Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« State Dept. #2 admits ChiCom arms in Afghanistan and Iraq | Main | O'Reilly's producer flips out »

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Dennis Young new LP leader

Just came back from the Libertarian Party's national convention and one-day Freedom Fair in Edmonton. I'm still getting my wind from all the travel (a four-hour layover in Seattle will drain anyone's joie de vivre...), but wanted to send a quick update to Shotgunners about the LPs new leader (which you'll hear much more about in the coming days).

The LP elected Dennis Young, a former military man and police officer, to head up their party, and a stay-at-home mom in Savannah Linklater as Deputy Leader. Both positions were contested, with each candidate getting a significant proportion of the total vote.

Dennis Young beat out former LP President Alan Mercer in a nail-biter. Young insisted that he had the chops to formulate a media plan and strategy--something the Canadian Libertarian Party hasn't done well in the past. He also trumpeted his experience and background as a military and police man in being able to speak credibly on foreign policy and on the war on drugs.

I'm paraphrasing, but he did say something like, "the media will find it interesting that a military man, someone who has seen action in places like Bosnia, is opposed to nation building and an interventionist foreign policy. So will voters." And on the topic of drugs, Young made it plain that he opposes the forthcoming (and likely) extradition of Marc Emery (the "Prince of Pot," about which we have written extensively, and whose column we carry exclusively), and repeated the line about this position being more credible and interesting for both voters and the media when it's coming from the mouth of a former cop.

Mercer's strategy was to emphasize a decentralized approach to leadership. What might have been an implicit shot at Harper's leadership style, Mercer repeated his conviction that candidates and members should be free, and be encouraged, to speak to issues that matter most to them, and to be permitted to speak from the heart. Since decentralization and anti-authoritarianism is a key part of the libertarian outlook, Mercer's plans resonated with quite a few of the attendees. Enough so to make the outcome as tight as it could have been.

After winning (and before), I had a chance to speak at length with Young. I asked him what his main strategy will be, and what platform planks he plans on emphasizing. His response? While he hasn't had a chance to formulate this exactly, he thinks the Conservative Party has failed to stand by one of their own in Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn in the on-going Canadian Human Rights complaints against Ezra for publishing the Mohammed cartoons in the good ship Standard, and Maclean's for publishing an excerpt of Steyn's book in the magazine. Philosophical conservatives, and former Reformers, should be furious, Young thought, that the Party went ahead and put together a 51-page legal brief basically agreeing with the complainants in both cases.

Young also repeated his opposition to Emery's extradition, to the delight of Marc Emery himself, who was a speaker at the non-partisan Freedom Fair portion of the event (but stuck around to give advice and chat with fellow libertarians). Emery was happy to be video-taped endorsing both the federal Libertarian Party, as well as Dennis Young as leader (as soon as the video is out, I'll post it here).

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on May 20, 2008 in Canadian Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e5524456178833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dennis Young new LP leader:

Comments

Thanks for the post, Peter. My vote went to Dennis Young, specifically because of his ability to use the media more effectively in educating the public about the freedom issues that we all face. I expect the Western Standard to play an integral role in this strategy.

I'm also pleased that Savannah Linklater is the new deputy leader. As my right-hand woman throughout the planning of this Convention, she was absolutely indispensable. Being a stay-at-home Mom will help a lot, because she'll have a bit more time to dedicate herself to the cause, which is always a struggle when part-time volunteers are trying to grow a movement.

Alan Mercer was a great President. He knows all the ins & outs of the Party. I really hope he sticks around in some capacity (Can he remain as President? That would be optimal in my opinion.)

There will definitely be a changing of the guard with the new LPC. A Leader from Calgary and a Deputy Leader from Edmonton. Are we to hear squeals of Eastern Alienation any time soon?

Posted by: Michael Sturko | 2008-05-20 6:46:59 AM


You bet, Michael. Since our mission is to cover the freedom movement as a whole, we won't fail to cover the Canadian LP.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-05-20 6:55:45 AM


This is really good news for after Nicholson and Harper's failure to intervene in the scandelous CHRC affair, I have been looking for an alternative party to put my time, money and vote behind.

Looks like we all might have found it.

Posted by: The LS from SK | 2008-05-20 8:36:48 AM


Who was the saint of lost causes? Was it St. Christopher? If so, you better start praying to him because the Liberatrian Part does not have a hope in hell of attracting candidates yet alone more than 50 votes in any riding.

