I like Dion as an individual because he appears as a model of integrity which is surely something the Liberal Party needs after years of scandal. He was an academic anomaly in Quebec by remaining a Federalist when his colleagues were mostly Sovereignists. He is unfettered by the outrageous bribery scams directed from Ottawa by cronies of Chretien and Martin. However, despite my paens I am not voting for the Liberals who always campaign from the Left while they govern from the Right. This is the party which in the early nineties committed their government to eradicating child poverty and then did everything they could to make it worse by axing our public housing program, ranked as one of the best in the world by the UN, and by downloading the other social cutbacks of the mid nineties to the provinces. Furthermore, and as Bill points out, they presided over a substantial increase in greenhouse gases after supporting Kyoto. I don't know why Glavin doesn't make reference to the above and has to ask the question why anyone should vote NDP. I'n certain Layton would do more to address poverty issues than the Liberals. Moreover, he has a suberb record on environmental issues when he sat on council in Toronto.

Regarding Reason #4 (which would be enough on its own to keep me from voting Liberal): the Liberal's betrayal of employees around the country led to Darren Entwhisle (CEO of Telus) being able to successfully break the Telecommunications Workers Union, along with a lot of help from scabs in Alberta. The new rules left the CEO with all the cards, and the workers with none. This will have severe implications for all workers in Canada. It allowed Telus to ship many good BC jobs overseas to call centres in the Philippines and elsewhere -- there will be many more such job losses in the future.

When push comes to shove, Liberals always side with Money. Dion will be no different. It's essential to have a strong NDP presence in Parliament.

Bill, Bill, the NDP are dust in the wind old chap. Layton is a national windbag, surrounded by members who are representing only special interests.

The NDP's time has come and gone; they missed the bus!

Liberal or NDP, it's a useless debate and a wasted vote. The Liberal record is clear and just because they've installed a shiny new leader means nothing. The NDP have fallen by the wayside. Why do they continually fail to point out the egregious loss of our sovereignty, or the vast theft of our common wealth by the elite? Where are they on the SPP and the NMU? It's astounding and very sad that most people refuse to look past the superficial froth of these debates.

#11, You can cast your vote and feel good that the NDP will never be involved in a scandal or corruption, on a federal level anyway, because they will never form a government.

Teleman, you are burned out hack. Get a real job for a change.

Every time someone says "The NDP will never form a gov't" I am reminded of the expression 'wishful thinking'.

As if they could be any worse the the current, or past gov'ts. Puh-leeze.

Reason #12. Both the Liberal an Cons, (Who can't make up their minds what they want to be called) have had their chance since we became a Dominion. The only times that they did anything for the people is when they were afraid of the NDP (CCF) vote. So why not give the NDP the chance to screw up (or not). The others have had their day and they continue to prove to us that neither can govern the country FOR THE PEOPLE who vote them in. JMHO

Well said! While I have to admit I like what I see in Stefan Dion thus far, what this article reminds us is who controls the real power behind the LIberal Party. Answer: big business. And big business has no interest in the public good. So just like most people we know have a conscience which they struggle with, so too must Canada have a conscience. Which is the NDP.

For the reductionists out there who seek to dumb down the complexity of democracy and argue we should only vote for a party who can win, they're simply misinformed. Such logic completely ignores the power of the Tommy Douglases of the world; the Martin Luther Kings; and all the other people in our society who stand up for others. You don't need to be in power to shame others into doing the right thing.

Thanks!

Just another great reason to vote GREEN, or even better -> if you really hate this $$$ hand-out --> VOTE INDEPENDANT and IGNORE all party afiliations!

Bill is right, in that one should always beware of the Liberals bearing gifts. The only time they ever do anything is when pushed from the left, so it would make sense to bolster the party that is to the left of them. Not that I have high hopes for the NDP or consider it very radical. One other thing, Why was David Orchard included in the list of reasons not to support the Libs? Seems to me his principled stance against the Free Trade Scam is a mark in his favor.

As much as I like Layton, it has been many years since the NDP has played a meaningful role on the national stage and it has been less than stellar on the provincial stage as well.

For many years now, the NDP should have been the obvious environmental choice in Canada, but they have been too inbred with labour to be seriously considered.

I'm not sold on it, but I am curious what one of the major parties will do with a legitimate environmentalist at the helm.

The NDP has always been the conscience of Canada and are important to the future, but it is past time for them to rethink their relationship with labour.

This article rings with fear, and I think it is justified.

Modern Serf
A point made very emphatically in Chantal Hebert's column in today's Toronto Star. Check it out:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1165619409958&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907622983

anarcho, remind me again, which left wing initiative lead to tax cuts and balanced budgets during the 90's......

Well, this is but a carry over thread from the Glavin piece, even if from an NDP perspective, where I already more or less said my bit on this subject, I'll play along with Tyee's notion of "objectivity" by merely saying that I basically agree with two other writers here.

Cynic, who actually is a realist, wrote,

And then Stump, who in response to a certain Liberal biased sentimentality which exists around Dion, counters with the no less nor more valid observation,

As if they could be any worse the the current, or past gov'ts. Puh-leeze.

Equally valid observations, I think. I don't really think the NDP would do particularly any better or worse than either the Libs or Cons. About the same.

And for those who claim that "historically" at least, where for a brief time of the old CCF especially, when it was some true, that the Liberals only produced "progressive" legislation out of fear of the NDP, I think that time has been long past, in fact. Nobody, certainly not the ruling class, and their overtly serving parties such as Lib and Con, has been seriously afraid of the NDP for a very long time now. There current reputation is more, even amongst former voters for them such as myself, one of bumbling and co-opted incompetence.

And the final proof of the pudding, regarding the real nature of the relationship between Liberal and NDP, exists in the persons of such as Bob Rae, Dosanjh and others of lower rank stature whom I know personally, who move back and forth between both parties, voting one Federally and the other provincially. (We've even heard it here in some persons.)

The fundamental reality is that both these parties, with most of the compromising movement occurring on the NDP side, are now more alike, policy and grounding ideology-wise, than they are different. Each can about equally as well behave and claim each others programmatic policies, and are about as likely to behave fundamentally the same, with only superficial difference in actual "formal" governance. Where their talk is not reflective of the actual walk they will do at government. (Where the NDP at only a slightly different pace, and with some more concern for its effect on workers, has nonetheless implemented health care cuts perhaps only marginally less than has either Lib or Con, for example. The general direction of policy development, however, has been about the same: Cutbacks, scaling down the size of government, privatization of governemt services, and even incentives and bailing out Big Corporate business (that pulp mill?) without posing any threat to bringing them under democratic worker-community control.) And nowhere is the nature of the "blending" process between all the parties, not just Liberal and NDP, though mostly these two, more obvious than with the Carole James "collaborationist opposition" in BC, and the Jack Layton "collaborationist make good corporate government work opposition" in Ottawa, where they have actually been working in legislative cooperation with the Conservatives.

Continued next post...

From previous post...

And for those who say that this has emerged as the pattern throughout the developed capitalist states, for example even in Germany-, rather than being a positive as these folks attempt to claim, it represents the same collapse of choice in the Globalized Corporate Capitalism period, and the victory of collaboration which works everywhere about equally as well against working and lower class interest. This, I suggest, is NOT a positive development.

No one here, not the least me, is denying the existance of a process of party and ideas choice homogenization that has been at work within globalized corporatist capitalism for a very long time now, certainly over the post prosperity capitalism period beginning with the early 80's. It exists.

The issue is, whether this is a good or bad thing. Clearly, I think it is a bad thing, which presents a United Ruling Class Front which all, or near all parties effectively wind up co-operating with, that works against the working and lower class, and progressive social development interest in real choice and self-governance democracy, for economic equality and power. It is a front which objectively serves to defend and advance continued ruling elite control and globalized corporatist development within capitalism.

The fact is all parties within what passes for current capitalist democracy, save perhaps the Neocon Conservatives, are now become but anaemically pale versions of their former selves, certainly Liberal and Social Democratic (NDP). (As has the "official" trade union movement become but a like aenemic version of its former glory days.)

Bill sure got the experts talking.
I do agree with most of what he said. The odds of me ever voting conservative is as likely as me going to the moon. I have never forgotten what I was told while in the military in the 50's, while on some sort of a parade. Vote Liberal or starve to death. The party some folks look on with great disdain, runs Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and will run BC before much longer. They forced the liberals to get back some social programs, and now are forcing the Cons to rewrite their legislation on climate control.

Give the NDP a chance to actually govern Canada ??????

LOL ....ad - infinitum.

That's a Comedy blockbuster in the making.

Doesn't the " Good Book" mention trusting the given stewards in small things FIRST ....and THEN large ?

HINT: Think BC and Ontario under the NDP.

Sorry, most of us would be on the outside looking in while the NDP would be the antithesis of McDonald's: Millions NOT served, " Members and special interst groups ONLY" .

NDP forming Gov't would be the fastest track to NDP extinction..(oops, DAMMIT, I shouldn't have let that secret out !!! ).

If they can't even form a decent OPPOSITION , Federally or Provincially, ...what kind of GOV'T would they make???...Jinny Sims and crew should "fail" them.

Bill:

I'm sure glad you aren't advocating for the provincial NDP in British Columbia.

Betcha couldn't. Eh?

Good article Bill, lays it all out. But be honest, you got that stuff from the debate on the Glavin thread didn't ya? :-)

LOL ....ad - infinitum.

That's a Comedy blockbuster in the making.

maestro, I used to say the same about Stockwell Day and the people who actually voted to be LED by Stockwell Day. 'nuff said.

Not unlike the provincial Liberals busily building roads and gearing up for the two weeks of white folks sliding downhill in 2010 to fatten the wallets of their members and special interest groups?

Thank-you, GWest for the Chantel Hebert link at the Toronto Star; I admire her unique take on the maccinations of the canadian political scene. She can be forgiven for her call that Ignatieff would finally take the Lib convention but she has great insight, today! Mr. Harper's call for a Fr. Can. nation did trump Ignatieff; even tho' there is no substance to this designation. Mr. Harper had the income trusts leak mended,overnight! with little feedback! Mr. Harper FINALLY gave some money to Aids research while avoiding Stephen Lewis. Mr. Harper is pretty foxy.
Now is he directing his Ag. Minister to break up the Wheat Board and maybe allow GM,terminal seeds to take over the harvest?
Bill;good thoughts on staying the course with "Jack" but Jack may be able to get some satisfaction for canadians really concerned about the environment by,as Chantal says; doing business right now with the powers that be!Maybe Jack should have lunch with (Cons.?)Garth Turner. Garth campaigned for Ms.May in the recent London election and Garth knows how the inside of the conservative gov't is working these days.I downloaded Garth's handy "environmentally friendly" booklet.
Yes, Virginia, there really is a global warming.

Do not vote for anyone who sends troops to the Middle East. Afghanistan and Iraq are bloody diversions. Canada is still being led around by the US and will suffer a similar fate. As the US army attacks Iraq, the US gov't erodes rights at home by suspending habeas corpus, stealing private lands, banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, rigging elections, conducting warrantless wiretaps and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies (these violations will flow North to Canada). Soon, another US false-flag operation will occur (sinking of an Aircraft Carrier by Mossad) and the US (with help from Canada) will invade Iran (on behalf of Israel). Vote out all war-mongers.
Final link (before Google Books bends to gov't demands and censors the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

Booker:

#4 is probably the best opportunity for the NDP to differentiate itself from the Liberals. Highlighting such issues, however, would conflict with their current strategy of trying to broaden their support by downplaying their relationship with trade unions.

Stump:

Good, then you agree.
So you want fries with that ?

That's what a reader above wrote. The thing is, the very same thing could be said about all the NDP governments this country has ever had, doncha think? Is there an example of an NDP government that didn't? Please advise.

Stump:

Gary:

Perhaps the NDP could use these quotes in their campaign literature.

Jeffrey J.

Please send this along to the NDP. This is the argument they continually use to dissuade people from voting Green.

I will never vote for the NDP under Jack Layton because of his despicable
stance on Dion's dual citizenship. He said that it's OK for ordinary Canadians to have dual citizenship but it's not OK for party leaders. What a crock.

Ten Reasons to Vote NDP - and one reason not to:

"Election.com has had other problems. In January 2003, during Canada's New Democratic Party leadership convention, the Canadian Broadcasting System reported, “Earl Hurd of Election.com said he believes someone used a "denial of service" program to disrupt the voting – paralyzing the central computer by bombarding it with a stream of data”…service was restored, then… "Toronto city councilor Jack Layton's victory on the first ballot surprised many, who had expected a second or even third round of voting before a leader was chosen from the pack of six candidates."

For election security experts, a strong and growing suspicion is that computer glitches or disruptions are actually vote rigging. A surprise election result should raise a red flag."

Source: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0307/S00140.htm

Figures Glavin would support Ignatieff.

