I can accept that maybe things will improve, and I'd rather our campaign ended on a positive note than if we'd started off doing well and then the wheels come off the bus near the end. The reason I started this thread is that the NDP had arguably one of the most successful Parliaments in its history, and I don't think the momentum from that has stayed with us into this campaign. I do believe the NDP has something positive to offer Canadians, and I believe the NDP can make that offer without explicitly mentioning the Liberals, Conservatives, Bloc, or Greens. One positive thing I can see is that Layton can continue on the theme of the export tax and talk about Canada standing up to the United States in defending its interests. I believe there is opportunity for us during this campaign, but I'm a little concerned that it may pass us by.

I am really bothered by the right wing (Liberal and Conservative) media doing everything to ignore the NDP. No surprise there but it still blows after all of these years.

Of course the Hargrove love ins are being used by the media against the NDP no matter how anyone may justify it.

Unfortunately, Jack has also done some puzzling things:

First were the remarks on private care (I know there's a commonsense justification but it gets lost very quickly in a 10 second sound bite).

"No new taxes" is the quickest way to LOSE votes. Those three words are poison in Ontario (think McGuinty). No one can make that promise and anyone who has paid a price (think Bush senior).

The clarity act comments were completely unecessary.

The foot warmers in Montreal, although small spuds destroyed the entire value of Jack's excellent points that day.

Finally, it seems whenever Jack is asked for specifics it's always "we'll announce the details of our policy later."

I know it's early days and I do sometimes get unecessarily nervous during elections but we really need some better weeks.

That said, i think harpie's dog and pony show will wear out. I really wish someone would nail him on the remarks he made at the beginning of the campaign that "I'm against all taxes". Talk about a wedge issue.

Martin is also not looking too sharp but we know the scare tactics and pleas for NDP votes is being held for the new year.

So far, Duceppe definitely looks the most comfortable. He always does considering he's the only leader I've ever seen since Trudeau who doesn't have any fears about stating his position. I know its a strange comparison but I really do see that same "I don't care what some opponents might think, here's my views" attitude. I have to say it's very refreshing considering how our "English" leaders always look so uncomfortable in the mushy middle.

Over the past years he's been more comfortable with his policies and it shows.

People respect that. It's amazing how many people voted for Harris only because "he means what he says". I know its total bs, but people are really tired of spin.

Some here are scared of the NDP going too far left, and want it placed by the small
l-liberals. Obviously I don't.

That is roughly where I expect those individuals and campaigns who fail to pace themselves will be at abut a month from now, around January 10 when the big push, real campaign starts for the January 23rd E-day. They will be exhausted hoping and praying for it to be over.

In terms of our standings in the polls, the basic sense seems to be we are on track. Most commentators talk of the strong likelood of a minority government with the NDP holding the balance of power. That is our goal and unless there is a drastic change that is probably what we will achieve. So be careful and be cool.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: peterjcassidy ]

Jack has already defined the NDP campaign as NOT being class based, when it should be. The NDP is a working class party, and the NDP shold point out that it alone is standing up for the interest of the working class, while the Liberals and Conservatives are pandering to corporate Canada.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Left Turn ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Left Turn:
The NDP is running an awful campaign. a lonely worker summed it up quite well. The only positive I can see is that Jack is pacing himself; but that in and of itself does not make up for Jack's horrible positions on the clarity act, onprivated health care, and his awful press conference outside the Gomery Enquiry building in Montreal.

Jack has already defined the NDP campaign as NOT being class based, when it should be. The NDP is a working class party, and the NDP shold point out that it alone is styanding up for the interest of the working class, while the Liberals and Conservatives are pandering to corporate Canada.

---

I couldn't agree more. Layton is running well to the right in 2004 (even if he rescinded on some of his bolder policies then too). And I've got a good local candidate running...but his the slogan I've got from the NDP literature I've got says "Jack Layton: Putting People First" (Clinton's slogan in '92).

quote:

---

I really think people are ready for a Douglas again. Someone who says that's where I am and if you don't like it, vote for those two "cats"!

---

You mean the Douglas who only introduced Medicare 17 years after taking power and led a very MODERATE mildly left of centre government in Saskatchewan???

1) The debates are coming up. This gives Canadians a chance to compare the parties platforms. Hopefully Martin and Harper will resort to mudslinging and cheapshots very early on (esp in English). Layton can counter this merely by offering his own positive vision, and reminding people, as he did last time, that every other party is offering something to vote against, the NDP is the only party offering something to vote for. (And someone please remind him to wait his turn to speak this time around, I know he lost a great deal of credibility last time for that reason.)

quote:

---

And someone please remind him to wait his turn to speak this time around, I know he lost a great deal of credibility last time for that reason.)

---

Its too bad. I had a great campaign slogan, too. I will be running eventually against my local NDP candidate, if not this time, then next time.

The campaign slogan is a sure fire winner: "Don't! Don't vote for me!"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
That will happen automatically this time since whenever it will be one leader's turn to speak, the others will have their mikes turned off.

---

Cutline: Prime Minister Paul Martin looks at a red wine while visiting a winery in Beamsville, Ont. Sunday. (CP/Paul Chiasson)

tough campaign, eh?

Meanwhile, Harper gets tough. . . um, not really

Cutline: Canada's Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, right, and chief instructor Tom Burtnik take a bow prior to taking part in a karate demonstration in St. Catharines, Ont. Saturday, Dec. 10, 2005. (AP PHOTO/CP, Jonathan Hayward)

Will his handlers ever learn their lesson with Harper? Who the hell dresses him?

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Américain Égalitaire ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Left_Wing_New_Democrat:
How can the working class (or even my ethics class) be expected to condone theft over $5000?