The conservative party will be content to paint the Libertarians as a bunch of right wing nutbars to cement their own position as a moderate right of centre party that is acceptable to the majority of Candians.

You Libertarian freakazoids are being played.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 9:43:33 AM


Oh, Epsi, you are such fun.

I like to think that voting to effect the outcome of the election is irrational. And it isn't that I "like" to think that, it's that it's true (for any election with more than, say, 12 people voting). And the literature is long and boring and everyone is on the same page. If you're voting because you think your vote makes a difference, then you are de-lu-ded.

So, why bother to vote at all? Here's a suggestion: Vote for the sake of expressing your sincere preference. You don't have to hold your nose, you can cast a ballot for the party that most closely resembles your actual and sincere bundle of policy preferences (or as close as possible). That way, you get the instant benefit of expression, and you're not irrational.

In addition, you don't need to win, you need to do well enough. Well enough for what, you might ask. Well enough to get the Tories to give themselves a collective shake of the head. They are wrong to abandon Ezra, and deserve a good throttling. They are wrong to stay quiet on Emery (even though it was Health Canada that suggested to medicinal marijuana users that they go buy from Marc Emery, thereby giving sanction to his activities). And they are wrong in abandoning economic liberty on so many fronts.

So where's a genuine free market, pro free speech, conservative to go? Keep voting for a party that thinks you have nowhere else to go, or cast your lot in with someone else?

I don't care, frankly, since I don't stick my finger in the air, feel the breeze, and vote according to public opinion. If I vote at all, it's with sincerity. Even if I know not enough others will do what I do to make a difference (but I'm not irrational, and I don't vote to "make a difference" in that sense).

You might make a case that Libertarians are being played (although I'm not sure if you mean "libertarians" or "Libertarians" since there is a difference), but I think it's a lot easier to make the case that Conservatives (sic) are being played, and conservatives (sic) are being played as well if they keep doing what they've always done, and keep expecting a different result.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-05-20 10:08:48 AM


As an irrelevant political force in Canada, why would you devote so much energy to something that will not produce anything meaningful?

Far better to work within the Conservative party where the struggle for ideas can translate into policy that at least has some hope of making a differnce.

This is proof for me that Libertarians or libertarians are impractical and naive and focussed on irrelevancies. An example of this preoccupation with irrelevancy is the fact that to you, capitalization of the "L" makes some sort of difference. As if the average right thinking Canadian gives a rat's ass.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 10:29:06 AM


Indeed, it certainly isn't necessary to win. The Green Party has never won a seat or exceeded 5% of the popular vote, and yet all of the major parties now have a "green" platform, and the Liberals even seem to want to establish themselves as somehow greener than the greens. It clearly isn't necessary to be a major threat to affect change in our government. The message just needs to get out to the public.

Posted by: K Stricker | 2008-05-20 10:34:04 AM


I'm a little taken aback, Epsi. Just how does casting a ballot constitute devoting "so much energy" to something? I didn't say I was going to canvas for candidates, or do anything besides that. And I believe I also said "if I'm going to vote at all." That's a conditional statement.

And "naive"? Did I say that the LP has a hope in hell? No. All I said was that I get more satisfaction casting a (admittedly futile--in the sense of electing candidates, and not in other senses) ballot for Libertarians than casting an equally futile ballot for Tories. No matter who I (or you) vote for won't make a lick of difference.

Actually, since Canada's electoral system now awards $1.79 per vote if you hit 2 per cent or more nationally, or more than 5 per cent in any one riding (and for that riding), you might think that it makes much more sense to cast a ballot for a party that believes in free speech, free markets, and free minds. Not a party that is committed to, uhm, what was it, recently? Making lightbulbs illegal?

(And don't worry about it resulting in Liberals getting elected. Let me repeat: Whether or not you vote, and who you vote for, makes such a miniscule difference to the outcome of the election, that no one will notice if you just stay home or watch American Idol that day rather than trudge out to cast a ballot. Really.)

As for capitalizing the "L"--it makes all the difference to the argument we're having. There are libertarians in the Conservative Party. You were making a case that libertarians ought to stay in that Party and fight to change it from the inside. You can't make that case with Libertarians, since that means "a member of the Libertarian Party," whereas libertarian means "a person who believes in the libertarian political philosophy."