I am myself pretty much completely disenfranchised.

anarcho:

I wondered that as well. David Orchard is an organic farmer. His political life began in the 1980s when he toured the country educating Canadians about the flaws in the Canada-US free trade agreement. One could keep worse company than his.

This has always been the case. In Saskatchewan and Mantioba they have switched to one man one vote and hence, they have held power many times.

In BC and federally, they have not. Hence they have not held power federally and only twice in BC. That point seems to be missed a lot.

Well, revsionist NDPers like to tell us that this was a period of milk and honey. Voters thought somewhat differently.

Well Frank, the article certainly lays out attacks on the Liberals and the overall gameplan of the NDP to attack and bash and attack and bash the Liberals with not a peep on the Conservatives... again... it seems to follow suit with the same old NDP failing strategy.

And there is no mention whatsoever on what the NDP has done in the past or present for any voter to consider why we should continue to vote for them beyond Tielman's ability to heavily criticize the Liberals while giving the Conservatives a bye... again.

Sometimes, when you read an article, you have to look at not so much what is there, but what isn't. As it is, there is a good healthy chunk of bias in what is there and this, combined with a complete void of criticism for the hard right ruling party of Canada, along with a complete void in terms of what the NDP has done as a party for Canada both past and present, is what disappoints me.

There's alot that should be there but isn't is already bad enough, and what is there is for the most part, challengable and debatable because of its obvious bias. This article might please an already hardcore NDP supporter, but it does nothing for someone like myself that isn't hardcore anything, other than to get rid of the sellout separatist Harper. 9 out of 10 reasons are full of bias, exaggeration and half truths, with #4 as having the only possibility as having weight to mention. A record that goes beyond accusation and until someone enlightens me as to what the anti scab bill really was, (cause Bill Tielman doesn't go there) I'm likely to think its 10 for 10. C'mon, Frank, do you really think the NDP can't do some better PR than this?

Excellent point, Beacon Hill. (I assume we're talking Beacon Hill in Victoria here-, in which I had the pleasure to live for many years. And from where my wife picked me up in a dance hall and seduced me.:-)

All parties known to me are about as equally capable of arguing out of both sides of their mouth at the same time-, and not apparently see the contradiction. It has much to do with whether it is they doing the goring, or being gored.

Many very good and insightful observations here, around the character of our "parties system" and their prevailing "vanguardist" characters. Much ado about nothing, fluff and semantics are about the sum of their difference. Other than that, they are all much more agreed than they differ on the status quo, the ruling class controlled economic system, the need to "control" the working class and its various stratas, and so-called Big Money controlled "parliamentary democracy".

None of them is out to fundamentally change society, or has any designs on doing much more than "tinkering" with the prevailing status quo. Even them as talk the talk, never deliver the walk-, unless of course you are already wealthy and want a tax cut, an austerity programme and wage freeze imposed on working folks, or other anti-working class legislation.. Then it's "Yes Sir, No Sir. Three bags full Sir. Immediatement!"

Just more same old, same old.

Working Man:

I'm not arguing against one person one vote, but I will point out that Manitoba has only had three NDP governments - one more than BC. BC has actually had more NDP Premiers.

Thanks, Coyote. Yes, my moniker is named after the park in Victoria. Which dance hall?

Quite right, Coyote. Our so called democracy is so rigged. Garth Turners website is an eyeopener in terms of how much/little MP's actually have in terms of say in policy, direction, well, anything.
garthturner.ca
As Garth states in his blogs, (Dec. 9th, and his second last entry is a good summation of whats ahead for the voter electorate as well) Every party controls its own to such a point that there is no room for self examination, no room for internal challenge... and the Conservatives are the most authoritarian of them all, by far.

Thanks as always to the many spirited Tyee commentators regarding my article here.

A few points of clarification are in order:

You may call me a "hack" but you should also consider my recent 24 hours column on the BC NDP's failings as opposition. I will continue to criticize the NDP provincial and federal where I see a need.

I'm not "burned out" however!

And I have a "real job" - running my consulting company West Star Communications successfully for nearly 9 years - yes I am a small business person.

I have no problem endorsing the BC NDP despite my criticisms - they would do significantly better than the Gordon Campbell Liberals on so many issues. The leaderless Greens, if that's what BC Mary sees as the alternative, will once again not win a seat in the provincial 2009 election, so they are not in the game in my view.

I did not crib my arguments from the Tyee reader thread on Terry Glavin's piece. Nice try:)

Stephane Dion should give up his French citizenship immediately - Layton and many others are right. An Opposition Leader and potential Prime Minister who is a citizen of another country is intolerable and is not an insult to ordinary citizens with dual citizenship.

Leadership requires a clear commitment to one country - Canada - and no others.

I predict Dion will give up his French citizenship within weeks at most.

Lastly, for those who think Dion is a "true environmentalist" I suggest you check the Liberal government record again with Dion in cabinet and check further on his environmental history before becoming that minister. I think you will find it scanty indeed.

A welcome conversion to be sure - and just in time for a leadership convention and an election!

Thanks again and season's greetings to all!

- Bill Tieleman

Seasons Greetings, Bill. :-)

P.S. You're no hack. And, uh... are you hiring by chance? I wouldn't mind supporting someone who prefers to kick sand in all of their faces regardless of color and stripe, heheheheheh...

I agree with your assessment of Dions dual citizenship as well, and wouldn't mind a tip or link on how to find out Dions voting record as MP and minister of the environment. Any leads you or anyone else could toss our way, Bill?

Baloney.
Winston Churchill always considered himself an honourary American because his mother was from the States.

Symbolic nonsense. Like the stupid pictures on 'our' money.

I'm no Liberal fan, quite the contrary; but we have too many Liberal crooks with pure Canadian citizenship that are disloyal to this country and province for me to get even the tiniest bit upset about Stephane's French citizenship.

His close personal friends from the back rooms of the BC Liberal party - now that's another matter.

Bill, why don't you come upfront with what you did during Glen Clark's government?

Washed up hack. Get a real job.

About that reason #9 would somebody remind me who triggered the election that got us this conservative gov't? oh, yes, Jack Layton... way to go, NDP strategists! (full disclosure: I did vote NDP in 2006 here in Van-Quadra)

Frank;

Your point being...?

....Given that the Reform/Conservatives ultimately evolved after post 93' electoral purgatory to where the Canadian electorate actually DID give them a chance to form a Federal Gov't.

The NDP, in my view, are becoming the political equivalent of the "Peter Principle" and have risen to their level of "U- K-NO-w What" .

Now, don't get me wrong, as they, the NDP, do have a purpose to serve in a democracy, , but then again, maybe it has already been served, and all thats left is the "cocoon shell" for posterity sake?

The NDP, again in my view, has no " Brand identity", no " Brand recognition " any more, to use a capitalist term. The other political parties have usurped the UNpatented NDP thunder and merged, or perhaps plucked,the useful and pragmatic portions of the NDP ideology/manifestos etc.

This is much like the merger of Chrysler and Daimler Benz, and on par with the hybrid joke of "if you own a Chrysler economy car, can you also concurrently claim to drive a Mercedes?"

Has the evolving, or perhaps de-evolving NDP support been reduced to balkan factions of (i) Class warfare in Urban Settings or (ii) those supporters in rural areas that feel disenfranchised by the Urban -Centric focus after they feel they have been exploited like a quasi Gold Rush.

Is the NDP, circa 2006 + a "Conscience", OR...a " party of Protest",...or " simply on Life Support " as it continually pisses into the winds of change ?

I am disgusted that anyone would even consider voting for Stephane Dion. It is obvious that he does not care about Canada because he has the audacity to hold a French passport.

I understand now why he has never done anything to promote Canadian unity. To ensure traitors like he can never be elected, I suggest a minimum five generations in Canada before one can stand for public office.

I can just imagine if he were Prime Minister: when he wasn't signing international trade agreements that would only benefit France, he would be missing important votes in the House of Commons because of his obligation to be overseas celebrating French national holidays.

One was the old Knights of Pythias Hall, and another the Starlite Ballroom-, upstairs on Governments St. near Yates. But the one where the Mrs. made her moves on me , young innocent that I was, my first night in Victoria after being transferred to Esquimalt off the aircraft carrier HMCS Magnificent, out of Halifax, was further towards Chinatown on Government and about Fisgard. (Can't remember some of the more obscure streets anymore. A brick hall as I recall.)

And ehh, there were so many navy and army types in Victoria, maybe still, that the ladys could pretty much pick and choose as they pleased, and knew it. So to actually get hit on, my first night in town, was pretty good, I thought. B-D lol.

What!?!? Gotta be fifty years ago!?!?

Just a lad, scarcely two years off the farm I was. Which doesn't mean I didn't know what it was down there for-, probably better than a city kid. :-)

Working Man is working up a head of steam. He says:

"Bill, why don't you come upfront with what you did during Glen Clark's government?

Washed up hack. Get a real job."

I've always been upfront - I was communications director in the office of Premier Glen Clark when we came from 30 % points back of Gordon Campbell and won the election. I left government shortly thereafter and went back to work at the BC Federation of Labour until 1998 when I formed West Star Communications, which is a profitable consulting firm - a real job!

Hardly a secret Working Man.

Thanks to the Brain for those comments.

I am led to believe that when he was NOT environment minister Stephane Dion spoke just 4 times in the House of Commons on environmental issues - in support of government initiatives and never once on Kyoto!

Searching the voting record and speaking occasions is possible through Hansard. Here's a starting point - but a long link:

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/housechamberbusiness/ChamberSittings.aspx?View=H&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=39&Ses=1

There is no question in my mind that the NDP has failed in its strategy to gain seats and popular votes from where it was a year ago. The key strategy for the NDP has been, especially since Latyon has taken over, is attack the Liberals with everything you've got... except your own record, or giving the true left a counter alternative with opposition to the hard right Conservatives.

G West's link with Chantal 'Hebert's view offers the major challenges ahead of them to diametrically oppose Harpers government as they have now painted themselves in a corner that forces them not do buddy up with them and they should have seen this coming.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1165619409958&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907622983

In terms of economical/environmental future strategies, I'm pretty much dead center, trying to look at whats best for everyone, not just the poor or working class socialists, but even the rich, yes, especially the rich, as their own greed, if allowed to run amuck would ruin us all. But when it comes to Canadian sovereignty, education, social programs, healthcare and government spending, I'm hard left and for the NDP to side with Harper and offer to extend his powers with any kind of support at all, knowing what his true agenda is which is to axe any boards or regulatory legislation that protects Canada's markets from multinationals (U.S. ownership), or the privatization of the CBC (possibly even to Canwest now that they are sitting on 1.1 billion), or the decentralization of federal powers, or ambitions to fracture and divide this nation far more so than it is already... than what can I say? Where is a hard lefty like me to go? It won't be with any party that supports Harper in any way, shape or form, especially to power itself.

Am I the only one who see's that the NDP with its balance of power scenario in a minority government, is better suited to influence government policy with a Liberal government and not a Conservative one? I think not. But if the NDP doesn't see it... Here we see an NDP party that constantly attacks the Liberals while turning a blind eye to Conservatives motives and agenda in the media, the former leadership debates in the last election, with their own actions of trying to support a Conservative government that will never support leftist agenda's and never will... am I the only one out there who believes the NDP's best chance of influencing policy lies with a Liberal minority?

It is for this reason that I feel that the NDP is not representing the left in the way it should... to oppose the right and go after the right "with everything they've got" and that rights includes the Conservative party of this country, not just the Libs where they feel their support would come from.

Just look at this article as an example. Not one mention of their supposed truest enemy, the hard neocon right wingnutted Harper infested Conservatives. And its not just the Bill Tielmans that think this way. Its the entire NDP party braintrust and boy oh boy, if you can't at least act like your left handed and identify who your worst enemies are (like say the current rihtwing government of Canada?) you will have no ability whatsoever to unite the left under an NDP banner which has traditionally been their base support.

The latest news from the G7M mentions the opposition might well gang up on Harpo and team and force an elecion sooner rather than later.I can't recall which issue, so all of us experts will get to mark a ballot, if in fact all the experts bother to vote.

The enemy within often trumps the perceived enemy outside.

There won't be a telethon for those that can't get their own shite together...nor shite in their own nest as well as just others' nests.

NDP : R.I. ____. ?

Thanks for the link, Bill. And if you're looking for some young (only semi partial bias) journalistic talent, I'd be more than willing to consider any offers you could throw my way in these regards (even though I may criticize your own work from time to time). ;-)

It is funny how people who cannot make substantial arguments against someone bring up relatively minor issues like dual citizenship. This looks like desperation. Dion has the potential to take votes away from the NDP and the Tories so let us bring up his citizenship. Rather low, an insult to all the Canadians who happen to have dual citizenship, an attempt to divide Canadians and to exploit the anti-French feelings in the West. Perhaps we should remember the times when Canadians citizens who happened to be of non-British origins were placed in internment camps because their loyalty to Canada was questioned: the Ukrainians Canadians during World War I and the Japanese Canadians during World War II. A good deal for the good Canadians who confiscated their properties and belongings. What is happening today with respect to Stephane Dion, and recently with respect to Michaelle Jean, is not that different: incite fear of those who are different, especially if you are envious of their achievement. One could expect this attitude from some of the Tories, not from the NDP, but here they are, catering to the worst in people. Very disappointing. Shamefull actually.