---

I have always denounced the actions of both convicted criminals Svend Rovinson and Gordon Campbell (and the group of thieves called the Conservative party)

To say that Svend Robinson isn't hurting the NDP in 2006 election - well is denying basic truths (hello 14% per cent people). It hurts every single candidate who is running for the party.
The golden opportunity to hammer the Fiberals at every second - well we just blew it - we handed the bullet to our opponents. People are pleading for honest leadership but again 14% and we seem to be bottoming

You are wrong. don't you know the NDPers have a plan to win votes and form a majority governmnet.

Go here:

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=35&t=001278

quote:

---

Originally posted by tallyho:
t...because this is actually what the NDPers know is going to be their salvation.

---

What, all of us? Good heavens, the hive mind is stronger than I'd thought.

lots of fancy words...

but I think fancy words are the "problem" of the NDP

Politics is about simple gut decisions.....Svend Robinson is a convicted criminal who once wanted to get God out of the Constitution (too bad he wasnt praying instead of stealing)

Most voters go with their gut.. and most Canadian voters are law abiding citizens. Svend Robinson's nomination is hurting the NDP (and his actions hurt the NDP in the last election .. the NDP dropped about 3% the night of his announcement which the NDP never recovered)

But at the end of the Jack Layton is signing his nomination paper. And in that test Layton fails.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ex-hippy:
Stockholm: where do you see that?

---

As for my fancy words I didn't think they were that fancy, but they do add up to a coherent argument (are those words too fancy?). If you disagree with my coherent argument (and it seems you do) then you should offer a coherent argument of your own to dispute it. I won't be holding my breath.

The question can easily be posed

Has the Svend Robinsion, convicted criminal, nomination helped or hurt the NDP's chances in the upcoming 2006 election?

I am absolutley sure..99% of the country would say "hurt"

quote:

---

Jacob two-two again like the NDP reality:
Talk down to every person who dare questions

---

Most people on the street feel his punishment is ridiculous

His crime is particularly egregious to people of faith because it was committed on Good Friday. (Don't forget he advocated removing God from Constitution)

As a parent we struggle to teach our kids what is right and what is wrong.

I completely denounce the criminal activity of the Liberal. It is abhorrent and should be strictly punished with stiff criminal sentences and jail time.

But the NDP lost a huge opportunity - of hammering the criminal Fiberals - by nominating convicted criminal Svend Robinson

The previous poster who said 16-17% is enough. I say no. The NDP would be higher without convicted criminal Svend Robinson.

Voting is about gut decisions. It is about families thinking what is the best for them And also about morality. It's not about fancy words.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Oh Svend Robinson will always be a convicted criminal in the eyes of the Canadian voter

---

quote:

---

His crime is particularly egregious to people of faith because it was committed on Good Friday. (Don't forget he advocated removing God from Constitution)

---

[ 14 December 2005: Message edited by: ex-hippy ]

First, I completely denounce Stephen Harper and the Conservatives- If they get elected --there will be no more medicare as we know it

If insulting me, that's what people do when they lose arguments, makes you feel better - go ahead, it only discredits your arguments

But sorry people- the NDP campaign has not taken off in Ontario

The NDP lost a golden opportunity on the number one issue of the election "integrity" by nominating convicted criminal Svend Robinson

As has been poiunted out, the NDP is doing better in BC than anywhere else in the country and that is where Robinson is gettng the most publicity.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
I have always denounced the actions of both convicted criminals Svend Rovinson and Gordon Campbell (and the group of thieves called the Conservative party)

---

quote:

---

I completely denounce the criminal activity of the Liberal. It is abhorrent and should be strictly punished with stiff criminal sentences and jail time.

---

quote:

---

First, I completely denounce Stephen Harper and the Conservatives- If they get elected --there will be no more medicare as we know it

---

Good grief, partyanimal. Is there ANY party you support???

And for the record, partyanimal, I, and many folks I know in Van Centre, ARE voting for Svend.

How well could the NDP done without convicted criminal Svend Robinson's nomination. I believe the NDP would be 3% higher than it is and more NDP mebers would be elected in January 2006.
His effect will be felt in tight ridings.
And for the innocent candidate
they will pay the price.

Nobody can say his nomination helped NDP chances this election. Jack Layton would not have his picture taken with him when he visited Vancouver Centre. Layton had to stay a substantial space away from Convicted Criminal Svend Robinson - as one should with convicted criminals.

I believe most voters would agree with this (though probably not partisan babblers)

The reelection of convicted criminal Campbell (actaually as a parent I consider drunk driving basically muder) in abhorrent. But I honestly believe his criminal acttions did cost Campbell votes.

The Globe and Mail reports today a drop in NDP support in British Columbia
The number one issue of this campaign is integrity. The NDP has a hit it did not need.

My perspective is of a voting Canadian who is not a member of any party.
Hello people - this is the percentage the NDP needs to convince- not people who always vote NDP

I have no problem with Liberal and Conservative supporters openly touting their parties here, but I DO have a problem with people who try to get phony credibility by posiing as people who have ever even considered voting NDP and then trashing the party.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
BTW: What is worse, one candidate who pled guilty, paid his debt to society, returned the stolen merchandise and seeks rehabilitation and reintegration OR an entire political party (the Liberals) that systematicaly stole hundreds of millions of dollars worth of taxpayers money to funnel to their friends?

---

Ya.. there is NO COMPARISON. One stole in a moment of lapsed reason, and made amends thereafter.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:
Last year the Tories vetoed the nomination of former Saskatchewan Premier Grant Devine, and he would have won that riding had he been allowed to run.

---

Actually, he wasn't nominated. He was not allowed to seek the nomination.

Of course he would have won if he'd run. A tree stump would have won for the Cons in that riding. As it is, he got 27.4% of the vote running as an independent, but the Con got 36.9

quote:

---

how can Svend's crimes - even considering his repentance and rehabilitation- not affect the NDP's image negatively? I just don't see it.....