Incidentally, there's nothing stopping anyone from joining the Conservative Party, working within the Party to effect change, and casting a ballot for Libertarians (or whoever). So do both. And contribute a dollar seventy-nine to a group that will kick up a political stink about free speech and free markets and free minds.

Actually, come to think of it, there's no pressure on Tories to be any more free market, and any more committed to individual freedom. That's because both the Dippers and Grits are busy pulling the Tories to the left. You might argue that Libertarians are good for Tories, since then the Tories have an excuse to actually get balls-y for a change. Maybe.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-05-20 10:42:33 AM


Why does the Libertarian Party support a loser like Emery? He's a criminal, not a hero. Find someone around whom ordinary people can relate.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-20 10:43:24 AM


But the green party exists because of the failure of other parties to address a popular issue promoted by the leftoid media and because it honed its political skills in Europe. THe fact that it is splitting the leftoid vote into 3 parts is good news for Conservatives.

These are fundamental social and political drivers that do not exist on the other side of the political spectrum.

To deliberately hive votes off the Conservatives will only result in right wing vote splitting and condemn us to devastating socialist rule.

This is what I mean when I say that Llibertarians are naive and utterly impractical.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 10:46:18 AM


That's right Zebulon, supporting a drug addict moron is political suicide and exhbits naivety in the extreme.

This to me is a slam against every parent and every police officer and every school principal who is struggling to keep drugs and grow ops out of our neighbourhoods, out of our schools and away from our children.

Llibertarians are just plain stupid. But yes, feel free to display your ignorance and vote for them and justify it with your inane gobbledegook.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 10:50:45 AM


Epsi wrote: "To deliberately hive votes off the Conservatives will only result in right wing vote splitting and condemn us to devastating socialist rule."

Craziness! Holy cow, we must mobilize against the Libertarians!

(I'm confused, I thought the Libertarians didn't have a hope in hell... So why all the fuss?)

"This is what I mean when I say that Llibertarians are naive and utterly impractical."

Cleverness! They're both naive and utterly impractical! Like the gang at the Cato Institute--totally naive and impractical nuts. Like Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek--Nobel Prize notwithstanding, they're bananas!

(Come back to the side of sanity, Epsi. You usually do a much better job defending your position than this).

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-05-20 10:56:14 AM


"This to me is a slam against every parent and every police officer and every school principal who is struggling to keep drugs and grow ops out of our neighbourhoods, out of our schools and away from our children."

Right. If this isn't a comment right off the deep end, I'll ask: do you mean police officers like Dennis Young? Or some other kind of police officer? Do you mean that all principals, all parents, and all police officers speak with one voice when they say, "marijuana is a plant put on Earth by satan to tempt the wicked"?

Oh. Really? Thinking that principals, police officers, and parents all share one collective hive mind is, to me, a slam against every principal, police officer, and parent out there.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-05-20 10:59:37 AM


Talk to a bunch of parents who are working with the schools and local law enforcement about getting drugs out of schools and I PROMISE YOU WILL NEVER SEE A MORE COLLECTIVE MINDSET.

You are a very foolish young man. May you learn from this dalliance on the borders of naivety and come to your senses one day. I pray you will be a better man for it.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 11:10:30 AM


"...struggling to keep drugs and grow ops out of our neighbourhoods, out of our schools and away from our children."

Yes, we need to waste resources keeping pot away from our children in order to prevent them from becoming...

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=3e1b7647-05e9-4adb-ac75-533e74345e41

Working middle class Canadians.

Oh the horror!

Posted by: K Stricker | 2008-05-20 11:12:58 AM


Talk to a bunch of parents who are working with the schools and local law enforcement about getting drugs out of schools and I PROMISE YOU WILL NEVER SEE A MORE COLLECTIVE MINDSET.

Posted by: Epsilon | 20-May-08 11:10:30 AM

How about some decent parenting at home instead of promoting a nanny state where the Government makes sure you don't do something that may cause you bodily harm?

What's it with these self styled "conservatives" on the Western Standard that seem to be more interested in a nanny state that protectes them from $insert_hot_button_topic?

Isn't it the supposed "Leftoids" that are trying to control all our lives?

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-20 11:25:38 AM


I thought "Libertarians" supported those fighting against arbitrary government power. If so, the Emery is a wholly inadequate symbol of that struggle. He's entirely disreputable. Find someone new, like a businessman fighting red tape and taxation, not a druggie trying to avoid jail for his crimes.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-20 11:42:30 AM


Sorry, but lots of kids get poor parenting at home. Others get good parenting but still fall victim to pot and meth and worse. This will never change. Its a fact and must be dealt with outside of the family at the community level rather than left to spread its rot among the rest of us.