Truest enemy brain?

Who's been in power for most of the last 100 years? Not the Conservatives, or even the NEO conservathieves.

As a matter of fact, its been the Liberal ant the Neo Liberals for most of that time. Tell us some more about that Green government of theirs.

I dunno where you get the idea that Liberals are your friends, they're not.

They have all the friends they can handle on Bay street and Howe street.

Check your history man.

Oh, but they aren't my "friends", persay, Alchibiades... but I most certainly know who my enemies are, and I most certainly know who presently governs this country and its not the Liberals.

For what its worth, social cuts haven't been happening under a Liberal watch this year. Its the Cons who are all over that one, and you had better ask just how social spending got there to begin with. Sure, the NDP can claim intitiative all they want, but they can't claim stamp of approval. And history teaches that one well.

Didn't work well in 2001 did it?

Or 2005.

Or 2009.

The biggest problem facing the NDP is a lack of new ideas. Fearing to go left, into the territory of the social movements, it can only go right, to become the smiley face of neoliberalism. Thus, is created the ideological convergence that Coyote writes about.

You see, that's just it, Alchibiades. The NDP wants Liberal blood. I want Conservative blood to spill and that means replacing them with the lesser of two evils. Is the NDP going to do it? Become the next governing party of Canada in 2007?

And no, blaming the Liberals for how people vote in terms of strategy just isn't going to cut it anymore. At some point, the NDP is going to have to take credit for its own shortcomings and in terms of doing so or lack thereof, they are like all the rest. Blame everyone but themselves in hindsight, after its already far to late just won't cut it. It is, in fact, rather ordinary, if you get my drift.

And who is or does a better job (or should I say more appropriately the least worst job) of governing? The Conservatives? The Liberals? To people like Frank, there is no difference, when over and over again, we see the Cons cut social spending and the Liberals introduce social spending and sure, they cut their own spending initiatives... of course, their record of governance is full of failures... as all governing parties are. But which party is ultimately worse for this country? The NDP can claim birth to social spending all it wants, but the Libs gave it its stamp of approval and the Cons will never give it at all.

Can you well imagine what kind of social spending we would have under Harper? Think about that one just for one minute and tell me, Alchibiades, that my strategy to replace them with those ever so evil Liberals is deluded thinking. We give the Liberals a minority, we can influence them. There is a left leaning component, regardless of what the NDP exaggerators say. We give the Libs a majority... and we actually still have social programs that survive. We give the Cons a majority, and we won't even have a country left to vote for.

There's no difference... what utter complete and total crap. There is a left leaning component to the Liberal party, Alchibiades, and there isn't such a thing in the Con government (at least, by the time Harper's done booting the few of them out). You should begin to ask why that is... and it sure isn't because the NDP is offering the left leaning liberals a hardline left alternative to oppose the hard right neo cons of this country.

I'll say this from here on in until I'm blue in the face in this site. The NDP has to be openly critical of all rightwing agenda's, particularly the Conservatives moreso than the Liberals. This PRESENT time demands it. They might have been wise to go after the Libs when they were in power, especially with a majority governments but times have changed dramatically and their strategy is now dated as a result.

The NDP has to remind voters of their past record accomplishments where they exist, even and especially so dating back to universal healthcare, EI, labour and the international arena... and reassure voters that they will continue to preserve and protect these area's of social spending. They have to get their message out on FN's, poverty, and the environment, even when it mirrors the platforms of the greens and Libs. They have to conduct themselves far better in terms of conduct with leadership debates than they have, and quit playing exaggerative politics. They are quite simply, fucking around when they should stick to the facts. People see through it, just as they see through the same rhetoric from the Libs (and unfortunately to a lesser degree, the Cons). Above all, this party has to get back to the principles for which it was born, to be the voice of those who cannot speak for themselves and if they can't do it, they don't deserve leftist support, other than futures in terms of their ability to someday get back to common sense as an opposition to worst case scenarios. More and moreso, the NDP is seen as opportunists for power over results for their own agenda and that's bad for them, G. How do you think the Cons went extinct for a decade?

the Brain
We've been there before. The Liberals made so many unnecessary cuts to social programs along with the unnecessary cuts to corporate tax rates during the 90s that they still have a lot to live down.

Harper is doing pretty well messing up on his own though, I will give you that.
Except for Income Trusts, where he showed more toughness relative to business and corporations than Martin and Goodale ever did.

I just can't get that shrill display in the house in favour of the folks who are robbing this country out of my mind.

Makes me wonder what Liberals are all about, don't you find the same thing yourself?

I'm no Harpo fan either - the NDP (and every other small party) has a tough job doing as well as it can given the electoral system which the 2 big parties always promise to reform but never quite get around to doing. I don't understand why you have a problem criticizing them both, if you get right down to it.

But go ahead, move your vote from the NDP to the Liberals, just don't blame me when it helps Harper win more seats - I'm all for a coalition - but I want some kind of a binding agreement first. I just don't trust Liberals...or conservatives for that matter.

How about it Brain?

As a "captive" NDP voter I find it depressing that an article titled Ten Reasons to Vote NDP actually states none. The article might accurately be headlined Ten Reasons to Vote Against the Liberals, since every point attacks them (fair enough) but not one points to an NDP positive. This is at best an article in favour of Anyone But the Liberals, and surely would reinforce any partisan bias in favour of the Conservatives or Greens as much as the NDP.

It is a poor excuse for a pitch for the NDP, but it is a typical NDP argument. The dismal truth is that the NDP has been coasting since Tommy Douglas articulated a progressive vision for Canada, one that he could back up with his record in government in Saskatchewan. Also, Tommy Douglas was the last NDP leader who could get a laugh from an audience because he intended to. He was, at heart, not an obstructionist or a natural oppositionist -- he wanted to get things done and he did.

The Glavin/Teileman argument -- if mud-slinging is argument -- is a approach largely irrelevant to electoral strategizing based on a fascination with the structures of U.S. politics -- a system that is too cleverly constructed by half. Tyee commentators often seem to mistake our governance for the republic to the south. But we don't vote in a strategic battle for electoral college votes to determine a four-year king. Luckily, we live in a parliamentary democracy where I can make my decision based on the merits of my riding candidates. And once elected -- especially if a minority government results -- MPs can bring down a government on a moment's notice. Or, out of conviction or for ambition, MPs can resign from their party and cross the floor. Tyee readers generally cheered when Belinda Stronach did it, booed when it was my riding's MP, David Emerson.

These few points illustrate the fluidity of our system, and the lack of need to affiliate unduly with a national party. For years I lived in Vancouver East where Libby Davies is such an obvious choice for anyone whose political credo is anyone but Harper.

We are governed best when we have minority governments, for at least two reasons: 1) Parliament itself must find compromises in order to function and 2) citizens find the political soap opera of minority government more engaging -- we get more excited about politics the more it looks like the NHL playoffs.

So vote for whomever strikes your fancy. But, contrary to the spirit betrayed by Mr. Tieleman, vote FOR someone, not against them.

To borrow and extrapolate from Howard Dean (of which I dont have to, I was saying this for years before him), good people don't do whats popular... they do whats right. And in so doing, popularity finds them. What is the NDP waiting for? Why support broken down hot air bills and western separatist NCC U.S. sellout PM's? Why do they risk alienating their own? People see through the bitterness in the rivalries and all the rest, but I have to ask you, in this present time, whatever happened to the natural left/right rivalry in this country from the NDP? Even in this province, the provincial opposition is eerily silent. Ya know?

And as for imaginative platforms, their environmental changes are kneejerk reactions to the Greens. Their social spending is hopelessly over budget leaving strong impressions to bean counters that any kind of NDP government would be a deficit spending one, and one has to ask if the government is to raise the bar on welfare and EI and healthcare and womens rights and human rights, and international donations and on and on, how much so throwing money at the problems we now have will make them go away. The kids raised by drunks and addicts will still be skipping what should be meals. The spendthrifts will still be mismanaging their money. The lazy will still be lazy. And the red ink will still handicap their ability to do so.
Where is the NDP stance on organized crime? How can you balance stiffer laws with offenders, with swollen jails and the possibility that it is in fact counter productive for society not only financially, but with actual inmate reform?
Where is the NDP position on Quebec? Fiscal imbalance? Homelessness and drugs? Taxation, corporate, personal and otherwise? And environmentally, there is the provincial example that takes them more center than hard left, revealling themselves to look more like Liberals when it comes to actual governance anyways, and no, I'm not talking about this province, as this bunch of Campbell fools are Conservatives, through and through.

To that end, I would love to see Layton add to his lackluster bag of tricks:
1) A continuous advertizing of his platform with the NDP's online website.
2) To back off of all negativity, unless he is forced to defend his position.
3) Attack the Cons with an ideological vengance and give the Liberals a halfassed bye, except on environmental issues.
4) Take credit for the good things the NDP has done in the past.
5) Beef up their platform.
6) Goes without saying, run better candidates. People like myself vote more for candidates than parties and in this way, he has an in to attack the Liberals, as they obviously don't screen their own like they should (especially in Quebec).
7) Take on the separatists in this country, east AND west, they are far to silent in this front, the Libs are stealing the show.
8) Offer solutions to well known problems. Keep the wheatboard, but open up the market to CANADIAN grainhandlers in western Canada, as an example.
9) Introduce an accountability act of their own. Introduce an environmental spending plan of their own. A military peace keeping plan and exit strategy for Afghanistan, and a clear international donations plan. Christ, just shop and compare political platforms, in some places they are deficient, shore it up!
9) Above all, quit playing opportunistic politics and BE the principled exemplar.
10 Unite the left. This last one should be their number one goal. We already have center and right wing parties in this country. Until they really, and I mean really make an effort to do so, they won't grow, and it won't come through negative advertizing or rhetoric. It will come by polarizing themselves purposely with the right wing agenda's of both the Conservatives (especially them) and the right wing ideology of the Liberals (where it exists). The Con renewal and united right was the best thing to ever happen to the NDP. Exploit it!

Alchibiades, you already lost me when you mentioned cuts, as I assume you meant Chretien's majority government actions in 93', we've been there, I feel they were justified at the time and still do. As for social spending, it began to increase just as corporate taxation (which the Liberals had raised previous) was lowered.

Show me the toughness in allowing existing income trusts 4 years worth of tax dodges that can disappear 4 years from now with a snap of a finger...

Wore off on me a long time ago. It was separatist driven, of which, by the way, Gomery was the biggest 24hr running soap on Quebec TV last year. All it reveals to me is that the Liberals are not paying attention to who is running for office. They let the likes of David Emerson and the crooked bunch of backbenchers from Quebec run for their party. That's the real stain. They aren't screening their running candidates enough and until they do, I won't forget it.

Of course, I wonder about they are all about. They talk this and do that. But what I don't wonder about is Harper. His lies are ugly and his truth is even uglier.

If you think the electoral system doesn't favor a small party like say the Bloc? And do you have a deficit disorder? I have my fair share of criticisms for the Libs and Cons, but most definitely much more so for the Cons. As for NDP criticisms, we've just had two articles to comment on that opens the door for NDP feedback both good and bad. What, I'm not going to go there? Its going to be all praise for the NDP, like they are setting the world on fire? Better open your eye's, Alchibades... the NDP deserves their lumps, just like all the rest.

Just me has hit all the nails on their heads. I couldn't have said it better myself. I have most saying it in a more negative bent, 'cause this article mirrors the current NDP strategy of the day... and its most definitely not working.

brain,

Why would it bash the Conservatives? its a rebuttal to an article that claims NDPers should vote Liberal. Is there a danger of large sections of the NDP joining the Conservatives? Its the Liberals that lie about their platform to wipe out the NDP, not the Conservatives.

Such as no solutions to world peace? Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Its not targeted at Liberals, its targeted at NDP supporters that have gone to the Liberals.

This article is not an NDP campaign any more than the Glavin article wasn't part of Dion's campaign.

I can't imagine anyone calling themselves a "hard lefty" voting for the Libs and defending Paul Martin.

Humour me and address the issue of Alexa and Audrey not going after the Liberals and what the result was as far as NDP political fortunes go. You may think a Liberal minority gov't is the best thing for the NDP but you're basing that on what happened several decades ago and ignoring recent history. People who want a minority Lib gov't are going to vote Liberal. Period.

As maestro says, a rejuvenated Liberal party will destroy the NDP, as the polls since Dion became leader demonstrate.

I'm not a Liberal supporter. When I read this article, however, I was hoping that at least some of the 10 reasons would be actual reasons to vote for the NDP - and not just more reasons to not vote for Dion.

