|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
2 members (12boreman, 1 invisible),
368
guests, and
5
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,523
Posts545,799
Members14,420
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212 |
....Voting left doesn't mean for gun control any more than my voting Liberal next week for the first time of my life means I support the Liberal Party.
It's the only option I have if my loyalty to Canada.... Egad! Just kidding. I believe you told us here that you've been a hard lefty since at least around the time that castro first had his vision of building up cuba to the world's cutting edge health center. I can't say I follow Canadian politics to the extent that you lobby for the left wing of US politics, but maybe cback has a point? Seems like you're tacitly approving of the the foulest personal attacks and demonizing by libs against their opposition in Canadian history. Yup, I can see what you envision for your motherland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
The hospital and emails won't amount to an gnat's eyelash of influence in the US or the world compared to to the Middle East and US example of not able to govern in Washington, where your citizens say a pox on both parties. Iran isn't as intractable a problem as Pakistan and surging China from Africa to Middle East and South China Sea.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396 |
I don't know much about Canadian politics, but I strongly agree that ways must be found to bridge party feuding. Compromise is the essence of governing a democracy. Nobody gets everything his way all the time. The Incompetence Caucus wants it all their way. There are only 40 of them. If it weren't for gerrymandering, they wouldn't be elected in the first place. AAAARG. PS: No American President has been subjected to more hate speech than our present one. Bill, are you kidding? No president subject to more hate speech?? Daily I hear Bush denigrated. Daily!! And I'm in Canada and he left office 7 years ago! This is what I'm talking about!!! I could gather 100 people together in the town I live in, large retirement population, and ask for comments on Obama. For sure, better than 50% would be positive. Same group, ask about Bush....85-90% negative. Even lots of centre right have bought the media line....Bush is stupid. And repeat it to this day.
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396 |
Voting left doesn't mean for gun control any more than my voting Liberal next week for the first time of my life means I support the Liberal Party.
It's the only option I have if my loyalty to Canada is more important than my loyalty to the party I favour.
Let's see. Voting for a guy who has never accomplished anything in life, who is running based on his family name and being attractive (the hubris involved is staggering....where does he get off thinking he's qualified to run the country) and who, in the short time he has been in public life, has personally demonstrated all the behaviors he so vehemently criticizes Harper for (So you are going with a clear hypocrite). And you think THAT is in service to your country? King, at least vote for someone who may be misguided, but at least is a competent, serious guy. Vote for Mulcair!
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
I've voted left and conservative as circumstances warranted, as the US does traditionally by electing Democrat and Republican governments. I grew up favouring the weak and minorities because of a certain spirituality and my experience with the consequences of endemic inequality.
James is accurate in the longest and most divisive election campaign in our history. Canadian, US and European media describe as "beyond the pale" the way Canada lost its values under the current conservative government. Advance polls are unprecedented, with three-hour waits to vote.
A populace wanting change is a larger factor than "demonizing" in a campaign that has become all about the prime minister.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
Mulcair has been most principled and courageous leader, particularly on the Muslim issue, and arguably among the best or our best Opposition Leader in history.
I've supported the party generously but my NDP vote here this time in Peter's vacated riding could become a vote for the Conservatives with vote-splitting.
I've been able to accept election results with magnanimity because I know Canadians wouldn't collectively let anything bad happen to the country.
They got rid of the Liberals and now comes their denouement of the Conservatives for changing from their promise.
As for Trudeau, no one thought Diefenbaker had it either. None of the usual suspects would run for the party. Lawyers ran away. Dief produced the most democratic Commons in representation of the masses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 532 Likes: 26
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 532 Likes: 26 |
Ryan, are you saying you prefer stupidity and shallow thinking? I doubt you mean that, but it sounds as if you might. To an extent, I do mean it. Average is best. Intellectuals make shitty leaders, which is sort of what is troubling Brooks but, hes overthinking it. The incompetent caucus is winning the contest. Of course they are. They generally will. The main problem with intellectual leaders is they absolutely cannot deal with any crisis. When the time comes for decisive action, a David Brooks type really will be thinking about pant creases and philosophical betrayals. Its true in politics and its true in business. They think far too much, then do nothing, and someone like Putin eats them for lunch. The second problem is smarts rarely have any frame of reference or perspective for how the others think or live which causes them incorrectly apply abstract logical reasoning to social and relational domains. For example, the intellectual left cannot fathom why Middle American will not give up their guns. They dont know anything about the clingers. I would prefer to confine the high brows to research at the universities, institutions, think tanks, and corporate backrooms. Smart people have ruined more companies and institutions than average people because their intelligence far too often overrides their common sense. This is the irony of the left, and maybe part of what canvasback is noticing. The left is so very proud of their intellects but there is scant evidence that smarts produce good outcomes. The intellectual can convince himself of almost anything. Last night the best of the left told us climate change is the biggest threat facing America. Has any doomsday scenario ever come true? Just saying
Last edited by RyanF; 10/14/15 12:47 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396 |
Ryan, are you saying you prefer stupidity and shallow thinking? I doubt you mean that, but it sounds as if you might. To an extent, I do mean it. Average is best. Intellectuals make shitty leaders, which is sort of what is troubling Brooks but, hes overthinking it. The incompetent caucus is winning the contest. Of course they are. They generally will. The main problem with intellectual leaders is they absolutely cannot deal with any crisis. When the time comes for decisive action, a David Brooks type really will be thinking about pant creases and philosophical betrayals. Its true in politics and its true in business. They think far too much, then do nothing, and someone like Putin eats them for lunch. The second problem is smarts rarely have any frame of reference or perspective for how the others think or live which causes them incorrectly apply abstract logical reasoning to social and relational domains. For example, the intellectual left cannot fathom why Middle American will not give up their guns. They dont know anything about the clingers. I would prefer to confine the high brows to research at the universities, institutions, think tanks, and corporate backrooms. Smart people have ruined more companies and institutions than average people because their intelligence far too often overrides their common sense. This is the irony of the left, and maybe part of what canvasback is noticing. The left is so very proud of their intellects but there is scant evidence that smarts produce good outcomes. The intellectual can convince himself of almost anything. Last night the best of the left told us climate change is the biggest threat facing America. Has any doomsday scenario ever come true? Just saying Ryan, I could not agree more. Too much smarts is often more of a hindrance than a benefit.
Last edited by canvasback; 10/14/15 01:12 PM. Reason: grammar
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212 |
I don't quite agree. The smartest ones get the rest to follow along, counting on lack of smarts. Take for example King, he says he's voting for hope-n-change, rhetoric not facts. We know this because what politicians say and what politicians do are always different.
The top tier smart folks can trigger the feelings of the second tier smart folks to rally the lemmings. We know this because the subject title teaches us which folks to be prejudice against.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,025 Likes: 25
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,025 Likes: 25 |
Canvasback, Of course Bush is still roundly denigrated. He is almost singly responsible for the worst foreign policy decision since Vietnam. His adventure in Iraq cost the lives of 5000 US soldiers, the maiming of tens of thousands, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Obama's worst decisions are as nothing compared to this monstrous debacle. I have raised this issue here before and no one has ever responded except to say that there were too weapons of mass destruction, a claim that only a brain- dead moron could still maintain. My hope is that the US and Canada will find the way to electing better leaders. Given our political climates, the candidates we need tend not to step up. Who can blame them?
Bill Ferguson
|
|
|
|
|