So what is wrong with working at the community level with parents, schools and police working to keep our streets safe? This is not government or nanny state, this is local community based action. But all the pro-drug people hate this and try to lump it in with "nanny-state". They appear to me to actually want to work against keeping drugs out of our schools and neighbourhoods. To wit Snowrunner's utterly irresponsible comment. These are our children for heaven's sakes? Are you out of your mind? What is wrong with you?

So far all the govt has sone on this is make it illegal to take sniffer dogs into our schools.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 12:03:55 PM


Sorry, but lots of kids get poor parenting at home. Others get good parenting but still fall victim to pot and meth and worse. This will never change. Its a fact and must be dealt with outside of the family at the community level rather than left to spread its rot among the rest of us.

So what is wrong with working at the community level with parents, schools and police working to keep our streets safe? This is not government or nanny state, this is local community based action. But all the pro-drug people hate this and try to lump it in with "nanny-state". They appear to me to actually want to work against keeping drugs out of our schools and neighbourhoods. To wit Snowrunner's utterly irresponsible comment. These are our children for heaven's sakes? Are you out of your mind? What is wrong with you?

So far all the govt has sone on this is make it illegal to take sniffer dogs into our schools.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 12:03:59 PM


I will take your comment about me growing and becoming a better man to heart. Thank you. I also hope that you, too, will grow to be better than you currently are (I wish this for all of you).

Incidentally, Epsi, I don't smoke pot, or do any other illicit drugs. (I'm not sure if you knew that)

Epsi wrote: "So what is wrong with working at the community level with parents, schools and police working to keep our streets safe?"

And I say: Nothing. In fact, I encourage it. Which is why I support an end to the War on Drugs, because we have overwhelming reason to believe that it is precisely *because* drugs are illegal that we see as much drug-related violence as we do.

So, for the sake of safe streets, please join those police officers, principals, and parents who are working hard to get marijuana legalized.

These are our children for heaven's sakes. Are you out of your mind? What is wrong with you?

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-05-20 12:30:46 PM


So what is wrong with working at the community level with parents, schools and police working to keep our streets safe? This is not government or nanny state, this is local community based action. But all the pro-drug people hate this and try to lump it in with "nanny-state". They appear to me to actually want to work against keeping drugs out of our schools and neighbourhoods. To wit Snowrunner's utterly irresponsible comment. These are our children for heaven's sakes? Are you out of your mind? What is wrong with you?

Posted by: Epsilon | 20-May-08 12:03:59 PM

My irresponsible comment? You want to have the Government dictate you what you can and cannot do. So today it is pot, tomorrow what? You don't like the dinner your neighbour is cooking?

Kids aren't stupid, they don't take Candy from strangers if they are brought up right, nor will they drag pot (and other drugs) into schools.

If the choice is between solving a crime where bodily harm has been comitted or blowing millions if not billions on an anti-drug war I rather have them spent the money on the first.

And yes, these are "our children" but do you honestly think you do them a favour by basically "locking them up"? The goal of parenting is to make sure they don't kill themselves or others or cause permanent bodily harm, it's not to keep them in a padded room only exposed to "approved" things.

If you raise kids that way the adults they will become will be the losers who try to escape into a drug induced dreamworld (be it alcohol, pot or other stuff) to dull the harshness of the real world.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-05-20 1:22:47 PM


Epsi (a friend of Dylan's Mr. Jones) says:
"Far better to work within the Conservative party where the struggle for ideas can translate into policy that at least has some hope of making a differnce."

Observing the actions of the Conservatives, as opposed to rhetoric, indicates that the Liberals would be more likely to help make a change if what you value is the supremacy of personal choice and liberty and smaller government. These are the values a libertarian holds as important.

The Harper Conservatives have already taken spending to a new frenzy even Trudeau could only envy: what would they do with a majority? They have restricted personal freedoms more than the Liberals and have indicated they will go further if given the chance. These actions are from a party that had a open mandate to bring change. It is not just the federal Tory party, look the Alberta Tory's recent tax grab in gross imitation of Chavez and the program spending that is currently higher than any provincial NDP or Liberal government in Canada. There is a pattern there and if you look at actions you will find that pattern goes back all the way to Sir John A: Conservatives talk about small government but bring big government.