---

Okay, first Svend didn't commit a crime. The act was against the law but you don't actually commit a crime without criminal intent. For instance, when sleepwalking whatever you might do you are not held liable for (though you will no doubt be obliged to seek help). Svend had a breakdown, and is not liable for his one irrational action, morally or legally.

Second, you may not see how it can't hurt the NDP, but it hasn't all the same. Polls from Vancouver centre have overwhelmingly shown that voters there will not be taking his incident into consideration in their vote, both supporters and opponents alike. If it's not hurting in the very riding he's running in, how could it be hurting in general?

"My perspective is of a voting Canadian who is not a member of any party.
Hello people - this is the percentage the NDP needs to convince- not people who always vote NDP"

The majority of Candians, despite a prior comment, do believe that stealing a ring is a criminal activity. They are hard working folks who make 'an honest living' busting their butts 8 hours a day.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
His crime is particularly egregious to people of faith because it was committed on Good Friday. (Don't forget he advocated removing God from Constitution)

---

I think that any person who cared that Mr. Robinson stole something on Good Friday would be the same type of person who wouldn’t vote for him (or the NDP) because he’s a homosexual.

If we are going to deny someone the chance to run for office because of a past indiscretion, why don’t we also deny them the chance to vote? Or how about holding a job? It could be perhaps, because they’ve (presumably) paid their debt to society and want to be able to again contribute to that society?

Anyone who thinks that the actions of Svend in any way make it difficult for the NDP to raise the ethics issue doesn’t know very much about ethics. Other people have said it in this thread already; he admitted what he did, took responsibility, apologized and took his punishment. That is extremely ethical. This is the exact opposite of the LPC which has at every opportunity sought to deny any responsibility whatsoever, has never apologized and has not (really) been punished. Hell, even Campbell has a better record. He apologized and stopped drinking.

quote:

---

Originally posted by meat67:
Hopefully I’ll be able to view the debates some how. Again yay internet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RealityBites:

www.cpac.ca

---

If Layton had shown leadership and vetoed convicted criminal Svend Robinson's nomination.

What happens in Vancouver Centre happens in Vancouver Centre (recent polls indicate Fry with a slight lead and the NDP have dropped in Lower Mainland) - I only feel sorry for the other NDP candidates - who will be hurt. I think it cost the NDP 3% nationally. The Campaign is not going well at all - The Globe and Mail states today at 13% in Ontario the fine NDP members are in trouble in Hamilton and Windsor.

quote:

---

If Layton had shown leadership and vetoed convicted criminal Svend Robinson's nomination.

---

and if Martin showed leadership he would have the Liberal Party of Canada pay back the estimated $100 million dollars that it stole from taxpayers over the course of the sponsorship scandal and he would also demand that BC Premier Gordon Campbell be barred from public life forever since he almost committed involuntary homcide!!

quote:

---

---

I personally don't care. This obsession over the past is ridiculous. "He who is without sin, may cast the first stone..." Do we want boy scouts for our leaders? The best leaders in fact have bit of larceny in their heart.

So Svend had a breakdown and stole a ring, big deal. Who hasn't built a better life by stealing office supplies? At least he wasn't implicated in gross corruption, and his past record is quite admirable, even if he has been a bit annoying. I'd vote for the People's Jeweller anyday (although that sounds demeaning, I find it cute!)

[ 16 December 2005: Message edited by: West Coast Tiger ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
As a parent we struggle to teach our kids what is right and what is wrong.

---

Svend has a FABULOUS photo album online at his website. Some notable photos of him with Chomsky,
Tutu, Kofi Annan and many more great pics.

quote:

---

Is it still ok to say 'the thief, Svend?

---

That depends, Cowardho. Are you still afraid to debate me on the subject? That's what I thought. You can say anything you want (within babble policy) as long as you stand behind your words. When you run away whenever you are challenged so you can pop up elsewhere making the same accusations that you still are unable to defend, then I will rightly dismiss you as a dishonest agitator who doesn't even believe the words he writes.

As for you, partyanimal, I don't know what your problem is. Like Cowardho, you keep calling Svend a thief yet seem unable to defend your accusation, but unlike the coward, I get the impression you actually believe it. Maybe you're just crazy, and have become comfortable with believing things you have no logical reason to believe. You've read my defense of Svend, by your own admission and didn't attempt to deal with it at all. Your whole comment was "fancy words", as if this was some kind of refutation of my arguments. Then you just launched right back into the "Svend is a theif" nonsense.

One more thing from Svend's site. A message of the next events happening in Van today and tomr. If anyone is interested in attending, please go to his site for more details.

quote:

---

There are a few important events coming up that we wanted to remind you about:

1. Pre Leadership Debate Rally. The federal party leaders including, Jack Layton, are in town for first leadership debates. Join us outside the Centre for the Performing Arts at 777 Homer Street at 3:45 PM on Friday to cheer for Jack when he arrives. Look for the NDP signs and be prepared to make some noise.

2. Post Debate Breakfast. Join Jack and local NDP candidates for a free breakfast at 9:30 AM on Saturday at Subeez Restaurant, corner of Homer and Smithe.

3. Mainstreeting Blitz. Meet at our office Saturday at 11:30 AM for a light lunch and then head out for a couple of hours. Please let us know if you are coming.

---

I blame the Thief: Svend Robinson

As I said he will always be a convicted criminal in the eyes of the Canadian Public who feel his crime on Good Friday is particularly egregious, especially to people of Faith. Svend Robinson, the Thief, who wants God removed from the Constitution.

I believe Parliament is some place special. I hold in high esteem for only the people of the highest integrity. Does stealing on Good Friday disqualify you from being elected to Parliament, for me: unequivocally YES.

Don't foget as a lawyer- Svend Robinson the thief - should have known better. Candians are appalled at weak sentences thiefs and other criminals are getting.

