Mulcair opposes C-51 while Trudeau folds like a cheap suit 2

157 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

Government plans four amendments to soften anti-terror Bill C-51

Conservatives offer revised version of anti-terror bill but seven Canadian civil liberties and human rights groups call for it to be dropped

 

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/03/30/government-plans-four-amen...

Jacob Two-Two

"If you stick a knife in my back nine inches, and then pull it out six inches, that is not progress."

NorthReport

Tories’ behaviour during anti-terror bill hearings borderline anti-democratic

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/john-ivison-tories-behaviour-d...

Brachina
trotwood73

Under Liberal pressure to quit, LeadNow steps up fight against C-51   [source: someprogress.ca]

Quote:
It appears the Liberal Party has encouraged a high profile member of the Stop C-51 campaign to, in the words of the campaigner, “declare victory and go home.”

Jamie Biggar, campaigns director for the online advocacy group LeadNow, which has spearheaded the campaign in cooperation with OpenMedia and a broad coalition of other groups, has agreed to go public with his statements about interactions with an official from the Liberal party headquarters in Ottawa.

“[H]e was trying to persuade me that it [was] in my best interest to do what he perceived to be in his best interest,” said Biggar, by “try[ing] to turn the conversation back onto the economy,” an area where the Conservatives are perceived as weak right now.

Biggar informed this author early Monday morning that they were getting “a stream of emails” from the Liberal headquarters in (what he perceived as an) attempt to get them to drop or relax their challenge to Bill C-51—the so-called ‘anti-terror’ legislation which experts and lawyers’ groups have denounced as an attack on Canadians’ fundamental rights and freedoms.

Brachina

 Fucking Liberals, Trudeau is a toady who licks Harper's boots.

Jacob Two-Two

Justin figures the quickest way to take Harper's place is by crawling up his ass.

Brachina

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Justin figures the quickest way to take Harper's place is by crawling up his ass.

 

 LMFAO.

nicky

If this is true about LeadNow the Liberals have truly sunk to a new low. What do you think Pondering?

Stockholm

I think Pondering will have to take a long time to ponder how to continue to be an apologist for boy Justin after this latest outrage

thorin_bane

No, he is clearly focused on defeating the conservatives by voting with them. Its a sneak attack that way. The cons won't expect a more right wing party than theirs its such a brilliant stratedgy. Just waiting on JT to say Tax Cuts for the wealthy to finish the week off.

ajaykumar

People don't care about bills, they care for the economy ,jobs. Example: harper convicted of contempt of parliament! And given a majority a few weeks later.libs 2 billion gas plants and given a majority.Trudeaus decision was right. Those who protest/care about bills, don't make or break a govt. Those who are angry with his decision never voted for his party, they are maybe0.5 of the electorate. US rought in the patriot act, no effect on elections. Libs also brought in similar bills to c51 in 2001,and there was no effect on elections.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

You may be right ajay, but many of us are willing to bet that Canadians are going to hate it if you take them into foreign wars and pass legislation which takes away their basic rights.

Jacob Two-Two

No way ajay. C-51 was a big mistake. They're going to pay a price for this one, mark my words.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

I tend to agree with J22. C-51 has hit both Trudeau and Harper. Plus there is talk of Canadian involvement in war in Syria, Iraq, and Russia. Some of this war has already happened. The Government does not seem to know what it is messing with.

As we sit and watch the coffins come back on the TV memorial services for our fallen comrades, we have to think, "No more."

Pondering

Brachina wrote:

thorin_bane wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Brachina wrote:

 It has nothing to do with Trudeau's tepid critism, it has to do with the brilliant work of Tom Mulcair which has shifted public opinion to the point where even the people at Free Dominion are joining the fight and thinking of voting NDP even.

 

 And yet you want to give the credit to Trudeau, disgusting.

Trudeau certainly didn't shift opinion but neither did the NDP. Organizations, institutions and countless dignitaries and experts have come out against it. I would say they are the ones who changed the public's opinion. Nevertheless the NDP deserves credit for choosing to fight it. The Liberals should have fought it too instead of siding with the Conservatives even with reservations.