Harper has claimed to be a 'classical liberal', so he at least has heard the idea. At least the other parties have a plausible defence (very weak) of ignorance of the idea. The Tories are clearly more of a failure in terms of a sense of direction out of this mess than the Liberals before, and you suggest we support them?

The Libertarians are the only choice there is if you value personal choice as preferable to government mandates and rigid control.

VMS

Posted by: Valentine M Smith | 2008-05-20 2:12:41 PM


Nonsense

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 2:58:52 PM


Double nonsense. No wonder the Libertarians are failing. Even the Green Party is doing better - partly because they sold out to the Liberals.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-20 3:41:53 PM


Valentine M Smith, I am inclined to agree with this Heinlein character who's name wasn't on the VM list. VMS have another name or is it real?
I agree with your contentions; old money tyrannical tories. Old or New Money is fine, but this imposed system of old money protectionism is ruining capatalism. US Forefather's are Classical Liberals, not loyal members. Harper's continental congress?

Micheal Sturko if Alan double crossed me as my proxy, then he needs to meet the ethics committee, otherwise I agree, I see no reason to remove him as president. I agreed with him on decentralization, free trade issues, intellectual freedom in open debate and criticism and hostility to war I call England's war manipulating the US through Loyalist anglicans like Bush Jr (UMC). Espionage MI*-NSA wars are as horrot.
Why did we nominate or vote for a blue beret (UN)? A war monger's hitman?
Support the troops, yeah support the hitman and charge the don with pulling the trigger?
Hah!
The Libertarians are ruled by internal rabbles with set establishments, they focus nothing on membership building and inspiration and all on building up their other movements like the WCLF and Geddes' "Hang Out With My Insecurity" meetings.
Very little binding characters, I came in giving the party the benefit of the doubt and try to suggest people and inspire others to at least give it a year as a VM, then renew or not.
Now by some fluke I ended up with 2010 ending membership, my donations and crap ended up earning it or something, I am feeling more restricted. NeoRhino's are showing up better, 111 Votes in the last byelection and 0 due to no-shows to us. You think Ontario would have candidates in that, the CAP and Nutty Animal Rights Party (Liz White) had a Candidate.

I miss my old independent days; neorhino.ca's are a respectful bunch compared to many I meet in the BCLP/WCLF movement. Funny enough Ian Isbister (former Van Centre Ref Candidate) was known to be afraid to say "Homosexual," I respect he didn't go tory like the others and went LP, but it's funny. I was called the Homophobe my Mercer (and the appearent concerned election committee) until he had to face I am a comedian who uses all slurs and a victim of homophobic attacks that were not jokes, idle teasing. At least he humbled himself, I have respect for the conscientious, this is needed more than some drug loving consumption tax conservative who thumps Rand like the bible.


Best,


Gölök Zoltán Buday
Vancouver Candidate for Mayor
Tentative Vancouver Centre NeoRhino.ca Nominee (ask them, they inspired this).
"If it be asked, What is the most sacred duty and the greatest source of our security in a Republic? The answer would be, an inviolable respect for the Constitution and Laws." -- Alexander Hamilton (1757-1804) Source: Essay in the American Daily Advertiser, August 28, 1794 http://en.wiquo.myegopedia.com/

Posted by: Gölök | 2008-05-20 7:26:14 PM


Yes, I am disgruntled. Maybe asking me is a good idea, all views have some validity, If I was not on the ballot and the numbers aren't made public, shove it LPC.

Posted by: Gölök | 2008-05-20 7:29:49 PM


Golok - I recall that you were on the ballot.

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-05-20 8:06:45 PM


As quickly as both the Liberal Left and the Conservative Right are dragging us towards the complete annihilation of absolutely every personal right and liberty on which this country was built, I can't help but think voting for either is an irrelevant waste of time. It doesn't matter to me whether the gangster raping my personal rights and my bank account is dressed in Red or Blue. So, I'll be a Libertarian the rest of my life...just like I started out...
We're all legally slaves...and that's "by law!" Our system stinks.

Posted by: JC | 2008-05-20 8:47:35 PM


Marc Emery is a "loser", a "drug addict moron"...?

Oh yeah? Well ... you're a pig-faced, dummy, poopy head!

Is that all you've got, really? Name-calling?

