that's for certain).
Texan: Hey, c'mon! Dancing around the real issue is what we Canucks do best. ;-)
Seriously, Quebec's simply the biggest tension in the Confederation, but it's far from unique. Alberta, Newfoundland & Labrador, the increasing isolation of Ontario, all of these are problematic, and this little contretemps may end up having historic consequences. Mostly negative ones, unless all this is stick-handled *very* carefully.
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your viewpoint), I don't believe there's a single Canadian political party that can do that stick-handling with the necessary grace and dexterity. Interesting times...
Posted by: Garth Wood | 2005-04-11 3:50:13 PM
Hey Texas, you guys down there are already twisting in the wind, out on the deserts of Iraq in fact.
We don't need any advice from your kind. You believe in "raw power", but you have no answers when you start to pee on your own shoes, as in the example I gave over in Windsor and Detroit.
In any event, at least the world now knows what America stands for with Bolton at the UN. My response is to kick the US and Israel out of the UN, and move it out of the US.
And I would oblige Americans coming to Canada to state why they are coming here on a reciprocal basis with how they treat us.
I'm just sick of your shit Texas. And so are most other Canadians who are simply not going to put up with it anymore.
Arrogant Americans? I guess!
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-11 4:25:56 PM
Joe's not going to put up with it any more. He's going to stomp his feet and call you names.
Posted by: jhuck | 2005-04-11 4:29:18 PM
Joe - climb out of your ass grove, wipe the spittle off the monitor and ask your mommy to let you outside. You need the exercise, and exposure to reality. Your poor little meningless gasbag...
Posted by: FreedomAintFree | 2005-04-11 5:03:45 PM
Greg lost somewhere in Dallas wrote:
"Most of them you would love to have as a neighbor, and would not hesitate to share a foxhole with."
I would NEVER share a foxhole with you. You guys no longer fight wars that have a "just cause". Its been a long while since America actually did that. Ike was great. But Meyers is a lapdog. I would not follow him or Rumsfeld into a brick privy, let alone into places that were actually dangerous.
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-11 5:14:21 PM
Joe, someone like you would never be IN a foxhole. You and Joe Clark would rather thousands and millions of innocent people be slaughtered by despots and dictators than lift a finger to help them. And you denounce anyone doing otherwise. Cases in point, your support of Saddam and the insurgents as well as communists like Castro.
Only a selfish sicko like you would want Saddam and Castro in power.
Posted by: jhuck | 2005-04-11 6:33:36 PM
Joe doesn't want to share a foxhole with me or other members of the American military.
You can imagine our disappointment.
Posted by: Greg outside Dallas | 2005-04-11 6:46:57 PM
Joe's world-model is crashing Greg, and it's caused him to hit the fence on the club-house turn[1]. You can imagine how disappointed honest hard-working Canadians are ;-)
[1]http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2005/04/liberal_dominoe.html#c4840283
Posted by: Tony | 2005-04-11 7:01:12 PM
Hmmmm...the Toronto Star reported this? What happened to the left-wing bias? I'm also perusing the cbc website, and the main story is Renaud claiming that the PM's office and a Martin assistant were involved. And the 2nd story is about Canada's low-ranking in a UN report, certainly not something the CBC and it's communist controllers would want on there.
Posted by: BDillon | 2005-04-11 7:19:48 PM
JG said: "With Scott the Separtist in Calgary fuming over this irreversible and strategic loss, he may be temped with some of his American buddies to start an insurrection and start placing some of Mr. Alfred Nobles' invention into Calgary Mailboxes. That would of course bring about a massive response from the Canadian Army, turning Calgary into an updated version of Montreal."
Dude, you are obsessed. For your own sanity's sake, give it up.
JG said to Texan: "Canada has unity because it desires it, not because there is an Army with fixed bayonets ready to kill anyone who has another idea."
You just contradicted yourself. Earlier you said that the military would restore order in Calgary. Now you're saying that an army isn't necessary. Well which is it? History has proven that Canadian unity has to be enforced by military means - i.e. the invasion of Quebec in the FLQ "Crisis" of 1970, and the plans to send the military into Quebec in 1995.