Several organizations, institutions, and countless dignitaries and experts in the US also came out against the Iraq war and the Patriot Act. The reason these people didn't make any traction against the Bush administration is because there were no influential elected politicians who stood against the Bush administration. The difference in Canada is that the Greens and NDP came out clearly against it and fought against it where the laws are made, in Parliament.


Stop using facts because Pondering never responds to those. Just use rhetoric and made up BS in your arguments while ignoring any facts when proven, seems to work for our Libs.

ETA Like to say E May has been forecful on this issue and deserves some props on it.

 I agree.

I used to think so highly of progressves. I never imagined they would be the bullies. Those were in my idealistic days when I thought progressives wouldn't be rapists  or mysogynists either. Babble is certainly an eye opener concerning the character of progressives. Progressives, at least on babble, are just as vicious and mean-spirited as bullies anywhere else and bystanders are just as likely to standby and say nothing. Fortunately I have a thick skin. It's amusing to see how superior the bullies think they are when they share core values with Harperites in how they treat people.

Brachina

 When did we become bully's and rapists?

Pondering

Brachina wrote:

 When did we become bully's and rapists?

You tell me. (Note I did not say anyone at babble was a rapist so if that is what you are implying you are being a jerk. )

NorthReport

Liberal support for C-51 gets even more awkward

Remember the heady days, just over a month ago, when Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau declared that improving CSIS oversight in Bill C-51 was absolutely necessary?

“[Oversight] is crucial and must be amended, if we are giving CSIS the new powers proposed in Bill C-51 in its current form…We are confident that we have the necessary tools and plan to improve this bill, and we will do everything we can to achieve that goal.” – Justin Trudeau, February 19, 2015

But sometimes “everything” is not enough, as the Liberals learned at Public Safety Committee last night when every single Liberal amendment proposed was resoundingly defeated by the Conservatives.

Not ones to let facts get in the way of a cunning political plan, the Liberals are undaunted in their support for C-51 – but their brain trust would prefer civil society not talk about it:

The key email that I received from a senior Liberal told me simply that we should see the amendments as a meaningful victory on this issue.

In turn, we have been telling them that we're seeing widespread opposition to their current position: calling for amendments to C-51, while still planning to vote for it.

Thousands of people have joined our campaign to specifically call on the Liberals to strengthen their position on C-51, and we will continue to put more pressure on them to do so."    – Jamie Biggar, LeadNow Campaigns Director, Facebook post March 31, 2015

Awkward, indeed.


http://www.northumberlandview.ca/index.php?module=news&type=user&func=di...

Pondering

I don't think it's at all awkward. I just don't think the amendments go far enough. There has been no justification given for needing this bill in the first place. 

Brachina

 If you weren't calling us at rabble rapists then who were you refering to?

 

 I wasn't trying to be a jerk, I was offended.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Brachina wrote:

thorin_bane wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Brachina wrote:

 It has nothing to do with Trudeau's tepid critism, it has to do with the brilliant work of Tom Mulcair which has shifted public opinion to the point where even the people at Free Dominion are joining the fight and thinking of voting NDP even.

 

 And yet you want to give the credit to Trudeau, disgusting.

Trudeau certainly didn't shift opinion but neither did the NDP. Organizations, institutions and countless dignitaries and experts have come out against it. I would say they are the ones who changed the public's opinion. Nevertheless the NDP deserves credit for choosing to fight it. The Liberals should have fought it too instead of siding with the Conservatives even with reservations.

Several organizations, institutions, and countless dignitaries and experts in the US also came out against the Iraq war and the Patriot Act. The reason these people didn't make any traction against the Bush administration is because there were no influential elected politicians who stood against the Bush administration. The difference in Canada is that the Greens and NDP came out clearly against it and fought against it where the laws are made, in Parliament.


Stop using facts because Pondering never responds to those. Just use rhetoric and made up BS in your arguments while ignoring any facts when proven, seems to work for our Libs.

ETA Like to say E May has been forecful on this issue and deserves some props on it.

 I agree.

I used to think so highly of progressves. I never imagined they would be the bullies. Those were in my idealistic days when I thought progressives wouldn't be rapists  or mysogynists either. Babble is certainly an eye opener concerning the character of progressives. Progressives, at least on babble, are just as vicious and mean-spirited as bullies anywhere else and bystanders are just as likely to standby and say nothing. Fortunately I have a thick skin. It's amusing to see how superior the bullies think they are when they share core values with Harperites in how they treat people.