Let's get some of the good things out about the NDP out in print, please. I'm tired of negativity.

So you and Working Man agree. however, you're ignoring the history of 3rd parties under first-past-the-post systems. In other words its too easy to simply blame all the 3rd parties of the english speaking world. The system only accomodates a 2 horse race.

And this brain is where you go wrong. The Libs are not going to introduce any new social spending whatsoever without a threat from the Left. There is simply no reason to believe otherwise. Without the NDP being on the scene the friction point is the swing voters between the Libs and Cons. Unless THOSE voters want new social spending it won't happen.

Guess the truth hurts.

For reasons that should be obvious, the NDP are going to get clobbered by the Liberals in the next election. Perhaps the most pressing reason is the realization on the part of the great majority of thinking Canadians that it is absolutely imperative we rid ourselves of HarBush and his gang of inept neo-cons.

Which is exactly why a two party system doesn't work. In some provinces the NDP has sometimes replaced the Libs. What has it meant? That the NDP ends up looking much like the party they replaced.

That sure worked for Audrey and the Liberals.

Again, that sure worked for Audrey, Alexa and the Libs.

We don't do that now?

Do you have evidence the NDP is turning down good candidates in favour of bad ones?

They have united the Left. there are no other left-wing parties that get more than 50 votes in a riding.

straightshooter,

The only effect will be to rid ourselves of the NDP. The Cons will survive just fine. As for the Libs they will be back in power and not have to worry about bleeding votes to the dead NDP so they can concentrate on wooing right-wing voters.

Good times

Brain.
I wasn't talking about Gomery - I'm sure you've forgotten that. I was talking about all the Liberal members and their interim leader Bill Graham screaming blue murder at Flaherty and Harper over the changes to income trusts. Now that was memorable.

Those were the guys doing their masters' bidding that I was talking about. As to the softness of the corporate landing for those same trusts - I don't disagree - but it's a hell of a lot harder 'blow' than Ralph Goodale delivered a year and a half earlier.

I'm surprised you've forgotten all about Gomery by the way; isn't that a little inconsistent for someone who seems to spend most of his time attacking the 4th party in the House of Commons.

Further, I don't accept your categorization of the Bloc - check out their percentage of the popular vote in Quebec – I think they are firmly in ‘first’ place there - an awful lot of the blame for which has to rest on your Liberal friends by the way.

Your point being...?

....Given that the Reform/Conservatives ultimately evolved after post 93' electoral purgatory to where the Canadian electorate actually DID give them a chance to form a Federal Gov't.

Evolved? All the Conservatives did was breakup and then reform after 10 years of not being in power. Not exactly a dictionary definition of a "3rd party". Perhaps the breakaway Cons just ran out of ideas after a long 10 years?

Apparently many believe the same as you guys on the Right. That the NDP has served its purpose and we should not dissolve and join the Liberals and say goodbye to social democracy, Keynesianism and socialism and instead embrace the new economics of Friedman that the Liberal Party of Canada vehemently agrees with.

Again, although I disagree, its apparent from our dropping numbers that many want to be Liberals now.

the split doesn't seem to have anything to do with urban/rural, its hard Left and soft Left. But since you brought up urban/rural how is it you guys on the Right stay united even though the guy on a farm in Alberta has nothing in common politics-wise with a Bay Street executive?

As for the oft-repeated chant that the NDP has no new ideas. I know my Cdn history pretty well and I have to ask, what new ideas have come forward from the Lib-Cons?

Just me:

Congratulations on having the best post of the day.

No one ever votes FOR someone anymore.

We're far too cynical for that. We vote against the last bunch of rascals who've tried our patience once too often. The NDP, more is the pity, have never had the chance to screw up the way the Liberals and the Conservatives have been doing serially since the first CPR scandal hit the wires before the turn of the century before last.

If people had voted for decent policies and new ideas, the CCF would have been elected in the 1940s and again several other times since. There are too many selfish Ron Erwins in this country right now and the stupid selfish people get the same number of votes as the clever generous thoughtful ones.

I don't think that was such a good post Beacon Hill, but no offence to you or its writer.

Stephen Harper hasn’t screwed up badly enough yet and, the good-hearted souls who post here to the contrary, I think he’ll get his majority.

I know it will be bad, maybe fatal, for the whole country – but don’t say I didn’t tell you so.

Those who claim that the NDP has outlived its usefulness remind me a lot of those who assert that trade unions are no longer necessary. The implication is that workers can now put their trust in enlightened employers while working class voters can safely rely on the Liberal Party to look after their interests.

Hardly a credible theory, nor one that I'd care to put to the test.

Are you insinuating that voters have forgotten the inept Liberals already?
Eventually it will be obvious to most, that they are both serving the same masters!
the Greens are a one issue party, so like it or not the NDP is the only salvation, before we all go to hell in a handbasket

Alive

Believe me, it gives me no pleasure to say this, but if the NDP as it currently exists ever gained power in this country you would see ineptitude beyond words.

And what precisely is your authority for that statement?

We should look to Paul Martin for a guide in how to run a government? or to Jean Chretien? Or Stephen Harper? Or Brian Mulroney? Or Kim Campbell? Or Joe Clark?

How could the NDP do worse, please, tell me.

As a matter of fact, looking at the precedents of socialist governance in this country, you could hardly find a more signal example of fiscal responsibility that the Saskatchewan government(s) of Tommy Douglas.

Alternatively, would you prefer the model of Grant Devine? On the other hand, perhaps Gordon Campbell, who is, while staying out of the public eye as much as humanly possible, managing to sell British Columbia's assets to his friends and neighbours at fire sale prices.

What, straightshooter, are you talking about?

10 reasons not to vote ndp. bill tieleman, david schreck, adrian dix, harry lali, jack layton, olivia chow, ed broadbent, corky evans, glen clark, david zirnheldt, ujjal dosanjh, oh wait a minute...

Anarcho wrote,

Which is an interesting way of putting it.

In any case, even reading here one can see that the NDP truly is in serious trouble, even amongst folks who really, really want to vote NDP. I'm not going to get into it again, just because I think the reasons are clear enough.

Okay, you talked me into it. :-)

But what it does mean, in near absolute certainty, if this is true, that we are about to go back again to a majority Liberal government, such as we've had through most of our history, as Frank and GWest point out, and such as has brought us to here-, to this state of the betrayal of the country, and social deterioration. More than any other, this has been a Liberal, the traditional governing party of Canadians, achievement.

And while that would be regrettable, only some less than another Harper Neocon term, because I basically tend to agree with Just Me when he says of our status quo "parliamentary system",

And they actually generally have (past tense) benefitted more too, if by no other means, the slowing down and derailing of the more reactionary schemes and elements of the ruling class agenda.

Which, upon until the recent primary ideological convergence of all the parties of capitalism, across the entire spectrum-, save again maybe the Neocons, was true. Though, one of the consequences of the convergence is now that, this is no longer likely, and certainly "less" true. (For what has replaced it more is a new phenomena of, "You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours." of more or less friendly, playing the game, acting out, gentlemanly and ladylike maneuvering. It's those Puppet Masters again who are slowly managing, by maintaining a steady rightward moving pressure, to turn even classic "people benefiting" minority governance, around a full 180 degrees, to their benefit, at only some additional inconvenience to and preference for a majority government which can function in their interest, with near complete disregard for "the people".

So, my own view is, that we are finally arriving at a place in the evolution of the politics of "Post Prosperity Period" Capitalism, where it doesn't really matter which party or combination thereof you elect, majority or minority, you are going to get fundamentally, with some minor, even inconsequential exceptions, the same set of policy results-, Conservative, Liberal, NDP or Green. They will, as they have for awhile now actually, talk some differently in the run-up to power, but act more or less the same Neocon drifting right same in so-called power.

Continued next post...

From previous post...

It's why, for the first time in my long involvement and preoccupation with politics, I can actually seriously contemplate not participating in the next election, by not voting, and think that is more likely, certainly if that 40% about non-participation figure grows, to have a more long run positive effect than actually participating in what is here passing for democracy within late stage capitalism. I have not actually thought that was possible as a serious political alternative to here, right now.

It is what I advocate for seriously, however, for myself and other brave souls who have arrived at the same intellectual level of understanding, in this next upcoming general election.

Some serious changes, which I certainly do not expect, by way of a serious leftward movement within the NDP or some other credible party, challenging the status quo and ruling class Neocon policy set within current capitalism, would cause me to review this stepping outside what passes for bourgeois democracy. But uh uh, it ain't gonna hoppen, because they have already come too far along the road to being Liberals, what that leadership has really wanted for a long time now anyway. And their current "public" refusal to acknowledge the Liberals, by shunning them basically, is really a child's way of acting out, 'cause they won't let him actually in the yard to play with them.

Enough of the bullshitt already! This isn't a serious, actual democracy. This is what we have merely contented ourselves with, in the absence of the real article. It is what we have allowed to pass for democracy-, come down to us from the rising merchant class, its compromise with the old Monarchist and feudal aristocratic system of 17th Century England, fer fux sake.

I'm moving on, if even the rest of you ain't-, as much as I can anyway. :-) lol

sounds to me like the old coyote's been dipping into the dandelion wine again.

Alcibiades

one word:

POWER

They will use every trick and tool to get it and keep it.

Always have, always will.

G West:

who is this 'no one'?

I do and I think always will.

I try to learn about the candidates, I pay some attention to the parties (and their leaders - I always hear the Simpsons refrain that follows the batman theme from the 60's "nah-nah, nah-nah, nah-NAH, Leader, LEADER, LEAD-ER!") but since we 'legally' vote for a person and not a party here in Canada, knowing something about them and their views is more important.

Sadly not enough of the rest of the electorate seems to care.

I think that the voters of Vancouver-Kingsway will be paying closer attention from now on though.

alive

Are you insinuating that voters have forgotten the inept Liberals already?
Eventually it will be obvious to most, that they are both serving the same masters!
the Greens are a one issue party, so like it or not the NDP is the only salvation, before we all go to hell in a handbasket

alive, I think you should get those asbestos mukluks out from storage, cuz I agree with G West the current political winds are not blowing much into the NonDP nor the LIEberal sails...

Coyote,

Run for parliament, it only costs $1000.

As an independant candidate you need not listen to any leader, nor do you have to kowtow to any 'special interest'.

Were i to have more immediate finances I would try again myself (looked into it at the last one, but it was so close to the 'silly season' {xmas} I was hard pressed to get the volunteers to commit - - I think 'smilin' Jack wanted it that way...

Then you are one of the very very few my friend. People get exercized about voting because they want the opportunity to throw a particular bunch of jackasses out on their butts. Proved time and time and time again. In every jurisdiction I've ever studied. The few exceptions one can point to (chuck cadman for example) simply prove the rule.

Frank, Frank, Frank...
nice to hear from you, by the way, brother :-) flexing fingers for an attempt at rebuttal.

And when the NDP goes on the unprovoked personal attacks, they attack their own, I get your point!

It may as well be. Not much difference, if any.

I didn't define my center defined leanings with the economy/environment?
And socially, am I to believe that the Liberal party of Canada had nothing to do with the social policies of this country whatsoever? C'mon, Frank, its a stretch.

Well, now, since you're taking the same gameplan of being nice until provoked and putting it into different political environments, naturally, one can expect a much greater possiblity of a failed plan. Tell me, how can any opposition party not go after the Liberals when they are the only real opposition party in the house is was the case with two majority Chretien governments? Are you... making fun of my ability to reason? A child could catch onto the fact that when you have a Liberal MAJORITY government, that you have no choice but to go after them as leading party opposition!

And who's in power now, Frank... my memory is short, as G West claims, so it must be true. Please tell us who's actually governing the country. Is it still the Libs?

And those Liberals of which you say on one hand has no left, or left support, and on the other hand has NDP'ers defecting to the Liberals, well, I guess that must be the right wingers of the party, eh, Frank? And yes, there is absolutely no lefty intiative at all whatsoever within the Liberal party, the NDP most poke and prod them for everything, at least as you say...
Cont.

Frank: Cont.

At times. He's a right wing Liberal for sure, is my take. He's frugal with his opinions on spending, and he's anti union to be sure, as of which I can't understand why. Love 'em or hate 'em, they are needed. So their structure gets abused by individuals who abuse power and position as it is with all power structures, corporate, union, political parties, public office or otherwise. All institutions have a level of corruption. I have to question why he has such a bias towards them, along with some other pontifications of his, but I do see Working man as a patriot of this country and for what its worth, can't see how any patriot could truly support Harper. And on that note, for whatever reason, you don't seem to see the danger to Harper either, at least until there's no country left to inherit if he ever does get a majority which I'm beginning to believe its what you want. You know, decimate the country to ashes so that the proud left can reform and I don't know, try to pathetically pick up a bunch of smashed pieces... I'm sorry man, I'm just not willing to risk the break up of this country the way I percieve you would to prove a bitter point. And its really like that, Frank. But hey, just keep selling the "there's no difference between Cons and Libs" snow job so that that NDP can shoot up the middle. A few might listen.