Marc Emery is the furthest from a drug addict you'll ever meet. He's never had any substance abuse problems. He did, however, spend $250,000 sponsoring a drug-addiction treatment clinic for a few years to help Vancouver-area drug addicts get off crack, cocaine, heroin, meth, etc. He hasn't ever touched that stuff himself, though.

Still think Emery's a "drug addict moron"?

Posted by: Jodie Emery | 2008-05-21 12:50:37 AM


I used to think Golok might have some valid views. I've been relieved of that burden after this last posting.

Posted by: JC | 2008-05-21 6:53:22 AM


"Still think Emery's a "drug addict moron"?"

Yes. He's also someone around whom people won't rally. The Libertarians should find a better person to represent their cause.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-21 7:30:37 AM


I agree with Zebulon. Emery is a bad example to rally around, almost like the guy from ruby Ridge.

I would never accuse Emery of having a substance abuse problem, and even if he did, as i have in the past, it can be overcome.

What I don't agree with is rallying around someone who broke United States law and expects tto avoid the consequences. He thumbed his nose at their law in the most concrete of ways, when he should have focussed his efforts on changing things North of the 49th, and he could have succeeded.
The LP should rally around the hundreds of small entrepreneurs who are being squeezed by excessive taxation and red tape, and who are having to fight their competitirs who get government handouts from the very tax dollars that were expropriated from them!
That would resonate better with the public than to support Marc Emery's cause.

I liked AJM's approach on decentralization, and i hope Mr Young will not require candidates to toe a party line of his choosing. Libertarians are too diverse, and too idependent to go along with that.
Furthermore, AJM's work brought the LP back from the brink to where it is today.
I hope the party has not made a mistake akin to the Stanislaw Tyminski episode of 1990.

Posted by: Neal Ford | 2008-05-21 9:44:14 AM


As near as I can tell and having met the man, I don't think Mr. Emery has either volunteered nor requested the role of "Libertarian Poster Boy".
Some of his goals may overlap the LPC,
but I believe he sees any direct "political" activism as a waste of time. His goal seems to be to directly confront a particular law. Quite unlike main stream Libertarians who want to directly engage and confront a wide variety of government policies.

Posted by: JC | 2008-05-21 11:37:46 AM


JC, I got the impression from Marc that he is focused on that one particular law as he would be less effective in dealing with that one by spreading himself over several issues. Not that he doesn't support other libertarian principles, but that from his experience it's a waste of time to pursue them through political activism.

Posted by: K Stricker | 2008-05-21 12:06:48 PM


K Stricker Absolutely right.
And lets not forget that there were a a number of very credible speakers at the convention. Jan Narveson - Order of Canada and Distinguished Professor Emeritus at the University of Waterloo, Dr. Grant Brown - Law Professor and author of "Deadbeat Judges: How Courts Disenfranchise Fathers", Moin Yahya - Law Professor U of A, Scott Hennig - Canadian Taxpayers Assoc.,Lorne Gunter - Journalist, National Post and Edmonton Journal, Paul Geddes - Economics Instructor at Columbia College, Dr. Michael Wagner - author: "Standing on Guard for Thee: The Past, Present, and Future of Canada's Christian Right", Kalim Kassam - Journalist at Western Standard and of course, Marc Emery.
So there was a great deal more on the Agenda than one particular speaker at any rate.

Posted by: JC | 2008-05-21 1:02:04 PM


Emery is speaking at this conference with these other speakers? This is a classic case of how one bad apple can spoil the whole bushel.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-21 1:30:11 PM


You think that people WON'T rally around Marc Emery?

According to a 2005 survey done by the Strategic Counsel & Angus Reid Polling, 58% of Canadians oppose the extradition request of Marc Emery. Support at this time could be as high as 60%, or even 70%, because in the years since, public opposition to extradition has only grown -- with numerous national newspaper editorials, local news columnists, and even Members of Canada's Parliament all urging the Justice Minister to refuse extradition in this case. Here's a taste:

"Marc Emery Should Not Be Extradited" - National Post Editorial
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=411251

"Emery should be a free man" - National Post
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=238203

"Liberal, NDP, and Green Opposition to Extradition" - Political Party Statements
http://forums.cannabisculture.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1378682

"Persecuting the Prince" - Prince George Citizen
http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/20080205116668/opinion/editorials/persecuting-the-prince.html

"Of Seeds And Sovereignty" - The Gauntlet, University of Calgary
http://gauntlet.ucalgary.ca/story/12053?qt=marijuana