The passive aggression is loaded here in spite of the next post denying responsibility for what was clearly intended.

First Pondering is clear about those who disagree with her -- they are "vicious and mean-spirited bullies" associated with "rapists or mysogynists." But they are not the only targets. Those who do not rush to her defence and put us in our male chauvinist place are like bystanders who watch rapists. Those of you who try to stay out of this discussion are now in it becuase if you do not take Pondering's side to drive out the evil men who disagree with her -- you are bad as well.

It is a clear attempt to introduce gender into this political -- not previously gendered conversation. Hijacking gender to use against NDP supporters from a Liberal is interestng to say the least. But Pondering is reaching for an argument that she can use against those who are in the NDP and male to knock them out of the discussion. It works. I think it does even more damage to conversations about gender equality than the men Pondering is targetting (but I am not qualified to say that). As men we are just to accept that if we are male and identify with the NDP we are asshole chauvanists who can only be saved by the Liberal party. The issue of her constant posting style and attacks is closed when she invokes gender. We continue at our own peril. I write this knowing that whatever comes of it, I will not be able to reply without havingto take another 3+ month break from this site. So in writing this I have signed the blank cheque and have to walk away.

I will write a suggestion in reactions and get out of this conversation. Instead of this being about posting styles, aggressive promotion of the Liberal party over the bad NDP, this is now about gender, a discussion Pondering has won by default becuase she invoked the ground where half the people here have no standing. Who must be silent.

At risk, I will say that this is an attempt NOT to limit this conversation to Women but rather to Women who are supporters of the Liberal party and whose handle starts with a P and ends with a g.

For my part, I can say that my disagreement with Pondering has nothing to do with her gender or mine. It has to do with the party propaganda she is trying to forcebly promote and the means she is using to do that. But I know that her answer will be one that I will be unable to reply to.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Trudeau would pay no price at all if he backed out of C-51. He could say he listened to the people.

Brachina

 It depends on how long he waits, if its too long it won't help him with those who oppose bill C-51 because the damage will be done and it will open him up more to attacks from those who support bill C-51.

wage zombie

I told you LeadNow wasn't a Liberal shill organization.  Hope that sets your mind at ease.

NorthReport wrote:

Not ones to let facts get in the way of a cunning political plan, the Liberals are undaunted in their support for C-51 – but their brain trust would prefer civil society not talk about it:

The key email that I received from a senior Liberal told me simply that we should see the amendments as a meaningful victory on this issue.

In turn, we have been telling them that we're seeing widespread opposition to their current position: calling for amendments to C-51, while still planning to vote for it.

Thousands of people have joined our campaign to specifically call on the Liberals to strengthen their position on C-51, and we will continue to put more pressure on them to do so."    – Jamie Biggar, LeadNow Campaigns Director, Facebook post March 31, 2015

Awkward, indeed.

http://www.northumberlandview.ca/index.php?module=news&type=user&func=di...

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

The passive aggression is loaded here in spite of the next post denying responsibility for what was clearly intended.

First Pondering is clear about those who disagree with her -- they are "vicious and mean-spirited bullies" associated with "rapists or mysogynists." But they are not the only targets. Those who do not rush to her defence and put us in our male chauvinist place are like bystanders who watch rapists. Those of you who try to stay out of this discussion are now in it becuase if you do not take Pondering's side to drive out the evil men who disagree with her -- you are bad as well.

It is a clear attempt to introduce gender into this political -- not previously gendered conversation. Hijacking gender to use against NDP supporters from a Liberal is interestng to say the least. But Pondering is reaching for an argument that she can use against those who are in the NDP and male to knock them out of the discussion. It works. I think it does even more damage to conversations about gender equality than the men Pondering is targetting (but I am not qualified to say that). As men we are just to accept that if we are male and identify with the NDP we are asshole chauvanists who can only be saved by the Liberal party. The issue of her constant posting style and attacks is closed when she invokes gender. We continue at our own peril. I write this knowing that whatever comes of it, I will not be able to reply without havingto take another 3+ month break from this site. So in writing this I have signed the blank cheque and have to walk away.