"Canadians need to understand that "union" with the US is the embrace of a python. Once caught, you can NEVER leave. And like a python, it will grip you, like it gripped Oklahoma, until there was no life left."
So says you, the defender of Canadian federalism which has crushed the life out of every state except Alberta to keep Ontario happy. It's a chance I'm willing to take to keep my home, job, education and future.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-11 8:11:28 PM
The near insane comments and threats hurled across our southern border on this thread, coupled with cryptic comments by the hurler and his most influential protagonist on another thread lead me to believe we will be singing a requiem for "Guiseppe Verdi". If that actually happens, my hallelujahs will be very loud but I think the competition to be loudest will be extreme. For you, the correspondents from Texas, you said nothing to merit any of the deplorable abuse heaped on you. I appreciate your comments that apologies for something said by another individual were not necessary but in the sense that you are visitors in our house, so to speak, we should go out of our way to respect you and make you feel welcome. Y'all come back now y'hear.
Posted by: BobWood | 2005-04-11 9:58:13 PM
My respect for Harper continues to increase. He should not push for an election until it is clear that it was not he that asked for an election but the outraged shreiks of Canadians.
I am one of those outraged shreiks but I am glad that the Conservatives are keeping my howls in perspective
Posted by: Pete E | 2005-04-12 1:24:30 AM
Pete E. wrote: "My respect for Harper continues to increase. He should not push for an election until it is clear that it was not he that asked for an election but the outraged shreiks of Canadians."
But Pete, do you really think Harper is playing smart politics or is he Mr. Dithers II? No one doubts his intelligence but he has only shown intelligence on the policy side of politics. He is a miserable strategist with worse political instincts than Martin. He has no ability to go for the jugular on this or any other issue. Do you really believe he is holding off? I think he just can't make up his mind. Worse, I think he fears having to campaign: both because he hates shaking hands with real Canadians and being in front of the camera every day, and because he doesn't want to have to deal - again and in the public eye - with the major splits within the party between ultra-right and barely blue.
Posted by: Ted Lawrence | 2005-04-12 7:17:50 AM
I'm kind of wondering where Harper is myself right now. He should be out there saying "see what kind of operations the Liberals run? Here is what the Conservatives would offer you:" and then tell us all about what we would like to hear - less money stolen from the taxpayers, resulting in lower taxes!!
Posted by: ld | 2005-04-12 8:58:42 AM
Greg outside of Dallas wrote:
"Joe doesn't want to share a foxhole with me or other members of the American military."
You got that right! I do not want to see any more young dead Canadians coming home because some hot dog American can't wait to drop bombs on them as target practice.
You a$$holes make me sick with your carelessness. Ike would have courtmartialed the whole lot of you! And Patton would have run your asses off until you got the attitude adjustment that you required!
And, yes, I did serve in the Canadian Armed Forces, so I do know what I am talking about.
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-12 10:07:56 AM
"And, yes, I did serve in the Canadian Armed Forces,"
No you didn't. You're too much of a pussy who would rather see innocent civilians oppressed in brutal dictatorships to satisfy your hatred towards the US.
Posted by: jhuck | 2005-04-12 10:37:09 AM
JB wrote:
"I am a Canadian conservative and a pro-American believer in Republican ideology."
This is an outright lie. Canadian Conservatives were men like Sir John A. MacDonald, and John Diefenbaker. They believed in One Canada, from sea to sea. They believed in the Monarchy and they strongly believed in the institution of Parliament. Genuine Canadian Conservatives like Joe Clark STILL believe in the Crown, in Parliament and in one country from sea to shining sea. But you are no Joe Clark Conservative!
You betrayed yourself when you said you were a "republican". This is a foreign ideology that has no place in Canada. Even communists in Winnipeg have a greater claim to being "Canadian" than do you "republicans". No, call a spade a shovel, you are a "fifth columist" from the American Empire, hell bent upon perverting and subverting Canada. That is in FACT what you are.