"Ruling shines different light on Emery's case" - Vancouver Sun
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=f879d36a-e19c-4de3-a5dd-74eaa1a53ed1

"Marc Emery: poster child for U.S. war on drugs" - The Uniter, University of Winnipeg
http://www.uniter.ca/view.php?aid=40190

"Government Selling Out re: Emery" - The Cord Weekly, Wilfrid Laurier University
http://www.cordweekly.com/cordweekly/myweb.php?hls=10034&news_id=1270

"A matter of national sovereignty" - National Post Columnist
http://forums.cannabisculture.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1415267

"A Ticket vs Life in Prison" - AOL News Blog
http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2007/10/15/a-ticket-vs-life-in-prison/

And it goes on... that's just a short sampling of the numerous supportive media pieces (not to mention Rolling Stone Magazine, which is finishing a 7,000-word article about Marc right now for publication later this year).

The support is overwhelming. Hundreds of thousands of young people and adults have sent petitions, letters, donations, and other support in many ways. We have enormous groups with thousands of people online at websites like Facebook and MySpace, all devoted to preventing Marc Emery's extradition.

The Conservatives will lose votes if the extradite Marc Emery. I have 30 lbs. of petitions and letters to Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to prove it, many written by Conservative Party members urging him to not extradite Marc Emery -- and threatening to not vote Conservative if they do.

Marc Emery has the support of at least 50% and up to 90% of this country. Sure, many dn't like his attitude, his methods, his arrogance. I'm sorry if you don't like his character; many people don't. In fact, I meet people who say "I hate the guy", yet they also say "but I don't think he should be extradited."

Others say "Do the crime, do the time"... and to that we say this:

Canada's "time" for the "crime" of selling seeds is TWO MONTHS, a precedent set by the BC Court of Appeals in late 2007. Before that, it was a $2,000 fine (the precedent set in the year 2000, BC court of Appeals). See www.NoExtradition.net for those cases and more information.

Posted by: Jodie Emery | 2008-05-21 9:12:58 PM


You think that people WON'T rally around Marc Emery?

According to a 2005 survey done by the Strategic Counsel & Angus Reid Polling, 58% of Canadians oppose the extradition request of Marc Emery. Support at this time could be as high as 60%, or even 70%, because in the years since, public opposition to extradition has only grown -- with numerous national newspaper editorials, local news columnists, and even Members of Canada's Parliament all urging the Justice Minister to refuse extradition in this case. Here's a taste:

"Marc Emery Should Not Be Extradited" - National Post Editorial
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=411251

"Emery should be a free man" - National Post
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=238203

"Liberal, NDP, and Green Opposition to Extradition" - Political Party Statements
http://forums.cannabisculture.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1378682

"Persecuting the Prince" - Prince George Citizen
http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/20080205116668/opinion/editorials/persecuting-the-prince.html

"Of Seeds And Sovereignty" - The Gauntlet, University of Calgary
http://gauntlet.ucalgary.ca/story/12053?qt=marijuana

"Ruling shines different light on Emery's case" - Vancouver Sun
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=f879d36a-e19c-4de3-a5dd-74eaa1a53ed1

"Marc Emery: poster child for U.S. war on drugs" - The Uniter, University of Winnipeg
http://www.uniter.ca/view.php?aid=40190

"Government Selling Out re: Emery" - The Cord Weekly, Wilfrid Laurier University
http://www.cordweekly.com/cordweekly/myweb.php?hls=10034&news_id=1270

"A matter of national sovereignty" - National Post Columnist
http://forums.cannabisculture.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1415267

"A Ticket vs Life in Prison" - AOL News Blog
http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2007/10/15/a-ticket-vs-life-in-prison/

And it goes on... that's just a short sampling of the numerous supportive media pieces (not to mention Rolling Stone Magazine, which is finishing a 7,000-word article about Marc right now for publication later this year).

The support is overwhelming. Hundreds of thousands of young people and adults have sent petitions, letters, donations, and other support in many ways. We have enormous groups with thousands of people online at websites like Facebook and MySpace, all devoted to preventing Marc Emery's extradition.

The Conservatives will lose votes if the extradite Marc Emery. I have 30 lbs. of petitions and letters to Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to prove it, many written by Conservative Party members urging him to not extradite Marc Emery -- and threatening to not vote Conservative if they do.