I will write a suggestion in reactions and get out of this conversation. Instead of this being about posting styles, aggressive promotion of the Liberal party over the bad NDP, this is now about gender, a discussion Pondering has won by default becuase she invoked the ground where half the people here have no standing. Who must be silent.

At risk, I will say that this is an attempt NOT to limit this conversation to Women but rather to Women who are supporters of the Liberal party and whose handle starts with a P and ends with a g.

For my part, I can say that my disagreement with Pondering has nothing to do with her gender or mine. It has to do with the party propaganda she is trying to forcebly promote and the means she is using to do that. But I know that her answer will be one that I will be unable to reply to.

Nothing passive about calling out bullies. 

Disagreeing with someone, no matter how vehemently, is not the same as making personal attacks. It is only the personal attacks I am calling out as bullying not any political disagreement. 

You came back with a chip on your shoulder and a grudge against me. I'm not going to play your game. Go ahead and make a fool of yourself attacking me. 

6079_Smith_W

Diane Ablonzcy: Who needs the rule of law?

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2015/04/conservative-mp-ablonzcy-on-bill-c-51...

Quote:

Now the judge has to also consider, in addition to the Charter and the CSIS Act, something like rule of law. They have to consider things like principles of fundamental justice, whatever that is. If the Green Party had their way, there would be such a morass of opinions and considerations that action would be pretty much at a stalemate. I strongly disagree with the Canadian Bar Association on this, and I’ve been a member of the bar, and I strongly disagree with this amendment.

Brachina

 Perhaps this thread could go back to being about Trudeau folding like a cheap suit instead of about Pondering.

 

 Perhaps we should list the areas where Trudeau has folded like a cheap suit. Bill C-51, the Nexen take over, FIPPA, CETA, On the NDP amendment to bring the combat oportations and increased aid to refugees, Board of Internal Economy Kangaroo Courts, Proportional Representation, anyone care to add to the list. Of course it doesn't count all the times he folded under the orders of Dion, Rae, or Iggy, that list would get too long.

Pondering

Brachina wrote:

 If you weren't calling us at rabble rapists then who were you refering to?

 I wasn't trying to be a jerk, I was offended.

I consider myself a progressive, and I was referring to progressives in general and the types of behavior I didn't think I would see among them as a group not just posters on rabble. These are three behaviors I thought would be rare in the progressive community. There were rapes at Occupy. I have witnessed mysogyny elsewhere and here. Bullying is another behavior I think should be below progressives. Any sort of moral highground you think you may have is lost. 

Over the time that I have been here I have witnessed a reduction in personal attacks. I hope that can continue. 

Oprah managed to interview a member of the KKK and discuss his philosophy while maintaining full civility fully allowing him to have his say. She challenged him intellectually without any personal hostility. 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I don't like the word progressie; its a word that gives people an excuse to vote for Trudeau and the LPC. I'm a leftist; proud of it, and tired of being attacked for being one by "progressives", as "ideological", and narrow minded. The use of the word "progressive" is simply a word that is equivalent to fancy wrapong; it pretties up the package but the package's contents are still lacking.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

How did this thread get hijacked from what it  was supposed to be, an expose on Trudeau's sell out on civil rights?

Brachina

 the Lib supporters love derailing threads like this.

Pondering

Brachina wrote:

 the Lib supporters love derailing threads like this.

Brachina, you have been among those turning threads into personal attacks on Liberal supporters rather than whatever the original topic was. You and a few others go out of your way to be insulting to anyone here who intends to vote Liberal.  That is what derails threads.

The title of this thread was intended to offend and this thread was intended to be a bash thread not a political discussion thread so the personal attacks against Liberal supporters are not off topic. They are the point of the thread.  

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

Brachina wrote:

 the Lib supporters love derailing threads like this.

Brachina, you have been among those turning threads into personal attacks on Liberal supporters rather than whatever the original topic was. You and a few others go out of your way to be insulting to anyone here who intends to vote Liberal.  That is what derails threads.

The title of this thread was intended to offend and this thread was intended to be a bash thread not a political discussion thread so the personal attacks against Liberal supporters are not off topic. They are the point of the thread.  

 

Nonsense Pondering.