Now let me address your attitude that needs an adjustment about "fascists". Fascists are right wing political types that believe in strongly centralized government authority, and they quite often end up abusing human rights. IN Canada today, Ralph Klein has crossed the boundary into "fascism" quite often, his power is highly centralized as he destroyed the local authority of school boards and hospital boards, and YES he has trampled upon human rights of people, although as far as we know, not yet quite as far as Herr Hitler. Ralph was the one that refused to accept Court Orders in relation to compulsory sterilizations in Alberta, and he was the one that has trouble accepting the decisions of the Courts on many other human rights issues, including Court decisions in labour laws, and court decisions on the rights of Children.
So take your Republican garbage to the dump, it has no place in Canada.
As for why Hitler failed to invade England, a$$hole, it was because many Canadians that were in the RCAF joined figher command to help destroy the German Luffwaffe and later brought about the successful invasion in Normandy, and it was I am very sure, many Canadian Conservatives and many Canadian Liberals that WERE loyal to their God, their King and their Country when they died that day on Gold Beach.
None of them, NOT ONE, died for Canada to become an American Republic where right wing facist whores like Karl Rove or George Bush would be telling their decendants why they have to give up their birthright and ship all their resources to the US at firesale rates.
Let me end with one final note a$$hole. When the war was not going well, Sir Winston never lied about it to the people. Neither did President Franklin Roosevelt. One was a British Conservative, one an American Liberal. We in Canada under MacKenzie King NEVER were misled by either men. We fought with Ike, a Republican, and we followed Monty into the grim tasks that were needed to destroy German fascism that Conservatives in Germany failed to curb, indeed they were playing with fire when they appointed Hitler as Chancellor.
So you go and check your history, you go and see for yourself how it was that Conservatives, not Liberals who brought fascists like Hitler to power in Germany, and you have a good hard long look at what you as a "Conservative" are now trying to bring to power in Canada, if not Karl Rove fascists from south of the border.
You said it yourself. You are a "republican". I say you are "disgusting". With the backbone of an amoeba and the intellectual capacity of a microbe.
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-12 10:44:17 AM
Joe, you're doing a wonderful job of showing your christian values. I hope you reserved the sin-bin at church for at least a couple of hours, you're going to need it.
Posted by: jhuck | 2005-04-12 10:55:53 AM
BobWood opined:
"The near insane comments and threats hurled across our southern border on this thread, coupled with cryptic comments by the hurler and his most influential protagonist on another thread lead me to believe we will be singing a requiem for "Guiseppe Verdi"."
So what are you doing here Bob, offering up another "legal opinion" as a non-lawyer, or are you making a threat?
For my part I made no "threats". What I said was that the US has a serious problem because it has installed a government that is corrupt, which has condoned widespread corporate corruption among its supporters, has engaged in corrupt tendering practices in Iraq at the expense of the American taxpayer, and has committed attrocities and war crimes in Iraq. Furthermore, the Republican Party has corrupted the processes of bringing this corruption to justice since "high crimes and misdemeanors" have been committed not once, but several times all without consequences. That is the hallmark of a corrupt government.
Mr. Bush promised the American people that they were helping to bring democratic government to Iraq, but instead they have installed a fundamentalist Muslim Shiite Government in Baghdad under the control of the Grand Iatollah Sustaini. For that alone, George Bush should face impeachment proceedings because he did the exact opposite of what the Congress had authorized.
Karl Rove and his buddies "outed a CIA operative". They laid charges against Sandy Burger for taking home some classified papers (no leaks mind you), perhaps by accident, but with serious felonies like what happened to Ms. Valerie, the Bush administration is as corrupt as the Canadian Conservative Government in Saskatchewan with its many perversions of the Criminal Justice System.
As for your American Republican "guests", I am still waiting for his response to making a big hole in the ground over Windsor and see what he has to say about "collateral damage" in Detroit. I want to find out just how DUMB some of these individuals actually are.
Think of it as a kind of test.
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-04-12 12:08:28 PM
Well, it's nice to see that Joe Green's not posting any more.
Posted by: Tony | 2005-04-12 12:44:35 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.