Marc Emery has the support of at least 50% and up to 90% of this country. Sure, many dn't like his attitude, his methods, his arrogance. I'm sorry if you don't like his character; many people don't. In fact, I meet people who say "I hate the guy", yet they also say "but I don't think he should be extradited."

Others say "Do the crime, do the time"... and to that we say this:

Canada's "time" for the "crime" of selling seeds is TWO MONTHS, a precedent set by the BC Court of Appeals in late 2007. Before that, it was a $2,000 fine (the precedent set in the year 2000, BC court of Appeals). See www.NoExtradition.net for those cases and more information.

Posted by: Jodie Emery | 2008-05-21 9:13:27 PM


Llibertarians are so naive. I think Stephane Dion has more sense than these clowns.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-22 9:16:26 AM


"Llibertarians are so naive. I think Stephane Dion has more sense than these clowns"

Naive? Are you kidding? We are probably the only people who can see and are working against the complete annihilation of our freedoms. But that's ok Epsi...count yourself among the indoctrinated sheep and get in line for all your government granted priveleges. You'll be much happier there than having to think and be responsible for yourself. :) You have that "right" as far as we're concerned.

Posted by: JC | 2008-05-22 10:24:52 AM


Hah!

What a laugh. Supporting the likes of Emery and polygamists?

You guys are clowns. No one takes you seriously.

Epsi

Posted by: epsilon | 2008-05-22 11:28:06 PM


Laugh it up. The system you DO take seriously is criminal in nature. I take THAT seriously. And since you've chosen to pinpoint yourself on some very small and not particularly valid issues...I'll leave you to the myopic narrow mindedness you seem so content with. The work of freedom continues...

Posted by: JC | 2008-05-23 7:47:40 AM


The Conservative Party has never done anything good for Canada.

Epsilon should find better uses for time than trawling on and on the internet.

Posted by: C. McKibbin | 2008-05-29 6:56:15 PM


Hummm - seems to be a trend here that mirrors society.
A couple of posters putting out opinion only supportered by similarly weak opinion and not a fact in sight (i.e. with no backup) - put out against the facts that tend to be put out by libertarians (as can be seen in several posts here).
Sigh..........although I do have to laugh at Jodie's play on that silliness.

Nonsense

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-05-20 2:58:52 PM
--
Double nonsense......
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-20 3:41:53 PM

Posted by: Valentine MS | 2009-01-25 11:52:41 AM


I love Canadian politics. The "Libertarian" party elected a soldier - cop as its leader --- the only guys in the world who may, LEGALLY, kidnap you, steal your stuff and shoot you, if you resist --- so long as they have a warrant from some dumb lawyer on the bench!!!

Tee Hee. How many members does the libertine --- er --- Libertarian Party have in the rand --- er ---rank and file, anyway? God, I miss the old Rhinoceros Party.

Kevin

Posted by: Kevin | 2009-03-10 9:59:43 PM


[b] Apotheke Austria berlin paul gerhard apotheke[/b] [b]BESTELLEN BILLIG CIALIS Rezeptfrei EUR 1.21 per pill BILLIG CIALIS BESTELLEN Rezeptfrei[/b] [url=http://www.cialis-billig.enjoymeds.biz][img]http://www.cialiskaufen.enjoymeds.biz/kaufen_cialis.jpg[/img][/url][url=http://www.cialis-billig.enjoymeds.biz][img]http://www.cialiskaufen.enjoymeds.biz/kaufen_viagra.jpg[/img][/url][url=http://www.cialis-billig.enjoymeds.biz][img]http://www.cialiskaufen.enjo

Posted by: ApothekeOnlineDE | 2009-03-22 2:05:59 AM


[b] Apotheke Austria berlin paul gerhard apotheke[/b] [b]BESTELLEN BILLIG CIALIS Rezeptfrei EUR 1.21 per pill BILLIG CIALIS BESTELLEN Rezeptfrei[/b] [url=http://www.cialis-billig.enjoymeds.biz][img]http://www.cialiskaufen.enjoymeds.biz/kaufen_cialis.jpg[/img][/url][url=http://www.cialis-billig.enjoymeds.biz][img]http://www.cialiskaufen.enjoymeds.biz/kaufen_viagra.jpg[/img][/url][url=http://www.cialis-billig.enjoymeds.biz][img]http://www.cialiskaufen.enjo

Posted by: ApothekeOnlineDE | 2009-03-22 2:07:55 AM



The comments to this entry are closed.