MegB

Pondering wrote:

Brachina wrote:

thorin_bane wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Brachina wrote:

 It has nothing to do with Trudeau's tepid critism, it has to do with the brilliant work of Tom Mulcair which has shifted public opinion to the point where even the people at Free Dominion are joining the fight and thinking of voting NDP even.

 

 And yet you want to give the credit to Trudeau, disgusting.

Trudeau certainly didn't shift opinion but neither did the NDP. Organizations, institutions and countless dignitaries and experts have come out against it. I would say they are the ones who changed the public's opinion. Nevertheless the NDP deserves credit for choosing to fight it. The Liberals should have fought it too instead of siding with the Conservatives even with reservations.

Several organizations, institutions, and countless dignitaries and experts in the US also came out against the Iraq war and the Patriot Act. The reason these people didn't make any traction against the Bush administration is because there were no influential elected politicians who stood against the Bush administration. The difference in Canada is that the Greens and NDP came out clearly against it and fought against it where the laws are made, in Parliament.


Stop using facts because Pondering never responds to those. Just use rhetoric and made up BS in your arguments while ignoring any facts when proven, seems to work for our Libs.

ETA Like to say E May has been forecful on this issue and deserves some props on it.

 I agree.

I used to think so highly of progressves. I never imagined they would be the bullies. Those were in my idealistic days when I thought progressives wouldn't be rapists  or mysogynists either. Babble is certainly an eye opener concerning the character of progressives. Progressives, at least on babble, are just as vicious and mean-spirited as bullies anywhere else and bystanders are just as likely to standby and say nothing. Fortunately I have a thick skin. It's amusing to see how superior the bullies think they are when they share core values with Harperites in how they treat people.

You should be very careful if you're going to characterize all progressives as rapists and misogynists. It's wrong on so many levels and, since your language puts you outside the realm of progressive, makes me wonder what the hell you're doing here.

 

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering may be unaware how her posts are understood by anyone who is not a Liberal.

Her insinuations about progressives up thread are either an extreme of trolling or truly terrifying if you have to consider that they may have been written sincerely, this oblivious to how they would be received.

Sean in Ottawa

mark_alfred wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I don't like the word progressie; its a word that gives people an excuse to vote for Trudeau and the LPC. I'm a leftist; proud of it, and tired of being attacked for being one by "progressives", as "ideological", and narrow minded. The use of the word "progressive" is simply a word that is equivalent to fancy wrapong; it pretties up the package but the package's contents are still lacking.

I agree.  Occasionally I'll use the term "progressive", but it's never sat well with me.  It implies "change", and often preservation of social services and of the environment, (or in the case of fighting Bill C-51, preservation of civil liberties), is what we strive for, which isn't necessarily caught by the term "progressive".  Being left wing is to have a more interventionist and collective/social approach to issues (something Trudeau has spoken against, via saying the NDP is too "interventionist"), I feel, which really isn't well caught by the term "progressive".  That said, I'll occasionally still use the term as a differentiator to the term "conservative", but I use it reluctantly.

ETA:  However, given that the term "progressive" is the currently used term to identify left-wingers, I do agree with MegB's thought expressed in post #135.

I do see it as a collective term for what is not small c conservative.

It is a word used by some to include the vaste differences between the NDP and the Liberal party. To provide the veneer of common cause so that Liberals can demand New Democrats vote with them to keep out the non progressives. It is similar in that sense to words we might use to encompass both the Conservatives and the Liberals.

However, if I use the word I do think about social progress towards justice and equality and to that end I do not consider most Liberals to be progressive.

mark_alfred

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I don't like the word progressie; its a word that gives people an excuse to vote for Trudeau and the LPC. I'm a leftist; proud of it, and tired of being attacked for being one by "progressives", as "ideological", and narrow minded. The use of the word "progressive" is simply a word that is equivalent to fancy wrapong; it pretties up the package but the package's contents are still lacking.

I agree.  Occasionally I'll use the term "progressive", but it's never sat well with me.  It implies "change", and often preservation of social services and of the environment, (or in the case of fighting Bill C-51, preservation of civil liberties), is what we strive for, which isn't necessarily caught by the term "progressive".  I feel being left wing is to have a more interventionist and collective/social approach to issues (something Trudeau has spoken against, via saying the NDP is too "interventionist"), which really isn't well caught by the term "progressive".  That said, I'll occasionally still use the term as a differentiator to the term "conservative", but I use it reluctantly.