And when they both fail? We just had the Libs go through Gomery. The Cons are showing their stripes, but usually people have to go without food and shelter (along with a bunch of shrunken stock portfolio's) before they get the point. In other words, the Cons would have to govern for a few years to see their failing economic policies come home to roost and the Libs would have to do the same, for a repeat of '88'. And for what its worth, when we have a PM that would like to see this nation become the 53rd state and that should be cause for concern even for you. As Michael Moore puts it, "Stephen Harper should be running for governor of Utah, not the PM of Canada. Are Canadians really this slow?"

Yes, I guess those NDP defectors towards the Libs must have been the "righties" of the party. And naturally, the liberals have no lefties of their own. Yes, guys like Kennedy who ran a food bank for 10 years don't qualify. Yes, whatever would this country do if it wasn't for the NDP holding the Liberals hands on social policy.

Apparently. But it won't come from me. Those election polls will tell the tale well beyond our ramblings.

Frank: (cont.)

To that, we are agreed.

Only in your dreams, Frank. If it was so and the NDP united the left, they would likely have a majority government, most certainly a minority. I would venture to say that at least 30% of this country is left, if they ever actually looked at how left is defined. The percentage could be higher, maybe as high as the mid forties.

And while there are no quote unquote "left wing parties" other than the NDP, there most certainly is a left wing "base" in the Liberal party. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be a social policy in existence in this country today.

Who is it that claims the Liberals are forced to introduce social policies in this country because of the NDP? If this was the case, and the country would mutiny from the Libs in not doing so, then that would mean that the actual left in this country is hovering around 30 - 40%! So where is this great percentage of popular vote? I don't see it with the NDP. Please, tell me where this great, united left is occuring? I haven't seen any evidence of a united left whatsover, but division between the Libs and NDP... so tell me, how is the NDP going to bash the choices of its own to wave a red flag and expect its own to come back to them?

Again, if the NDP doesn't change its tactics and try uniting the left through the direct challenge of the currently governing right, I see no way for the NDP to increase their base, never mind hold their previous support and the way the polls are going, it doesn't look good for the NDP.

With this quote alone, nothing seems to come further from the truth, and I won't be the one rubbing your nose in it. The polls and votes will speak for themselves. The NDP, simply put, is in trouble and they had better find a way to change it fast and pray for the balance of power with fewer seats, or their own future as a party could come into serious question.

This is exactly the point I have been making on this site for the past couple of years. The NDP has to appeal to a wider section of voters than it does now in order to form governments. You do not win elections by preaching to the choir, something lost of the NDP.

It is also very much a policy issue. It is pretty obvious the NDP's policies do not appeal to 80% (give or take) of the voters.

Even more obvious and completely lost on the NDP and it supporters is that you can have all the wonderful and progressive policies in the world but you cannot enact them unless you form a government.

That is not exactly true. My business does not need a union and my employees do not want one. They see no need to send a portion of their pay to the USA every month. If there were a bad employer mistreating his/her employees then there may be a need for a union.

Canadian unions seem to be more representative of Canadian workers than American ones.

"Lastly, for those who think Dion is a "true environmentalist" I suggest you check the Liberal government record again with Dion in cabinet and check further on his environmental history before becoming that minister. I think you will find it scanty indeed."

Dion, like everyone else in parliment, is a politician. You can't reach anykind of leadership position without making major compromises. Dion's successful leadership bid success occurred because of his environmental pitch. Others will now have to compromise with him!

The best hope to move our country forward is to elect the Liberals into power. You could argue whether a minority or majority would be better, but we cannot continue with the religious right in power. Go see Happy Feet if you are uncertain why. Maybe it's time for progressive lefties to start joining the Liberals in an attempt to change it from within. Might be more effective than the NDP.

The Left is nowhere near 40% of the country brain. WM says 80% of the country disagrees with the Left and I would say he's correct. Currently, the Left probably makes up around 10% of the population and the protest-Left another 10-15%.

That's pretty much all united under the NDP. There is no room for growth. On the one hand you would have to abandon left-wing policies which is what WM always says. Yet we already have a Liberal party occupying the ground on which the NDP would then move to. So the end result would not mean winning an election as you and WM both seem to think would happen, the end result would be no seats at all and the end of the party. Meanwhile the Left would simply form another party to represent itself.

However, what you want is for the Left-wing voters themselves to abandon the NDP and move their own politics rightward and become Liberals. Sure, that would make sense if life and politics was a contest and you simply redesign your thinking so that you're on the winning team. However, "winning" such an election by all becoming Liberals would not feel like victory at all as my thinking and ethics haven't changed.

As there is in the Democratic Party of the US. However, it doesn't make policy. Because to woo new voters you have to adopt policies that appeal to the voters in between your party and the next one. That is what makes US politics a Tweedledum and TweedleDee thing and is what you're asking for here. Left-wing voters in the US have nowhere to go and the other Democrats know it so the only social legislation that ever gets enacted down there is that which appeals to the voters at the friction point between the Dems and Republicans.

I should add, I know you both already understand this point because you make it yourselves.

However, it doesn't just apply to the NDP as you suggest. It also applies to the Democrats and the Libs. They don't get elected appealing to their base, they have that regardless, that's why its called a base. You get elected by appealing to swing voters. In the case of the NDP that means moving to the Right. In the case of a Lib-NDP merger that would also mean moving to the Right. I don't understand why you would see any other outcome.

It depends upon how you look at it Frank. Certainly the percent of the population that votes for The Left comes to about 20-25% max, but if you look at a series of polls on various issues, you will find that the majority of the population take a progressive stance. Trouble is, about half or more of this progressive sentiment goes to the Liberals.

Uh...sorry, but where are the reasons to vote NDP? I just see a bunch of reasons not to vote Liberal. Until the NDP can remember why they exist and what they have to offer, instead of just cutting up other parties, they'll continue to fall in the polls while the Greens continue to rise.

probably true brain, and with fair weather supporters like you who'd rather vote Liberal than retain their principles it's not surprising why.

You STILL won't come to grips with a coalition agreement. WHY not?

I'd deal with the Liberals (the ones who would be willing to make real common cause with progressives on the left) any time. However, it has to be formal. It has to be legal. In addition, it has to be binding.
Especially on the Liberals because they've proved, time and time again, to be untrustworthy. In addition, given who supports them on Bay Street it's not surprising why that's the case.

Maybe then, the phony liberals like Bill Graham and Paul Martin would head to their real home and native land - the Conservative Party. They don’t even ‘talk’ a good show anymore.

But, anyway, suit yourself, we're going to end up with a conservative majority after the next election because the Liberals aren't really liberal.

Frank: noticed Elliot hanging around yesterday; you showed admirable restraint.

Well I don't really follow politics, I just like hockey eh. but I'm going to guess the Conservatives??

You wouldn't be reduced to a handful of seats if you had gone after the party taking your votes in the first place. As the Cons are not sitting on the fence wondering whether to vote NDP I think the NDP has to define itself against the Libs.

Exactly, without a left-wing party being in existence there is no friction point on the left of the political spectrum, as in the USA. No friction point equals no need to address issues of people who are too weak to even form a party.

I'm not sure I understand this comment. This is my point. The existence of the NDP is indeed in question due to the apparent rush of the protest-Left into the arms of the Liberal party. Where have I said otherwise??
Where we disagree is in what to do about it. You think there's a huge untapped pool of left-wing voters out there that vote Lib out of a weird need to poke their finger at the NDP party hierarchy, I don't.

Its why Carole James moves to the Right. there are no more votes to be collected by appealing to left-wing voters, she has them all since they have nowhere else to go. The only friction point is the voters between her and Campbell. That's who she has to appeal to.

anarcho, fiscally most Canadians are very much on the Right side of the spectrum, not socialists, not Keynesians, but followers of the neo-liberal economic policies of Friedman. Socially, most Canadians are moderate. The Liberals stand on the same ground as most Canadians, the NDP doesn't.

says anarcho.

No doubt this is true. The Liberal brain trust has always been very successful at prestidigitation.

Ten Reasons NOT to Vote NDP
Ten Reasons to Vote GREEN
1 Jack Layton
2Dawn Black
3Olivia Chow
4David Christopherson
5Alex Atamanenko
6Joe Comartin
7Libby Davies
8Penny Priddy
9Bill Siksay
10Peter Stoffer

woody, Elliot already made that same joke above. is there a website where you guys get this stuff???

Are you implying that NDPers should all vote Green? When are you going to design policies that would appeal to us? or would that mean you would lose your current supporters?

Frank,
check your email in about 5 minutes.

Following up on the link that kjcprovided above to the story of the computer glitch during the 2003 NDP convention that saw Jack Layton(one of 6 candidates) take it on the first ballot, I found: http://www.accenture.com/Global/Services/By_Industry/Government/EdemocracyServices.htm

I can't help but think that Accenture will be counting the ballots here in B.C., especially on the next referendum about the Preferential Ballot, which to my mind is a set-up to steal elections through computer fraud.

Also, a propos of the use of the Bank of Canada that I brought up on the Glavin thread, it seems reform was a part of the NDP platform, but was dropped after Jack got in.
http://comer.org/

I was recently informed by MP Judith W. of the NDP that you opposed the NDP developing policies for monetary reform (the Bank of Canada resolutions were dropped in the last election platform) and it is apparent from the actions of the Council of Canadians that you ill advise them as well. More

nana - what exactly is the connection between Jack Layton and accenture?

Just curious.

The firm Elections.com. GWwhose computers were messed with while counting the ballots during the '03 convention.
Read the story posted by kjc
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0307/S00140.htm

When I searched for Election.com, I was supposed to be automatically sent to Accenture. The redirection no longer works.

I've been suspicious of Layton since he and Broadbent endorsed NAFTA at a scrum shortly after the convention. He was Broadbent's boy and I stopped trusting him in '88. The word mole comes to mind.

Just got an email from my NDP MP. They are now firmly on the green bandwagon and are scheduling green meetings from Jan.
on.

Nana, you must rate:

I don't even get a automated reply from mine - so I quit bothering to communicate with him! I was becoming convinced that MPs and party leaders and/or candidates never answer mail or inquiries.

Then I remembered Stephen who writes me regularly (via free snail mail) to reassure me that he is cleaning up crime in Canada and how sorry he is that he can't stop gays from getting married!

I have a problem with any source that includes this inaccuracy:

Not that I love Accenture by any means. DO you ever read Robin Matthews at ViveleCanada?
He wrote a column in September that elicited a correction demand from an Accenture flak...a demand for which there was no remedy because Robin hadn't written what they claimed he had.

No doubt they're bad dudes. I don't know about Layton. He did a lot of good work at the community level for years in Toronto.

Frank lets be frank about the NDP, frankly, they are toast and you know it. The reason I duplicated Elliot’s thread , he missed a few names, avoiding breaking the 10 quorum.

so woody, who do you support and why?

rkewen I guess I'm on a list from having written on some issue or other. I can't remember whether I got an answer to that.

Hey, Chantal Hebert corresponds with both G West and Alcibiades on a blackberry....now that's impressive.

G West, Accenture is the new name of Andersen Accounting of Enron fame. They are also involved in the privatization of BC Hydro. They are probably the criminal models for the Campbell Crime Family. The CCFamily aspire to the Enron/Anderson/Accenture level of criminal success!

G.West Suuuch a nit picker you are!

Why don't you try connecting the dots instead. Acccenture, Anderson, Enron, Lay, Bush, Cheney, Haliburton,Accenture .....they just keep rollin' on.

So you're saying Jack Layton is a Haliburton plant?

Ya, so? What's that got to do with the Green party? Or should all the hard left decide to vote Green just because...

G west you asked?

The Greens and why not?

rkewen
Yep! know all that. But thanks for bringing it up. I try to do all I can to make sure more and more people everywhere are aware of the partners the BC Liberals have brought into the mix here in BC. I hope it's not too late.
I really could care less about what the Americans do as long as we can keep their greasy hands off Canada.

There's an interesting story in today's New York Times you should look at. I can bet that pee wee Rambo will be talking (if he hasn't already) to George about getting another exemption for Canadian arms dealers and manufacturers.

Here's the story link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/12/business/worldbusiness/12arms.html?_r=1&ref=americas&oref=slogin

If thats what you think, then you've misunderstood my position entirely for... weeks now? OMG... really shaking my head, here.

But that's just it, FRANK. IF YOU CAN'T GET THE JOB DONE AGAINST THE CONS, YOU GO TO SOMEONE WHO CAN. AND WILL! You talk about friction...
Which is why I've been saying their strategy has to change, and what's your strategy... just avoid the left/right clashes. This makes no sense at all... unless of course you're still a believer in the Libs and Cons being no difference. Convienient. And unwise.