You are doing what NDP partisans should be doing - attacking the messenger, doing anything to discredit one of the largest scandals to ever hit the NDP - Svend Robinson the Good Friday Thief. But alas, the message remains that the NDP can not take the high road in integrity. And it is as much Jack Layton's fault as it is Svend Robinson, the Thief. The Criminal Fiberals, who stole my money for their Criminal activities, and medicare hating Conservatives presently have the momentum: not the NDP.

[ 16 December 2005: Message edited by: Left J.A.B. ]

quote:

---

As I said he will always be a convicted criminal in the eyes of the Canadian Public who feel his crime on Good Friday is particularly egregious, especially to people of Faith. Svend Robinson, the Thief, who wants God removed from the Constitution.

---

I call a Con.

You know, there is more than ONE God, and not everyone worships YOUR God. And some don't worship a God AT ALL. Therefore, your points are moot to me and many other Canadians that don't follow your opinions.

When a debater has to personally attack the other opponent: they have lost.

On to the debates tonight.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
I do believe Ed Schreyer is truly an Outstanding candidate for the NDP

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Do you also refer to the "extortionist", Jean Chretien

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RealityBites:

[Drift]I initially read this as the "exhibitionist," Jean Chretien.

---

/Thread drift

quote:

---

When a debater has to personally attack the other opponent: they have lost.

---

Since when has this been a debate? You saying "Svend the thief" over and over is not debating, though I appreciate the fact you may not be aware what debating is. You offer no points or argument, you just keep saying "the sky is green", as if it gets less blue through repitition. In fact, until now I had no idea you even wanted to debate. Certainly nothing in your posts gave that indication.

I think I've changed my mind about you. I doubt you are for real. But just to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will give you the opportunity to debate with me. Aren't I a peach? I'm sure you're very anxious to display your argumentative prowess since you just talked about debating and winning. Don't stop now. Show us what you're made of.

Here is my defense of Svend from another thread. I look foward to your point-by-point rebuttal of my argument and the inexorable force of your crushing logic. Of course, if you run away like Cowardho then I will assume you are the same sort of dishonest crank he is, and worthy of the same level of respect, that being absolute zero. Go on, impress me.

quote:

---

Let's go over this for the one thousanth time: Svend Robinson, a wealthy and successful man and easily one of the top five most recognisable politicians in Canada, takes a ring from an auction run by people who knew him (and never once expressed any interest in pressing charges). He knew that security cameras were recording everything in the room. He knew that he would be recognised by half the people there. He knew this, yet he did it anyway, and thereby seriously jeopardised everything he had worked so hard to build over the course of his life.

Now, if this was a conscious criminal act then we would have to assume that Svend is one of the dumbest people you could run across. Far dumber, for instance, than the crack-heads who have occasionally broken into houses of mine and stolen things from me, as they at least waited until I left the house to perpetrate their crimes. The problem is that we know Svend isn't an idiot. In fact, he was clearly one of the brighter people in parliament. This is a dillema that appears to defy all logic, but only if one is so desperate to attribute criminal motives to Svend that one steadfastly ignores the obvious conclusion that the evidence implies. This was not a logical act at all, but an act of a person who had lost all reason. In short, he cracked up and did something crazy.

This is the same conclusion that the judge came to and the same conclusion that the public came to, indicating in recent polls that Svend's incident would not play any role in determining their vote. It is the only conclusion that any thinking person could come to, unless so affected by their irrational hatred of Svend that it creates a blind spot in their brain where this obvious conclusion should be, causing them to talk as if this conclusion had never occured to them, no matter how many times it is pointed out. Although Svend committed an act of theft, he is not a thief, since morally and legally, people are not held entirely accountable for their actions in the midst of a breakdown. the law (being, it seems, a far sight smarter than you) makes allowances for breakdowns and other lapses of reason, because they happen. They happen to all sorts of people in all sorts of situations. It may serve some need of yours to villify Svend to pretend that they don't happen, but they do all the same.

Now you can talk about the fact that maybe Svend's not all better. Maybe it's too soon to let someone who lost his senses run for office again. Maybe he shouldn't ever run again for fear of another breakdown. You can validly have such a discussion without me dismissing you utterly as a crank who will twist any argument you can get your hands on to attack certain figures. But if you insist on running with this "Svend is a thief" idiocy, then I will have to conclude that a crank is exactly what you are and never expect to hear any honest or unbaised discussion from you as long as you're posting here.

---

The question is asked; How's the NDP campaign going? The answer is quite disappointing.

Obviously the Conservatives and Liberals have the momentum. And I honestly believe
the nomination of Good Friday thief Svend Robinson is hurting NDP chances. I feel so sorry for the innocent NDP candidates who will not be elected because of him. If the past words are so right why did Jack Layton refuse to have his picture taken with Good Friday thief Svend Robinson recently in Vancouver?
The Macleans editorial proves that I am far from alone in my view. Also the NDP is presently THIRD in Lower Mainland British Columbia.

The average voter doesn't care about fancy words. It's a gut decision. The NDP is perceived as the party weakest on criminal punishment. As a parent, you teach your kids what is right and wrong. And I will actually teach my kids that Svend Robinson's are so wrong that he does not belong in Canada's Parliament ever. So are the actions of drunk driver Campbell and the Criminal Fiberals who stole my money.

Obviously there is a dichotomy between People of Faith and no Faith. If Good Friday means nothing to you - then I suppose Svend Robinson's actions are less egregious. And you know what happens to people of Faith in the NDP and Rabble - look at Bev Desjarlais.

quote:

---

partyanimal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5565
posted 29 May 2005 04:18 PM

Question

1. Are people who oppose Same Sex Marriage welcome in the NDP? Interestingly, Bev Desjarlais was pointed out as an example of a Christian NDPer although most babblers want her out of the party.

2. Are pro-life/anti-choice people welcome in the NDP?

---

quote:

---

posted 29 May 2005 04:29 PM
Having read the responses about Desjaralais on Babble - I am often struck by the vemen against her by babblers. Although not a poll - if she ever did vote her Christian faith and voted against same sex marriage would she be expelled from the NDP? It appears Jack Layton has said so.