ETA:  However, given that the term "progressive" is the currently used term to identify left-wingers, I do agree with MegB's thought expressed in post #135.

mark_alfred

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

However, if I use the word I do think about social progress towards justice and equality and to that end I do not consider most Liberals to be progressive.

Yeah, I guess I can see the word "progressive" in that light, and get used to it as the term to describe the left.

Sean in Ottawa

mark_alfred wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

However, if I use the word I do think about social progress towards justice and equality and to that end I do not consider most Liberals to be progressive.

Yeah, I guess I can see the word "progressive" in that light, and get used to it as the term to describe the left.

The problem is that it is hijacked to be used as a meaningless term to include Liberals and NDP to suggest they are part of the same movement and that NDP supporters should give up their preferred vote to elect a Liberal who (in their view) has more of a chance. This is why I do understand those in this thread who absolutely hate the term.

Like many words it has multiple meanings and the choice becomes either to avoid the word or try to take back the meaning to be what you want it to be. There are usually good arguments on both sides when it comes to words like this.

mark_alfred

It's interesting that Trudeau in his speech about liberty did not once mention Bill C-51.  He mentions the Charter, but fails to mention that his Liberal Party is supporting Bill C-51 which undermines the Charter.  He only supported Bill C-51 because polls initially showed high support for it.  It shows how truly shallow Trudeau is.

Winston

Pondering wrote:

MegB wrote:

You should be very careful if you're going to characterize all progressives as rapists and misogynists. It's wrong on so many levels and, since your language puts you outside the realm of progressive, makes me wonder what the hell you're doing here.

You, and most of the rest of us.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

In my opinion, the reason some Canadians have been using the word "progressive" so often in the past few years has nothing to do with political philosophy, and everything to do with U.S. gutter politics. In the 1980s and 90s, the Republican Party managed to completely undermine the meaning of the word "liberal" into something akin to "evil". They were so successful with this propaganda message that very few American politicians could survive while still calling themselves liberal.

Consequently, in the late 90s and early aughts, the term "progressive" began to emerge in U.S. political discussion, to describe the policies and attitudes which had formerly been known as "liberal". Only since then have I seen the term appear in Canadian political discourse, and I do not think that is a coincidence. Canadian Liberals (and sadly many NDPers as well) always want to be in line with their Democratic Party big brothers. Thus, we now see this term used rather widely in Canada for no good reason.

Sean in Ottawa

mark_alfred wrote:

It's interesting that Trudeau in his speech about liberty did not once mention Bill C-51.  He mentions the Charter, but fails to mention that his Liberal Party is supporting Bill C-51 which undermines the Charter.  He only supported Bill C-51 because polls initially showed high support for it.  It shows how truly shallow Trudeau is.

He has made a huge political blunder and it is not a surprise that he would not want to draw attention to it more than necessary.

He rationalized that he could sit on the fence on this Bill and it turns out that this was too cute by half and he is exposed on it. Some of us predicted that this would turn negative for him from the start.

Trudeau thought that this position would save him from attack from the conservatives. It was a bad judgment. 

It is hard to say who wins here. During the election we may see the NDP actually pass the Liberals and this could leave the conservatives find the NDP as their greatest threat. An NDP minority could result. I disagree with North Report that this woudl be a bad thing. The NDP would probably demolish the Liberals to win a majority in the election following -- assuming they do not blow the government. I suspect a Mulcair government would be a very cautious government that may very well earn the trust of the people.

The Liberals may be seen by the people as training wheels for the NDP that could come off after two years.

 

thorin_bane

I don't know but listening to Trudeau flounder for words while saying 'ummm' a half dozen times in each of his prepared paragraphs os very telling. When you believe what you are saying and have a firm grasp on the issue you are speaking of, you don't need audible brain pauses to line up your thoughts. All the moreso when speaking at a turtles crawl. Perhaps that is why Mulcair hasn't been better recieved, he should slow down and use less facts while stammering a whole lot more(though perhaps Trudeau has an actual impediment I am unaware of).

No worries even with the feather soft arguments trudeau has against Harpo he will still vote with the bill with no amendments. Such a rock of principles he is.