Holding hands with the Cons in any way shape or form will cost the NDP. Do you see the Liberals doing it? Leaving the Cons alone will cost the NDP. You've said it yourself, the majority of Canadians are social moderates. Perception is everything!!!!! The NDP is giving away their support to the Libs by default.

Just look at Chris H's post for an example. Harper is a bonifide true threat to this country existence and while NDP thinktanks are wandering around bashing the Libs and giving the Cons a bye, their own support however hard or soft, is thinking... "geez, we can't afford another Harper government. Who's going to stop him? The NDP isn't doing anything. I have no choice but to go Lib."

The NDP talks about Liberal cuts to eduction and healthcare, never really mentioning just how this social spending got there to begin with, always taking the credit for its existence... but the moment its taken away with cutbacks from the Cons, I have to read this quote above and shake my head. What a bombing political strategy...

All the NDP has to do to lose miserably, perhaps out of existence, is to leave the Cons alone. You know, just don't do their job, which is to look out for the interests of Canadians. Not americans, Frank. Canadians come first. It seems as though you want the country to fall on its ass so the great social left can rise from the ashes like South America, or it seems as though you don't take Harper's threat to this country seriously at all, reducing these right wingnut Cons as just another Liberal party... without the brand. Either way, its a thinktank blunder for the NDP to take the direction its taken and is still on.

And our disagreement won't change one iota.

The majority of us want peacekeeping and rebuilding, not war. The majority of us don't like guns and body bags. In the most important issues of all, education, military, environment, healthcare, all of these issues are issues where the left should shine. And now the Cons are cutting spending to them all except the military... for another GST point and possible red ink. Its insane actions by the Cons, and even crazier for the NDP not to oppose it. If they don't, where does the left go? What are its choices? You tell me.

The woody:

And The Greens are not toast in this next election? Is that what you are saying? That The Greens are about to move into the #3 spot, in their next out against the new Green Liberals.?

LOL B-D

If you have to know better than that, old woddenhead.

And even it we were to make that leap of faith in your understanding of things, are we to expect that they would be that much different from the NDP, let alone the Liberals?

Being as they are already not that significantly different from one or the other, save perhaps a tad closer to the Conservatives-, I think not. And I would actally really, really like to thinks so. But it's just too much of a stretch, especially with you as a mouthpiece for them here.

woody,
are you in favour of a coalition between the Greens and the NDP to avoid killing each other's chance of beating the Liberals and/or conservatives in tight races?

If so, I salute you. If not, like brain, you're just a soft Liberal anyway - why not vote that way.

No, Frank, I'm not saying he's a Haliburton plant...that's putting too fine a point on it. Espionage works a little less directly, as you know.

I'm saying that Accenture was in control of Election.com when the latter was in charge of vote counting at the 2003 NDP convention.

I'm also saying that Layton is a supporter of NAFTA and keeping the status quo re the impotence of the Bank of Canada. I'm saying for those reasons, there is a possibility that the vote counting was tampered with by those with an interest in maintaining control of the only national voice the left has in Canada.

We know about the CIA's work in Latin America because agents revulsion at the killings turned them into whistle blowers.

Nothing like that has happened here, but we can't assume that there is no activity. An NDP that worked would be very dangerous....it was hobbled from the time it stopped being the CCF, is my guess, through the labour movement. That was the CIA MO in Latin America.

not only will the ndp never hold power, they will never form the official opposition. obsolete and irrelevant does not a successful political party make.

brain, let's see if your strategy of turning Cdn politics into a clone of the US works. We'll only have 2 parties and see how many left-wing policies get enacted. Personally I think it'll turn into a race to see who can cut spending fastest and deliver the biggest tax cuts to the swing voters but I certainly can't talk anyone out of dismantling the Left so by all means do what you think is best for you.

And fiscally neo-con. You forgot that part of the quote. And how is the NDP giving away their support? Why would anyone vote NDP to stop the Cons when the Libs exist? C'mon, challenge your own points for logic.

Brain
I'm still waiting for your response about that formal coalition. Why are you avoiding it?

Let me suggest a reason.

Because you know in your heart of hearts what the Liberals are all about, and always have been - power, not service; control and reward, not listening and sacrifice.

You know damn well that the Liberals won't accept the terms of an NDP coalition because the Liberals aren't in the least interested in the kind of real reform the current insipid shadow of real socialism in the NDP represents.

You know they'd never foster the kind of fundamental democratic reform this country really needs - just like they rejected it for themselves during the leadership convention just completed. Unlike the Cons.

How many of those famous reform-minded Liberals took time away from the executive suite and downtown Montreal to talk reform? 500 out of 5,000, or thereabouts, right?

Impressive!!!.

Perfect description of you elliot.

Stick to sports, you're out of your depth here - I may have to go off on you!

Nana, so you're saying that the neocons disrupted the NDP vote so that Bill Blaikie wouldn't get elected as leader of the 4th party in Canada?

nana
Accenture is incompetent, no question. Enron proved that, although accenture would argue that there is no connection. But, as their corporate flak mistress's communication with Vive proved beyond doubt, they can't even read. I'm sure they can't count votes properly either and I hope the NDP has learned a lesson.

BCLiberals sure haven't.

Suggesting that the NDP has become irrelevant as part of some conspiracy in the US to mau mau incipient socialism in the Great White North is just beyond the pale.

Like most 'conspiracy' theories.

Things are bad enough without inventing theories out of whole cloth to make them worse - and less tractable to real change and activism.

My view.

If you want to see copies of my correspondence you're going to have to answer that email I gave you months ago, btw.

Now, in this piece from which I copied this quote Nana, I think you finally get to it. And a legitimate concern it is, that I think you raise.

But especially with this"

We know about the CIA's work in Latin America because agents revulsion at the killings turned them into whistle blowers.

Nothing like that has happened here, but we can't assume that there is no activity. An NDP that worked would be very dangerous..

There is scarcely a strategic facet of this country's national life that is not subject to US influence, and to assume that the CIA would not have an interest in, or be prepared to influence the outcome of an NDP leadership election, would mean that we are exempt from all the laws of the universe and US political interferences which operate in virtually every other part of the hemisphere and the world. We can easy enough see their influence at work through the Conservatives, and the effect of their NAFTA, GATT, NATO and NORAD, North Amerikan Union work through the Liberals... and then assume that they would be above acting through a US corporation such as Accenture/Elections.com to influence the leadership and policy outcomes of the NDP?

I think not.

If so, then we on the left clearly can be victim of our own gullibilties and blind partisanship, no less than anyone else.

Thanks for the observation, Nana. I think you have pointed to an important possibility and player in this ideological convergence going on within ALL the political parties of this country, at all its leadership and policy levels.

I certainly won't reject your thinking out of hand here.

To quote again, "Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean there isn't someone out to get me."

There is a time and situation where it is entirely appropriate to make these kinds of possibility connections and assumptions, and nowhere more so than right now than in this country, which is likely one of "the most" subject, certainly in the hemisphere, to US/CIA influences and control practices.

I would assume it. And to influence the political, policy and leadership outcomes of what has at least to here been the premier Canadian "Left" political party, is going to be somewhere up near the top of their in country "to do" list-, for the US Embassy and CIA in this country. We are not afterall, an insigificant source of their material, geographic and resource power. We've even been known to be persuaded to go to war for them, in our slavish, bootlick fashion.

alive, you state:

I hear this repeated a lot so I thought I'd take this opportunity to ask you a couple questions. Have you read any Green Party policy books? What are some of the issues that you feel the Greens don't cover?

Thanks.

Beacon Hill,
The policy books on the Green Party website are still the old ones with Jim Harris's picture on the front. I'd say not much appears to have changed.

The only new thing I see there is a few paras which sounds good and doesn't say a thing - would fit nicely in the covers of a Liberal red book.

Would you like a few quotes?

Trust me, it's all bumpf.
There is a nice picture of Elizabeth May in front of a green tree - I hope it's artificial.

Oh and there's this:

Good luck on that one!

you need to get a real job g. you spend far too much time repeating yourself here.

Back to school buddy. I understand they have a few openings for slow learners.
Bye

G West,

Here are some quotes from the NDP website:

I understand this, as was what you quoted from the Greens' website, is just insipid campaign literature.

What I asked alive for (because he suggested that the Greens were a single-issue party) was to list specific issues for which the Greens did not have policies.

No question Beacon Hill.

But everything on the Green book is still covered by that picture of Jim Harris. I don't have a very high opinion of him and his economic platform.

I like Elizabeth May and I wish her well and I'd be more than happy to see some Greens elected; but, that being said, it's the electoral system that favours the status quo which has stood in the way of change in this country forever. Although I thought her endorsement of Brian Mulroney as a ‘Green’ PM was pretty forgettable. And that’s the least offensive thing I’ll say about it.

Our main point of reference here is the NDP and I have no problem with an NDP Green alliance, never have had. I just don't believe that either Green or NDP votes moving to the Liberals - who are the masters of “same-old” in this country is a good thing.

Moreover, I don't think it will do anything but put more conservatives in the House of Commons.

It is a real problem, I understand that; and if the Greens adopt a socialist program I might just start voting for them instead of the NDP.

Will I ever vote Liberal? Not until they dump their enablers from Bay Street and Howe Street and decide they are democrats and not selfish elitists.

Have a look at the fine piece of unbiased "journalism" that Mr Hack wrote in 24 today. It is so awful I won't even bother to pick it apart.

Get a real job and stop being a parasite, Bill.

Thanks for understanding and elaborating what I said Coyote.

G.West always manages to miss points. To declare Accenture as merely incompetant
is terminally naive. Somehow G.West whenever I think of you, the word gatekeeper comes to mind. One won't see American greasy fingerprints to use your phrase, if one doesn't look for them...and it's tricky, because they use gloves. But as the article from scooppointed out, when a field of 6 is reduced to 1 one on the first ballot with no prior indication of that happening and the ballot counters have shady connections, one shouldn't let ones belief that there are no conspiracies blot out the obvious and prevent investigation.

Active members of the NDP should be really aware of the possible undercurrents within the party and to question them whenever possible.

I think Bill Blaikie would have proved really troublesome to the impotence agenda,Frank.

How many times do I have to say this? I'm a member of the Green party. I very well might be voting NDP because I believe they are putting forth the best candidate in my riding (although its not yet confirmed on my end) and this matters to me more than partisan politics. My criticisms with the NDP are meant to be constructive, not destructive and if neither of you can get the drift, than neither of you will appreciate why I've gone to half full lengths to criticize the NDP party as a whole... and I highly doubt that you or G want we to go to "full" lengths.

Things aren't looking good for the NDP these days, y'know? There might be a reason why, other than the Libs are no longer rudderless and the Cons are rolling right along with the Bloc with their open agenda's to wreck the country, and the Greens are picking off a point here and there with the dissidents. The blame, if and when the time comes, should rest where it belongs. We make our own beds...

No, Frank, that's your hypothetical. I'm telling you that if the NDP leaves the Cons alone, anyone with a brain who recognizes the danger of the Cons in power will have no choice but to vote Liberal and why? You laid it out for us. The NDP simply wants to preoccupy its time against the Libs and sit on its ass when it comes to Harper. What other choice does an anybody but Harper voter have? The NDP isn't giving them one.

What do you mean? I don't see the Greens shrinking in the next election. I see them getting 6% of the popular vote, and likely a seat, maybe two. As for the NDP... maybe 12 - 13%?

Anybody but Harper, Frank. I didn't make it complicated.

Center and right, but certainly not hard right neo con the way you make it out to be. The Liberals actually do pass spending legislation targeted for social programs. Of course there will be bribes from both. The Cons will try to piece of Quebec... and they will be lucky if they get 14% of the popular vote and one seat. The Libs won't have to try as hard as you think. All they have to do is show up and oppose the Cons at this point.

Must I continue to repeat myself? Read the thread. I thought I made it clear, even with this repeat post.

Good question. If the voter wants the Cons out of office, then it sure seems as though the NDP isn't the way to go. Its not like the NDP is really going after the Cons, so what choice do voters have? If you want a Con minority, just vote NDP. To bad the NDP doesn't go after the Cons the way they should... the Lib/NDP switch hitters really have no choice but to go Lib when it comes to stopping Harper.

Here's the solution: forget the traditional parties that have brought us to this point and vote for progress and obviously cause nothing but negative divisiveness and pessimism.

Do you really win a seat by criticising the other parties and claim they are not left enough? Isn't the point to attract the full spectrum and focus on the issues and platforms that work instead of repeatedly tickering with ones that don't!?

Even if a seat is not won, the point is made to represent a clear option that does not believe the status quo is working out and it pressures the other parties to take up the issues that have been undermined by all the traditional parties: inclusive social justice, democratic reform, sustainable/ecological economics, preventative health care, balance and long-term vision.
Vote for Elizabeth May and the Green Party.