Also, secondly, if a pro life/anti choice person voted their conscience as an NDP Member would they be expelled?

---

quote:

---

posted 29 May 2005 04:40 PM Well if Haprper is elected I would expect a vote on abortion or some restrictions, and a vote on same sex marriage (I don't believe his promise)

---

quote:

---

posted 29 May 2005 04:49 PM
Well Reality Bites..you said it.. if a person votes their faith, which many people have a faith which in good conscience they oppose abortion and same sex marriage: they are expelled from the NDP (though you do take it one step further and expell them from parties that you aren't even a member of)

---

quote:

---

posted 29 May 2005 05:00 PM
I think I have my answer

If you have a personal faith that opposes abortion or same sex marriage - you must realize that you should not be involved in the NDP by any means - beacuse from past posts under no circumstance would the NDP allow an MP to vote their faith

Sadly I don't think this is Tommy Douglas' dream or the way to forming a Government

---

quote:

---

posted 29 May 2005 05:11 PM
I prefer appropriate respectful debate on issues - such as - that people whose faith opposes abortion or same sex marriage and would like their MPs to express these views in Parliament can not call the NDP home.

I realize that some faiths are pro choice and pro same sex marriage like the United Church. Wheras, some faith like Islam are not.

---

quote:

---

posted 29 May 2005 05:23 PM
When a poor debater looses an argument they resort to quite inappropriate words (you are Osama bin Laden)

I think this should come to an end

You've proven that people who wish to express their MPs to express their faith should not be in the NDP. So be it. Accepted. There are other parties that welcome them like Liberals and Conservatives.

---

I think the above puts the lie to *any* suggestion that PA is supportive of an inclusive, equal-rights-friendly NDP. It might also explain her fixation with Good Friday (which she has been ranting about in relation to Svend's ring incident since at *least* December 4 in this thread). Her animus to equal marriage might also go a long way toward explaining her particular fixation with Svend Robinson.

To quote PA back to herself:

quote:

---

You've proven that people who wish to express their MPs to express their faith should not be in the NDP. So be it. Accepted. There are other parties that welcome them like Liberals and Conservatives.

---

Perhaps she might find a different board more to her liking as well -- somewhere like Freak Dominion, maybe?

[ 17 December 2005: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]

quote:

---

I think this debate is running near an end.

---

Ha! A unique and inspired defense. When someone takes you to task for your words and you can't back them up, just pretend the conversation has already been settled even though it never happened. Sheer genius! Does this tactic work a lot for you?

Particularly on a board that receives taxpayer money. Sorry you haven't intimidated me one bit.

Of course this prove Babblers and a certain section of the NDP oppose free speech and only support speech they agree with

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
...a board that receives taxpayer money.... Babblers and a certain section of the NDP oppose free speech...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Particularly on a board that receives taxpayer money. Sorry you haven't intimidated me one bit.

---

This is new. How does this board recieve taxpayers money. I think that is one of those floating rumours you butbars talk about a lot, and then believe is true. Kinda like all those rubes who think Dick Chenney did 9/11?

Correct me if I am wrong.

Frankly, this is Internet Publishing. And all publishers have a right to censor content they don't like. It is called editing. That is why all publications hire what are called editors.

The National Post is not required to publish my letters, is it? And even if they do, they explicitly reserve the right to "edit"
my views.

That is its editorial right. I do not have the right to censor your speech on this board, I do not own it, but the board and its people do have the right to censor mine if they don't like it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Obviously Christianity and Good Friday are certain Babblers "Kryptonite" and just the mention of these words turn them into anger.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Rabble receives funding from a group called Alternatives (that receives approximately 70% of its funding from the Federal Government)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Obviously the Conservatives and Liberals have the momentum. And I honestly believe
the nomination of Good Friday thief Svend Robinson is hurting NDP chances. I feel so sorry for the innocent NDP candidates who will not be elected because of him. If the past words are so right why did Jack Layton refuse to have his picture taken with Good Friday thief Svend Robinson recently in Vancouver?
The Macleans editorial proves that I am far from alone in my view. Also the NDP is presently THIRD in Lower Mainland British Columbia.

The average voter doesn't care about fancy words. It's a gut decision. The NDP is perceived as the party weakest on criminal punishment. As a parent, you teach your kids what is right and wrong. And I will actually teach my kids that Svend Robinson's are so wrong that he does not belong in Canada's Parliament ever. So are the actions of drunk driver Campbell and the Criminal Fiberals who stole my money.

Obviously there is a dichotomy between People of Faith and no Faith. If Good Friday means nothing to you - then I suppose Svend Robinson's actions are less egregious. And you know what happens to people of Faith in the NDP and Rabble - look at Bev Desjarlais.

---

So do you teach your children that if they make a mistake they should be punished forever, or that they should own up to it, take responsibility, and accept the consequences. There are 2 parties here with tainted reputations. In the one case, the member in question turned himself into the police and accepted the consequences. The members of the other party ran around and covered up their wrongdoings. Can you guess who I'm talking about?

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
...And I honestly believe the nomination of Good Friday thief Svend Robinson is hurting NDP chances...

...And I will actually teach my kids that Svend Robinson's are so wrong that he does not belong in Canada's Parliament ever...

...Obviously there is a dichotomy between People of Faith and no Faith. If Good Friday means nothing to you - then I suppose Svend Robinson's actions are less egregious...

---

As a Christian you should be teaching your children the gospel of love and forgiveness. Jesus was gentle with sinners, and condemned the self-righteous.

[ 17 December 2005: Message edited by: Contrarian ]

Forgiveness? No way. Compassion? Forget it. "Judge not, lest ye be judged"? Not in this lifetime.

Do you speak to your children more about the evils of accumulating wealth, which Christ spoke of at length, or do you talk to them more about the regrettable sin of the homosexual lifestyle, which Christ never brought up even once? Is it really Christ's values that you teach your children or simply your own predjudices?