Pondering

MegB wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Brachina wrote:

thorin_bane wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Brachina wrote:

 It has nothing to do with Trudeau's tepid critism, it has to do with the brilliant work of Tom Mulcair which has shifted public opinion to the point where even the people at Free Dominion are joining the fight and thinking of voting NDP even.

 

 And yet you want to give the credit to Trudeau, disgusting.

Trudeau certainly didn't shift opinion but neither did the NDP. Organizations, institutions and countless dignitaries and experts have come out against it. I would say they are the ones who changed the public's opinion. Nevertheless the NDP deserves credit for choosing to fight it. The Liberals should have fought it too instead of siding with the Conservatives even with reservations.

Several organizations, institutions, and countless dignitaries and experts in the US also came out against the Iraq war and the Patriot Act. The reason these people didn't make any traction against the Bush administration is because there were no influential elected politicians who stood against the Bush administration. The difference in Canada is that the Greens and NDP came out clearly against it and fought against it where the laws are made, in Parliament.


Stop using facts because Pondering never responds to those. Just use rhetoric and made up BS in your arguments while ignoring any facts when proven, seems to work for our Libs.

ETA Like to say E May has been forecful on this issue and deserves some props on it.

 I agree.

I used to think so highly of progressves. I never imagined they would be the bullies. Those were in my idealistic days when I thought progressives wouldn't be rapists  or mysogynists either. Babble is certainly an eye opener concerning the character of progressives. Progressives, at least on babble, are just as vicious and mean-spirited as bullies anywhere else and bystanders are just as likely to standby and say nothing. Fortunately I have a thick skin. It's amusing to see how superior the bullies think they are when they share core values with Harperites in how they treat people.

You should be very careful if you're going to characterize all progressives as rapists and misogynists. It's wrong on so many levels and, since your language puts you outside the realm of progressive, makes me wonder what the hell you're doing here.

I consider myself a progressive and I am not calling myself a rapist.  Are you claiming that no progressives are rapists or misogynists? In a sense I would agree with you but they are certainly within the community. 

The point of my post was the bullying that occurs here but you seem to have missed that part. There is nothing in this thread that warrants personal attacks against me. No one was responding to something I had said. It was just the usual juvenile "Pondering is a groupie na na na na na na" crap. 

 

Sean in Ottawa

thorin_bane wrote:

I don't know but listening to Trudeau flounder for words while saying 'ummm' a half dozen times in each of his prepared paragraphs os very telling. When you believe what you are saying and have a firm grasp on the issue you are speaking of, you don't need audible brain pauses to line up your thoughts. All the moreso when speaking at a turtles crawl. Perhaps that is why Mulcair hasn't been better recieved, he should slow down and use less facts while stammering a whole lot more(though perhaps Trudeau has an actual impediment I am unaware of).

No worries even with the feather soft arguments trudeau has against Harpo he will still vote with the bill with no amendments. Such a rock of principles he is.

Yes, you would need much greater rhetorical skills than Trudeau can muster to defend the obvious contradictions surrounding the Liberal position on C-51.

I can see the thinking behind their position (even thouh I hate it) and I would not say that nobody could pull it off -- but Trudeau clearly cannot not even with his own followers, many of whom bring a messianic approach to their support for him.

It would take a bullshitter of the rhetorical strength of Brian Mulroney to get away with this.

NorthReport

Liberal support is continuing to head South and their support of C51 obviously has something to do with it.  

NorthReport

That's why Frank Graves is now calling it clearly a three-way race, eh!

 

Sean in Ottawa

ajaykumar wrote:

Voters who will SHOW up to vote,won't care about his position on c51. Voters vote on money issues. The situation around the world will continue to deteriorate and I think support for c51 will not make or break an election.people care about jobs. They don't care about China, CBC, c51, keystone, daycare , proportional representation. The reason for a insignificant decline in support for Trudeau and the insignifcant increase in support for harper is that people are now starting to make up their mind about the election. Mitt Romney and Obama were in a tie before the election day. And months ahead of the election Obama had a slight edge over Romney. Look at the UK election,where the labour party was points ahead of the conservatives, and they are in a tie close to the election.

Speak for yourself AJ. I am showing up to vote and I do care about those things. I am not alone.

Pages

Topic locked