Not avoiding it, G, just preoccupied with Franks NDP ideology to not go after the Cons the way they should. And for its worth, my influence on the matter is nil, so the idea is not something that has preoccupied much of my time, but here goes.

Firstly, remember the '88 election where Broadvent garnered 43 seats? No surpise. Voters didn't want the Liberals back in power, still smarting from Trudeau fiscal mismanagement and stale blunders. Voters didn't really want Mulroney's free trade either. But the vote was split between the Libs/NDP enough so, that the Cons won another majority with what, 43% nodding heads for the sellout? Even in '88, the NDP failed to go after the Cons, believing that their votes were leaning Liberal. The same blunder is repeating itself today. Remember what happened in 93? The Liberal hangover wore off, the Cons blew it beyond any reasonable proportion and the NDP tanked. And why? Same old blunder. Lets go after the Liberals. So if you want to stop the Cons, and you've got a stale Liberal party, anyone with a brain would think, Hey, this NDP party should go after the Cons instead of the Libs, you know, actually give the voter an anti Con alternative! But this isn't what the NDP does. "Lets hate the Libs and give the Cons a bye." Same old blunder. History repeating itself.

Sounds like an NDP ad, to which I won't disagree regardless.

I agree with the first part. There is no reason for the Libs to share power once they have it. And in a minority government that has the NDP holding the balance of power, the power is already shared, is it not? But lets face it. If the Libs actually end up wit a majority, why should they share power with the NDP? And as far as social programs go, we actually have them in this country, G. I can't remember the NDP ever garnering 155 seats to pass social legislation they way they see fit. They had a little help, y'know? And it didn't come from the Cons.

Of which I fully criticized the Liberal party for it, and will again. Am I somehow supposed to disagree with you now?

I believe the total votes were 613 out of an eligable 6000 delegates. Yes, piss poor Liberal organization, and I've criticized it harshly and not just on this site. This issue is destined to be revisited and is likely to be reversed in the latter part of the next 10 years, but it won't come without a price. 4 days of media coverage gave the Liberals legitimacy and a boost at the polls BEFORE A LEADER WAS EVEN PICKED. Why would the Liberals do away with this kind of exposure? Its my belief that they will try to introduce a hybrid comprimise that give "one member, one vote" while keeping the convention itself. I'm not sure yet how they can, but its certainly what the Liberal party would want, if they have any common sense, is the best of both worlds.

now you're just getting boring g. go for a walk and get some fresh air.

brain,

For the fifteenth time, people who are followers of classical economics but don't like the Cons are not going to vote for the NDP no matter how many times the NDP criticises the Cons, they will vote Liberal.

Now does your argument seem logical to you in any way? Because it doesn't to me.

Wow, maybe two?

Why would I care?

Anyway, thanks for the advice but you're not even an NDPer.

Enjoyed your post, Coyote:
The U.S. threat to control our politics is very real in every party. To think that it isn't is to live in a world of pretend. U.S. foreign policy these days, likes to father and know whats best, "or else". And if they don't go through the front door, they will most assuredly go through the back which is in this case, the Conservative party of Canada. Nowhere is this more clear, than to see Harper rise as a reformer with NCC U.S. money support coming from U.S. corporations, and most likely the Republican party itself.

Nana is quite right to be highly suspicious, if not outright accusing. As for me, the CIA Republican controlled Con party is no longer a high suspicion. Its a fact. Everything the Con party has done economically speaking, has been to bribe the greedy with the leftover crumbs by eroding our own market protection once held by government crown corps like the CBC, a media outlet that has the ability through its archives to remind Canadians of who they are, boards such as the wheat board that keeps U.S. grain handlers from having full monopolies, CRTC deregulation and guess what else is on the plate. The deregulation that disallows the foreign takeover of Canadian banks and insurance companies. How quickly we forget that this is what Mulroney intitially wanted... and how quickly we forget that if this happens, its economical checkmate, we've just lost our economic sovereignty. And what seems to be the saddest part of this thread is that the G West's and Franks of the world, smart as they are, aren't catching onto the Republican expansionist way of doing business. If deregulation of banks, insurance and whatever else happens in this country because we decided to vote a Con majority, there won't be a country left worth haggling over. We'll just become a 53rd state figurehead of the empire.

When will we all finally wake up to these facts?

morefreedom.org

For the newbies, this was where Harper hung his hat as president for 5 years until assuming control of the Con party. Its not as full on racist or churchy as it once was... but the jest of their gameplan is still there. We assume there is no threat to our sovereignty by the U.S., when nothing could be further from the truth. They want us, our resourses, our markets, even our currency if its healthier than the U.S. dollar, and it is. And anyone who thinks the empire isn't expansionist, better think again. Real hard.

you keep saying 53rd state? What is the 51st and 52nd states?

And again, in a two party system the Cons will always win sometimes. Even the Democrats sometimes win presidential elections.

I would bet that if the NDP disappeared that many if not most NDPers would not vote at all due to the lack of choice available. Just like the US.

As for our currency, have you read the summation of the Conference Board of Canada's report in Macleans last month?

Now does your argument seem logical to you in any way? Because it doesn't to me.
Why would I care?

You know what, Frank, there are far more important things out there than money. And I'm not the only one who believes this. As for your don't give a shit attitude, what can I say? Must suck to be you.

And considering I've been debating with someone who doesn't give a shit, if all NDP'ers were the same as you, I would never vote NDP. (good thing they aren't) For what its worth, you can have your condescending thanks back. My opinion of you has just completely tanked.

Actually I've never heard the NDP asking for the vote of those who believe poverty is the result of laziness or that the increase in child poverty under the Liberals can be blamed on bad parents or those that believe healthcare is a luxury item that had to be slashed.

I know for a fact the Libs heartily endorse those beliefs so I'm sure you'll be welcomed with open arms.

Bon chance

Let me rephrase that- Here's the solution: forget the traditional parties that have brought us to this point and obviously cause nothing but negative divisiveness and pessimism.

Vote for progress and non-partisan issues that effect all Canadians and the planet.

Jim Harris came from the progressive right, I come from the progressive centre. Many new Green support comes from the progressive left. I don't consider the Green Party to be right or left. It is green.This is positive! We are "greening" all parties and Canadians and the elected parties are finally taking notice.

In the London by-election, there were more votes earned from the other 3 major parties than the single largest percentage from the NDP:

Let’s compare from last Jan:
Liberal: 40.1%
Conservative: 29.9%
New Democrat: 23.8%
Green: 5.5%

Conservative Dianne Haskett 9,327 24.5
Green Party Elizabeth May 9,845 25.8
Liberal Glen Pearson 13,285 34.9
N.D.P. Megan Walker 5,365 14.1

Nov 27, 2006 (253/253 polls)
Liberal: -5.2%
Green: +20.3%
Conservative: -5.4%
New Democrat: -9.7%

The Liberal and Conservative vote difference from last election adds up to 10.6%. Is this splitting the left or redefining the political spectrum?

Vote for Elizabeth May and for the Green Party not against the Conservatives or the Liberals or Harper or whatever it is....[B]

And for those of us that don't see eye to eye with the "progressive" Right? Just close our eyes and think of England?

If some Libs and Cons have found the environment-god, great. Soon they'll be figuring out ways to profit from global warming. Fantastic! as Bill used to say. I wish them the best but I don't know what the Green stand is on anything outside the environment (they're for it).

Every Green on this board gives me a different story.

Excuse me for intruding into the necessary conversation above, but I found a really neat site for any fellow conspiracy researchers.

Try this stating point...notice George Schulz and his connection to Accenture through its Energy Advisory Board and then their connection to Homeland Security and then think about the GPS based meter readers that have been installed in Vancouver by BC Hydro.

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=29&name=Accenture

G west you asked?

so woody, who do you support and why?

Earlier I replied I’ll support the Greens, now why?
Twice this year ,that Im aware of, Jack Layton has flown from Ottawa to Vancouver for what I can only best described as for frivolous purposes .The first trip was to attend to a wedding, the second trip was to attend a Chinese head tax repayment ceremony. Both times, these were a week end trip.
what are cards made for? if his presence was in the official capacity ( which it wasn’t) then some other local NDP stand in could have attended , e.g. Carol James or NDP mp
In regards to the head tax repayment ceremony, I more than sure, all at the function were more than capable of signing and depositing their own cheques, they didn’t require Jock-o , if Jock-os wife was also a recipient it could have been available for her in Ottawa. So here is Jack-o going around the country flapping his lips about pollution and Kyoto and the Tar sands and big (ass) oil, and what does Jack-o the mouth do, jumps on the bomber to Vancouver, fock global warming, fock the smug, fock the ozone. Im going partying!! All on the biggest polluter around “air planes” I stayed several days in Richmond a few years ago I went into a non smoking tv viewing lobby one evening, after a short time my eyes were sore and the air had a kerosene smell, I mentioned this another chap there, he matter a fact stated that this particular building exchanged the air every few minutes and as we were located under the airports take off flight path, the air being taken was also drawing in exhaust from the planes taking off, some days its worse than this he said.. People are going to have to take the initiative and bite the bullet, and give up flying all around the country and world for no good reasons, I bet of those flying right now 95% are for frivolous purposes. Watch the sh!t hit the fan when heavy duty taxes are imposed on the flyers just as the sh!t has already stared in Quebec over the 11/3 cent a liter tax that the government there is adding to the gas tax, funding it wants green projects, But nobody wants to give up sh!t, any where.

Frank wrote,

And a serious question for which I think, and you should know, there is no answer, Frank.

Even assuming the worst, which I do not, but hold out as a distinct possibility, that "interests" in the US Empire, acting through Accenture/Elections.com, formerly of Enron accounting practices fame, who provided the "technical" elements for the NDP leadership election machinery that witnessed the remarkable first ballot rise of Jack Layton, , was positioned to have acted to influence that internal NDP election campaign. And had or did they, we would not certainly, or at least unlikely be privy to the counsel given or reasoning behind the decisions they made or outcomes they conspired to influence. (And I am not yet ready to say that they did, in fact, only that the outcome hinged in large part on the behaviour, expertise and possible motivations of a large and discredited US global corp, not a stranger to scandalous fraud behaviours. So even someone as partisan as yourself must see "some" possibility here...)

We might, on the surface of it think that Blaikie would have in fact been their more obvious "preferred" choice. I would.

But who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men-, or for that matter the US Empire, their corporate and intelligence agencies?

I only expect and would prepare for the worst.

Who might know but that they may be aware of something we are not-, or acting on interests and motivations, and making choices the sense for which is unknown in its detail to us.

That said, I certainly give Jack Layton the benefit of the doubt, though I am unimpressed with him or his acumen-, nor is his party, were tjere even the event of such a scenario, likely to be the only one with personnel plants, bugs and intelligence operatives of The Empire within it, influencing their outcomes. I presume it. (Though they are not all powerful either, and are as capable of fucking up as our own intelligence agencies.)

But for all the mystery that may be at work here, what is clear and entirely obvious, out of every political party in the country, save for the most marginalized, none speak ill of the United States or seriously and implacably challenge our participation in US global economic arrangements, war schemes and alliances. and all our parties are embarked upon political courses which are leading to a centre/centre right ideological and social, economic, and global behavioural convergence... that is sapping and destroying even our bourgeois "limited" democracy

If the proof of the pudding is indeed in the eating, it is clear that this country is not on a developmental course on any front that is inimical to the US Empire interest. On the contrary, for all the jabber, jabber, our politics, economics and foreign policy behaviours are, virtually coming out of all parties, unchallenging of US Empire interersts in the bootlick extreme, and indeed our entire post WW2 behaviour "in practice", with some minor Trudeauesque bumps, still remarkably slavish, bootlick and thoroughly obedient. We counduct our affairs pretty much in a subject, "colonized" manner, in fact, and the obedient colonial "mindset" is all pervasive, pretty goddamn much in ALL parties and across the country.

Continued next post...

One might even be forgiven for thinking that we are being unduly influenced and interferred with from some foreign interest direction. That it is rooted in and has control over all the major elements of our political life, as a supposed/presumed "independant" country. And the old USSR no longer exists. So we certainly can't hold them up as the bogeyman amongst us.

I wonder who just might....

But still, I can certainly not, nor likely many of us here, claim to have the absolute definitive inside track in any regard. We are too much a victim state and society, scared poopless to radically differ with.... You know who. (Whisper, whisper.)

Though there is this troublesome and question raising body of evidence that points to something. Which is what is clearly nagging at Nana, as well as myself. And Lynn. :-) I know it nags at her too.

And like many a woman will tell ya, or man for that matter, ya don't always have to catch them in the act or have an incriminating photo, to know that they are fuking around.

(you don't mind if I don't post the whole thing do you woody?

Don't disagree with anything there woodster. But slamming jack for 2 trips to Vancouver is a little much. Have you checked out stevie boy's flight plan lately. And he takes up a whole damn plane now he's getting so overweight. But for gosh sakes don't let realisticman catch you dissing international air travel - he thinks being 33,000 feet in the air in a kerosene fired aluminum tube is all that keeps the economy going.