Do you tell them the story of the man who was digging a grave for his father when Christ came along and said, "forget your father, come and follow me"? Or the man who said he had to provide for his wife and children but relented when Christ said, "don't worry about your family. Come and follow me"? Do you tell them that when Jesus' family came to get him, he gestured to the crowds surrounding him and said "this is my family", because in the eyes of God bloodlines are irrelevent and all people are brothers and sisters? Do you tell them that?

Do you remind them that Svend is their brother, no different than their own siblings, and should be loved by them as they love themselves and their family, with patience and generosity of spirit? And that when forgiveness is asked for, no matter who asks, it should be given freely? Do you tell them these things?

Or do you tell them which paths, people, and actions are wrong, bad and wicked? Do you fill their heads with laws of behaviour designed to separate the "good" from the "bad", based on a lot of rules that Christ never actually spoke of himself. Christ wasn't a big fan of laws and rules. When the Pharisees quoted rules at him, to tell him his behaviour was improper (much as you do with Svend) he said that the old laws were fulfilled in him, through his boundless indiscriminatory love for all. Rules weren't important.

Do you really raise your kids the way Christ wanted us to live, or do you simply fill them up with all your personal fears and hatreds of those who are different from you. "All of us are wretched" said St. Paul. No one is better than anyone else is what he meant.

If so - what demonination do you attend? Do you attend weekly? I do. I am a practising Roman Catholic.

If you can't say yes that you are a Christian - you really should not be preaching about Christianity. So I am challenging the three of you to say Yes or No if you are a Christian and ask which faith you attend and how often.

Similar to men telling me about childbirth and non-parents telling me how to raise kids .. the statements are suspect.

Have I forgiven Svend Robinson - Yes. Have I forgotten his deeds on a special day for me - Good Friday - No. Good Friday is a day unlike any day in the year. I hope he leads a healthy long life. But I do not believe that under any circumstances he should be relected because I hold Canada's House of Common in such high esteem. It is a special place of honour and integrity. This is similar to what has been said in Macleans magazine.

I think it's fair to ask - when a person talks about Christianity- especially when they challenge another person's Christianity- if they are a Christian or not.

quote:

---

I think it's fair to ask - when a person talks about Christianity- especially when they challenge another person's Christianity- if they are a Christian or not.

---

Why, so you can dismiss them if they say no? The truth is the truth no matter who says it. If you live as Christ asked you to live, you would have nothing but love in your heart for Svend. You would want the best for him, including putting this painfully public emotional collapse (that happened to manifest itself in an irrational act of theft) behind him and supporting him in the continuation of his life's work, advocating for a better Canada through parliament. Instead I see nothing but judgement and condemnation, cast stones and incriminations.

Does it give you a thrill of self-righteousness to be bleating "Svend the thief" over and over? Does it make you feel superior? No one is above others, said St. Paul. Do you remember him in tears at his press conference, wishing he could take back actions that he was not fully in control of when he cracked under the pressure he put on himself? Did you feel forgiveness or contempt? Be honest. I've been told that Svend reads this site sometimes. Would it please you if he were hurt by your words. Do you think Christ would harrass him in such a way?

Easy to say "I forgive Svend" but less easy, it seems, to show him true generosity of spirit and believe in his conviction that he wants to amend his mistake (which was pushing himself too hard) and serve the people with renewed purpose. That you would deny him even the chance to run, let alone the chance to serve, shows incredible meanness of spirit. When someone asks for your cloak, give him your robe too. When Svend asks for your forgiveness, what will you give him? Just that? Or will you go the extra mile? What would Christ have of you?

No, I am not a Christian. That is, I do not believe that Jesus the man was the son of Yahweh, the fictional Judean patriarch, that you worship as God, or that he was Yahweh himself. Isn't that a relief? Now you can ignore everything I say. Whew, that was a close one. You almost felt obliged to take my words into consideration there for a second, but that non-Christian thing gives you that automatic wall that you can erect so that you can assure yourself that there could not be any wisdom in the things I say. That's very convenient for you, I'm sure. On the other hand, I do believe in the words of Christ, and the love he tried to teach people to live by. I am impressed by the wisdom of the scriptures and try to incorporate them in the way I live and the things I teach my children, but I'm sure none of that matters, right? The important things to remember are that I'm not Christian and Svend's not heterosexual and so neither of us is worth the spit off your heel.

I realise that I'm putting words in your mouth but this is the impression you are giving me. If I'm misrepresenting you then you should tell me why these things are important. Why shouldn't I challenge your Christianity when I feel it is lacking just because I'm not Christian myself? Why shouldn't I challenge anyone to live up to the morals they profess to live by? I would expect others to challenge me and I would thank them to do so. Svend is challenging himself by continuing on with his work. He is a very moral man and living by his morals means working against injustice in the way he has learned to do, as an MP in parliament, but you want to hang his shame around his neck like an albatross so that he never escapes it. This experience has been traumatic for him but you never want to move beyond it, you want to keep throwing it in his face. I don't see how you can be pleased with yourself acting this way towards him.

By the way, I think this is an important question, and I would like to hear the answer.

quote:

---

Do you speak to your children more about the evils of accumulating wealth, which Christ spoke of at length, or do you talk to them more about the regrettable sin of the homosexual lifestyle, which Christ never brought up even once? Is it really Christ's values that you teach your children or simply your own predjudices?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
May I ask if the previous posters Jacob two-two, Contrarian, and Aristotleded consider themselves Christians? Yes or No?

---

Pretty soon I am going to get the lecture on childbirth from the men of babble.

We do get involved .. our family donates much of our used clothes and has volunteered at the local food bank. And did I mention we sponsor a little girl in India (now don't all start cursing because I am going to say it) a Christian Charity.

If Svend Robinson the Good Friday Thief did read this ... I would plead with him not to go forward his candidacy for Parliament.
Your actions on Good Friday a particular Holy day is egregious to people of Faith. (though I can understand if you do not believe in Good Friday you can not understand this... it is about faith)

Svend when you asked to remove God from the Constitution... don't you know ... this is not the views of many Canadians.

I would say imagine a House of Commons with integrity. Imagine a Commons with is help in high esteem for Canadians.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Svend when you asked to remove God from the Constitution... don't you know ... this is not the views of many Canadians.

---

A group of people in his constituency signed a petition asking for God to be removed from the Constitution. As their Member of Parliament, what was he supposed to do? Merely delivering a petition on behalf of your constituents doesn't mean you actually support what the petition calls for. It makes you a good constituency representative.

And you are the only person I have ever heard who's chosen to make an issue of the fact that this happened on Good Friday, when Jesus Himself, as was pointed out earlier, promised the thieves beside Him that they would enter into paradise.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Yes, just as I thought non-Christians telling Christians about their Christianity - highly suspect at best ...

...If Svend Robinson the Good Friday Thief did read this ...

...Your actions on Good Friday a particular Holy day is egregious to people of Faith...

---

Which of these statements do you have a problem with?

quote:

---

You're talking about the day on which Jesus died; when he said of his crucifiers: "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do." While he was dying on the cross, he said to the repentant thief; "This day you shall be with me in Paradise."

As a Christian you should be teaching your children the gospel of love and forgiveness. Jesus was gentle with sinners, and condemned the self-righteous.

---

I only ask people if they are Christians when they start lecturing me about Jesus. As Christianity is a faith you have to live to really know.

I also ask when people lecture me about raising kids if they have kids.

Anyways, Audra is welcome to end this debate any time she wants to

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Pretty soon I am going to get the lecture on childbirth from the men of babble.

---

How do you feel about being a Conservative when it is common knowledge that fundamentalist Protestants (so many of whom are CPC MPs) all regard the Pope as the Anti-Christ and Catholicism as a sham and a fraud.

[ 17 December 2005: Message edited by: Stockholm ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Contrarian , which Christian demomination do you belong to? I am Roman Catholic.

Do you attend church service weekly? I do.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Do you attend church service weekly? I do.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Yes, just as I thought non-Christians telling Christians about their Christianity - highly suspect at best ...

---

Is this from a non-NDPer lecturing NDPers?

quote:

---

Originally posted by LiberalPrisoner:
Is this from a non-NDPer lecturing NDPers?

(note folks: I am not an NDPer, do I even have the right to ask this question?)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
BTW: Do you get fucked on Good Friday?

How do you feel about being a Conservative when it is common knowledge that fundamentalist Protestants (so many of whom are CPC MPs) all regard the Pope as the Anti-Christ and Catholicism as a sham and a fraud.

---

It is for these people their words are highly suspect.
For Jacob two-two you are not a believer in Christ(your words). Your comments on Christ must be approached as an outsider.

And Stockholm who wrote a quote "I want Jews to eat pork" I would even go far to say he is quite anti-all Faiths.

Aristotle and Contrarian will not disclose there denominations and if they are weekly chuch goes. It goes to their credibility.

If you are Christians - again does it mean "nothing" that Svend Robinson's crime was comitted on one of Christianity's Holiest Day? Is this day for you - just another day?
It is not just another day for me.

Also with Svend there is his actions with Sue Rodriguez and euthanasia. No MP ever presented a petitioned to remove God from the Constitution. And Alexa McDonagh, the Leader, did the just and correct thing by removing some of his duties.

For example: I would never lecture a Hindu on their Hindu faith. I am not Hindu.

I responded to the question - How's the campaign going? I believe the Good Friday thief Svend Robinson (and these feelings are echoed in a Maclean's article that he should be sent backing) have hurt "the campaign" without momentum. It is an outsider opinion.

A few things I teach my kids

Never be afraid to share your opinion.

For my daughter, do not be the least bit concerned if some men get angry.

quote:

---

I note I have never called another Babbler a derogatory name.

---

No, just Svend Robinson. I guess it's easier to insult people when you don't have to interact with them personally, isn't it?

quote:

---

Well as a Christian I do think there is a difference between a person who claims to be Christian but does not attend any denomination or goes to church on a weekly basis

---

Of course there is. There will always be a difference between you and "them", don't you worry. So comforting to dismiss everyone's words without listening. How very simple it makes life.

quote:

---

It is for these people their words are highly suspect.
For Jacob two-two you are not a believer in Christ(your words). Your comments on Christ must be approached as an outsider.

---

And so, ignored completely. As well as Christians who don't attend a particular church. And if you met one of those who tried to tell you something you didn't agree with, I'm sure you'd find some other way to put yourself above them and ignore their words. This is not a faith. It is a defense mechanism.

I can understand you approaching me as an outsider, but you're not approaching me at all. You're just ignoring me. It shows a profound lack of respect for others. For instance, as a parent, a do take the words of non-parents about childraising with a grain of salt. But still I often engage them on the subject of childraising and find they often have insightful things to say. I would never dream of doing what you are doing, saying that their opinions were worthless and ignoring them completely because they couldn't possibly have any merit.

People can have good ideas about things they are not personally involved in. I think you are afraid of new ideas and separate yourself from others in your mind so that you don't have to be challenged. It is nothing but fear.

quote:

---

Aristotle and Contrarian will not disclose there denominations and if they are weekly chuch goes. It goes to their credibility.

---

How so? They never claimed to be church-goers, just Christians. They have lost no credibility. They have never claimed to be what they weren't. You are grasping at straws so you don't have to listen to anyone.

quote:

---

If you are Christians - again does it mean "nothing" that Svend Robinson's crime was comitted on one of Christianity's Holiest Day? Is this day for you - just another day?
It is not just another day for me.