I'd like, as Frank says, to see a little more of the Greens program though. I still haven't recovered from Elizabeth May's pandering to Brian Mulroney - another noted air traveller.

And how does the sainted Elizabeth get around these days anyway? Sleigh? Coach and four? Baker electric car?

I thought all those gas taxes we pay here in BC were supposed to be paying for better transit, guess not eh?

I've noticed the smell in Richnmond for years, Phil Gagliardi told me it was the smell of money.

Believe me, it gives me no pleasure to say this, but if the NDP as it currently exists ever gained power in this country you would see ineptitude beyond words.

Reading your posts, is a good reason to not believe you!
If you were down on your luck, you would hope that the NDP came to power, and began to distribute the wealth of this migthy country in a more equal fashion!
Sorry not to participate all that much here, I have a life!

Careful Coyote, you'll get yourself into trouble.

See: http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060916233655368

Accenture doesn't like being called an accounting or auditing firm.

Now, isn't that extremely interesting.

Though this article is about the national election, with the recent posts about Accenture and US nosing into the business of citizens of other countries, I couldn't help but post the following about businesses the BC gov't is our private info. to.

http://www.bcgeu.bc.ca/2440

I urge everyone to read this very important piece by Robin Mathews. It comes "not word wrapped" through this link, but I merely selected, copied it, pasted into notebook, word wrapped it and stripped it of extraneous formatting junk. Then I repasted it to Word and saved it.

And lest one thinks US Corporate Big Brother does not hover over our lowly deliberations in these threads.

But even stripped of that element, Robin also points in the direction which I think things need to begin to develop, if we are serious about this country, democracy, and freeing it from US colonial control, of which there is legitimate right to suspect that it also works through our party system in this country.

Good points Coyote; and thanks to you too, SIG, as always.

And thats your problem, Frank. Some (but not all, did I ever say all poverty is caused by this, idiots putting words in my mouth again, pissing me off) poverty is caused by these reasons. Do you for some reason believe that laziness and fiscal ineptitude doesn't exist within the populace? Duh, yah, sure there's such a thing as bad luck... and there is also such a thing as personal failure from lack of effort or paying attention. There's a whole smorg of reasons why people end up with a hand out. A mere sampling of those reasons so happens to have on its long list, laziness and stupidity. Good luck bull shitting yourself thinking these traits don't exist within the human realm.

The 51st U.S. state: Israel.
The 52nd U.S. state: Iraq.
And their 53rd state? Any other dumb questions?

Pretty easy to pick out others' problems if one wants to. Which is why it's better not to let these things get personal:
You sure that's the way you feel brain?

Maybe take a step back and reconsider. Even read Frank again - a little more carefully.

I think you'll find that fiscal ineptitude is usually a characteristic of entities a little bigger and more powerful than individuals. With folks, you usually just call it poor budgeting – my view.

I've seen far too many small farmers who managed their money just fine screwed thoroughly by the fiscal ineptitude of a whole bag full of Liberal politicians (and Conservative ones too) in Ottawa for me to think that the main problem in this country is personal bad money management. Not to even mention the banks and a tax system designed to cater to their interests.

Those traits you're so upset about right now are the things that ought to bring us together, not force us apart my friend.

The brain,

Please consider that your arguments will have more effect if you ease off the throttle of personal attacks. Leave that to the less-enlightened.

Cheers.

You're welcome, G West.

And, thanks to both, you and Coyote, for all the good and obvious reasons - mainly, trying to help us have freedom and democracy, without Randily defining neoconservatism/capitalism as freedom and democracy packaged into one tidy truth.

The Ontario provincial NDP appears to have the message - unlike BC's opposition - which had to have it drilled into them by the public.

A provincial government plan to give Ontario politicians a 25 per cent pay raise before the legislature’s Christmas break left the New Democrats lashing out today against the “thoroughly repugnant” move.

The Liberal government, with the support of the Opposition Conservatives, surprised observers by introducing legislation to raise salaries for members of the legislature to 75 per cent of the pay of their federal counterparts.

Ontario politicians currently earn a base pay of $88,771, compared with the $147,700 paid to federal members who represent the same ridings, but unlike MPs, the provincial members do not have a pension plan.

If the bill passes, members of the Ontario legislature will earn a base salary of just over $110,000 a year — a raise of $22,000 — and will also see a doubling of their RRSP allowance, from five per cent to 10 per cent of their salary.

Premier Dalton McGuinty’s salary would jump from $159,000 to $198,600.

Provincial politicians in Quebec earn about $107,000 in salary and pension — the only ones in Canada earning more than the $88,770 paid to Ontario MPPs.

Politicians in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador get between $73,000 and $88,000. Those in Nova Scotia pull in about $66,000, while their counterparts in Prince Edward Island are the lowest-paid at just over $55,000 in salary and tax-free allowances.

Ontario’s integrity commissioner had warned the provincial legislature could soon become a “farm team” for the House of Commons if salaries aren’t raised.

Conservative Leader John Tory noted he has consistently said the issue of pay for politicians should not become an annual political football, and said he agreed to support the pay raise because it’s necessary to get the best people.

“People are not attracted to public life, or find themselves unable to seek public office for, among other reasons, the compensation is not fair and appropriate for the responsibilities involved,” Tory said.

NDP house leader Peter Kormos was kicked out of the legislature for railing against the proposed pay raises, and claimed the Liberals and Conservatives conspired to keep the pay-raise bill secret from the NDP until the last minute.

“This is repugnant, this is thoroughly repugnant,” a red-faced Kormos fumed outside the chamber.

“I’d say there’s some underhanded deals going on here.”

Kormos also said it was inappropriate for the Liberals and Tories to propose salary increases when the government is already under fire for the $3-million severance package paid to Hydro One CEO Tom Parkinson, who quit last week amid questions about his expenses.

“In the shadow of Tom Parkinson, this is the height of hypocrisy,” Kormos said. “It’s self-serving. It’s an embarrassing day for the province of Ontario.”

The Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation agreed that proposing a 25 per cent pay raise when the province is embroiled in a debate over Parkinson’s severance and a scathing auditor’s report on irregular spending isn’t very politically astute.

“In light of the auditor general’s report, it’s going to make the government look quite poor,” said spokesman Neil Desai.

But veteran Liberal Richard Patten defended the pay hike, and said political parties at Queen’s Park are worried they could lose members who want to run for better-paying jobs in federal or even municipal office.

“I think this is the right thing to do; it’s fairly humble,” said Patten, who also suggested Ontario voters could have the final say on the pay raise in next year’s election.

“If they don’t (like it), then they can boot us out.”

So, Bill, see all of the brilliant ripostes your piece spawned, and how does that make you feel about the Tyee intelligentsia? I didn't see it, but somewhere along the line one or more of these brite lites, perhaps tiring of their own verbosity, must have picked up on your point No. 9 wherein you declared that "stampeding"(i.e.,"strategic") voting had led to Tory victories in ridings where the NDP had the best chance of winning. Unfortunately, you failed to flesh this out. Maybe you and your friend Will could get together and provide us with one or two examples? Then, of course, you could follow up with a discourse on how the NDP can pick up seats in Quebec, where most elections are decided. We know, we know, we know, your fondest dream is that somehow NDP stalwarts will remain true enough to put in place a large enough NDP caucus to hold the "balance of power." Not likely. In a House of Grits, Tories, Blocs and Zealots, any and/or all of the first three will ensure that the Zealots never wield the mythical balance of power, no matter what their numbers. That's just politics, folks. Glavin wins this one, Bill. Stick with the sky train freebie column. Tabloid becomes you.

bud carlos
Those declaring victory before the actual battle starts frequently repent their haste.

As do the spectators who pretend they understand a contest in which they've played no part.

I think, on balance, the Zealots are the Tories, by the way.

Time to wave the white flag G West...

BTW: that's wave, not waive.

What is the purpose of posting the Ontario NDP MLA's rant about pay increases? I didn't hear them say they WON'T accept them, or donate them to some charity, or to the Fraser Institute, etc.

This is an old political side show trick,....to attempt to gain brownie points while in Opposition by protesting about pay raises , as they also gleefully cash the paycheque which includes the raise.

At least they .....ummm ....did "something" ....errrh... to earn it ?

Are you still here maestro?
I thought everyone moved on....wake up fella!
You're missing the main event.

G. West I believe the reason for the use of the term "Canadian Broadcasting System" is that the author of the article is Lynn Landes, an American investigative reporter.

I have a 2003 This magazines that lined up the various contenders for the NDP crown and Jack Layton was not the front runner. He was well behind Bill Blaikie and one other, I can't remember and am not at home so cannot look it up.

As ar_menio pointed out above, it was Jack Layton that "triggered the election that got us this conservative gov't."

Duh.

My feelings exactly Nana. And as far as Layton being a NWO plant, here is the motive:

This makes perfect sense, when it comes to crime and corruption, all roads lead to the moneylenders.

I missed that part of the Glavin thread.

And speaking of death squads, didn't JFK want to do away with the Rothschilds-created US Federal Reserve?

kjc

More utter baloney. The election happened when Paul Martin wanted it to happen and not a second sooner. He thought the timing would work to his advantage and he guessed wrong. Apparently you think he couldn’t count any better than Joe Clark.

I see you're up to your old tricks of finding some way to blame the Rothschilds and the Jews for everything.

Nana had two or three of her posts erased for pretty much the same thing yesterday.

I can't say I disagree with such editorial activism.

Getting a little paranoid G. West? Did I once mention "the Jews?"

I am actually descended from the Portuguese Sephardim, that is to say real Jews, not Askenazi frauds.

Were it possible, they would fool the very elect.

You didn't have to kjc. You used very recognizable code and, as a matter of fact, no, I'm not paranoid - you are.

I know exactly whom you claim you're descended from; and I know exactly what kind of things you claim to believe in.

You don't fool anyone. Any more than David Duke does.

Of course he did. The Smilin' Millionarie saw more seats comin' his way, (temporarily it will turn out) if he did not support the Liberal government. He did get a few more seats but we got Herr Harper and The Millionaire Socialist lost the balance of power.

Smooth move, Jack.

Smooth move, Jack.

Baloney!

Do you not understand the tiniest thing about our system of government?

Paul Martin is responsible for his government's loss of confidence - it has nothing to do with the opposition.

Your buddy Paulie (now there’s a millionaire – 700 of them at the very least) looked at the polls and figured he'd have a better chance in January than he would have had after final Gomery.

I think he was right.

Your pathological hatred for the NDP blinds you to reality working man. It has ever since you've been posting here.

I think you're a little over the edge on an issue that is clear and apparent to everyone else with the exception of a couple of sociopaths who also post here from time to time.
Nice company!

It may be going a little far to say that the opposition has "nothing to do" with defeating the government in a non-confidence motion.

Not in this case Beacon Hill. Moreover, not generally either. The confidence of the house can also be lost if the party in power loses its way as well. Government members can chose to withdraw their support from their own party - or vice versa - as happened in the spring of 2005.

There are several precedents in Canada where sitting governments have decided to 'ignore' what would otherwise have been non-confidence motions. You can look it up.

Martin knew exactly what he was doing - just as 'thinkers' like my interlocutor knows what he is doing by trying to create the impression that the failure of Martin's government was anything but a failure of Martin as a leader and a politician. Martin's whole Gambit relative to Gomery blew up in his face and every honest Liberal (if that's not a contradiction in terms) must know that too. What he planned to be a quick method of destroying the reputation of Chretien turned into the device which guaranteed his own destruction.

Trying to blame that on the 4th party in the House of Commons is pathetic and dishonest.

Martin's other mistake, evidently, was doing something even a tyro trial lawyer knows never to do.

He asked, in the 'open court' of public opinion, a question the answer to which he did not know in advance.

Such a mistake is almost always fatal.

.

I wouldn't say that. What I want from the NDP is, provincially, a decent opposition, and federally, a change in policy that would actually allow it to form governments. Neither is going to happen any time soon.

The NDP in BC and federally are their own worst enemy; they are blinded by idealology and cannot take responsiblility for their defeats.

And how long have you been a member of the party dedicated to improving it in the respects you've just mentioned?

I would never join any organisation that would have me as a member.

So we'll just continue to ignore your mindless blathering then.

Someone who's only interested in that nonsense you posted above here doesn't merit the time of day, let alone a serious response.

You're no W.C. Fields.

Actually, it was Mark Twain.

Groucho Marx.

You're absolutely right Beacon Hill.

But Working Man is no W. C. Fields. Fields was a curmudgeon too, like our interlocutor - but he had a way with words that W. M. can only envy....

He wants to be thought of as socially enlightened while he behaves like the clod next door or old uncle Harry who always got ripped every Christmas and embarrassed himself in front of the children

Fields did that shtick much more convincingly.