---

What did Jesus say when the Pahrisees said that he shouldn't work on the Sabbath? He said rules aren't important. You would do well to listen to this, for you seem to obsess about the details of your religion while missing the spirit. You villify people and put yourself above them, and then get put out about who's observing Good Friday. Remove the log in your own eye. Also, as has been pointed out, though you disresectfully never listen or acknowledge, Svend was not in control of himself when he did what he did, so how does it matter when he did it?

quote:

---

Also with Svend there is his actions with Sue Rodriguez and euthanasia. No MP ever presented a petitioned to remove God from the Constitution. And Alexa McDonagh, the Leader, did the just and correct thing by removing some of his duties.

---

I understand you've never liked Svend or the causes he stands for (like representing his constituents). That's fine. The thing that reflects poorly on your character is seizing on a personal tragedy of his to use as ammunition against him. Stick to the real reasons that you dislike him, and don't exploit his pain.

quote:

---

I would never lecture a Hindu on their Hindu faith. I am not Hindu.

---

I have challenged Hindus on their faith before. They engaged me on the subject. They were more respectful of my opinions than you, who have dismissed me utterly as beneath your notice.

quote:

---

A few things I teach my kids

Never be afraid to share your opinion.

---

That's great, but if they run into a person like yourself it won't do them much good. Their opinion will be ignored and dismissed. Though I daresay they know this about you already.

[ 18 December 2005: Message edited by: Jacob Two-Two ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
Aristotle and Contrarian will not disclose there denominations and if they are weekly chuch goes. It goes to their credibility.

---

So if I told you where I go to church, would you say that the United Church isn't a real Christian church? What's to stop me from turning around and claiming that you aren't a real Christian because the Catholic faith is about worshiping idols like Mary and the Pope (a position I personally DO NOT agree with, but one that many Christians I know hold)? Did you know that many Christians believe the Catholics have been deceived by Satan into worshiping a false religion?

My observation of the electorate is that we are a little like fish - ten second memories.

All of time until after New Year's is like the "phony war" where England and Germany were supposed to be at war but not much happened.

This is practice for the most important part of the campaign - the last 2 weeks.

I predict issues raised now (like SSM) will NOT be determining factors on voting day. A crisis or two, a couple of scandals will occur.

I have consitently condemmned the actions of criminal Fiberal party. They are horrid. Either Martin knew about the thievery or is the dumbest person on the planet. Either way it is serious criminal action or neglect.

He also fails the leadership test - by not firing Scott Reid for his insulting comments about parents like me

But if the Conservatives are elected I really believe medicare is ended in Canada

So what's the independent voter to do (who is not a party member). I don't think the Greens will elect anybody. The NDP is running Svend Robinson the Good Friday Thief
and Layton fails this important test. (also for sending Svend a few days after his crime to a patronage nonsense in Scotland)

Jacob two-two it's actually spelled "defence" in Canada (defense is an American spelling of the word)

If I even believed Svend the Good Fiday Thief for one minute in his crying on TV.. he felt bad because he knew he'd be caught

It is the truth

1. he is wealthy he could have easily afforded the ring.

2. He is a lawyer..he should have known the laws

3. If your ill and don't get psychiatric help -are you not really responsible for your actions?

Aristotle I'd still like to know what denomination you are in and do you attend church weekly. (If you haven't figured out no man will silence me) You have criticized my interpretation of Christianity and speak such as the "Supreme Expert" on Christianity. I have the highest respect for the United Church of Canada and all churches in Canada.

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
But the most important thing which I saved for list: It is a HUGE thing for me that the crime was committed on Good Friday. For me it's "the" day.

---

Then you'll have to scream about that one on your own. You're the only person who cares about the act ocurring on Good Friday. I'm finished arguing with you about this.

[ 18 December 2005: Message edited by: Aristotleded24 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
...But the most important thing which I saved for list: It is a HUGE thing for me that the crime was committed on Good Friday. For me it's "the" day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by partyanimal:
For example: I would never lecture a Hindu on their Hindu faith. I am not Hindu.

---

(disclosure: I am a Christian{though not a regular churchgoer at present, although my views on Svend would be the same if I were a regular churchgoer}was raised Presbyterian {which would make me United Church if I were Canadian}and was married to a Catholic who sometimes went to mass and sometimes did not(she received a Catholic funeral after her early death}and, in my considered religious opinion, YOU TRULY NEED TO GET A LIFE!)

Even Jesus would find your repetitious and vindictive posts annoying were He reading this(which, for all we know He may be). Jesus would not be going on and on and on about a past sin that the sinner had clearly repented and faced consequences for. Jesus would look to the future, to what that redeemed sinner would do now.

It was that kind of thing that the Romans decided to kill him for.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Burch:
was raised Presbyterian {which would make me United Church if I were Canadian

---

quote:

---

How's The Campaign Going?

---

it should be (set in Time Horton's coffee shop):

quote:

---

Originally posted by RealityBites:

[Drift]Not necessarily. While the UC was a merger of Presbyterians, the Methodists, and the Congregationalists, about 30% of Presbyterian congregations didn't join and remain as the Presbyterian Church in Canada.[/Drift]

---

Really? Well, I assumed the ones who didn't join were in the far right wing of Canadian Presbyterianism, so I don't think I'd have thrown in with them.

Glad Inquisition Animal(or was it Lynching Party Animal?) was banned. Thanks Michelle.

(BTW, I thinks the Animal woulda shouted for Barabbas, thats what I thinks...)

As to my own definition of Christianity, I refer the reader to the lyrics of Bruce Cockburn's "CRY OF A TINY BABE" or Ewan MacColl's
"BALLAD OF THE CARPENTER".

[ 19 December 2005: Message edited by: Ken Burch ]

[ 19 December 2005: Message edited by: Ken Burch ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Burch:
Really? Well, I assumed the ones who didn't join were in the far right wing of Canadian Presbyterianism, so I don't think I'd have thrown in with them.

---