babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » election 2006   » Liberals want to destroy NDP

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Liberals want to destroy NDP
TCD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9061

posted 28 January 2006 12:39 PM      Profile for TCD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In case there's any doubt as to what the Liberals were thinking when they canvassed with Buzz Hargrove:
quote:
While Liberal strategists believe that Mr. Martin's enthusiastic campaigning in the last week and his refusal to wave the white flag earned the party 20 more seats, it was not enough.

"What we needed was two more things," the adviser said. "We needed a little more time, but we also needed a corresponding recession in the numbers of the NDP."

Four more points scraped from the NDP was all that was needed. But it didn't happen.


Today's Globe.

When Liberals gleefully appear with Buzz Hargrove, when they eagerly promote the appearance of Maude Barlow, Elizabeth May and the other members of the "Think" Twice coalition, they do it to depress the NDP vote - not the CPC vote. They do it to defeat New Democrats.

Just stating the obvious.


From: Toronto | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
BCastro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11420

posted 28 January 2006 12:49 PM      Profile for BCastro     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
this is why the ndp needs to finish off the liberals at next opportunity. the ridings to focus on are obvious.
From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 28 January 2006 12:50 PM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by TCD:
Just stating the obvious.

Indeed, and the NDP wants to destroy the Liberals. Or at least it should.

Throughout the years, I've actively campaigned against the Council of Canadians. I've told all NDPers I know that the CoC is a Liberal organization that takes money that would otherwise go to the NDP. All NDPers should cancel their PACS with the CoC and give the money to a truly worthwhile organization, hopefully the NDP.


From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 28 January 2006 01:02 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I believe that NDP MP Peter Julian was Director of the Council of Canadians before being elected in 2004.

Are you suggesting that he might be a double agent/closet Liberal??

The CoC is an organization that focuses on ISSUES and it is not a political party. I have no objection to peoplke forming non-partisan organzations to promote certain issues.

[ 28 January 2006: Message edited by: Stockholm ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 28 January 2006 01:09 PM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
woosh.
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 28 January 2006 01:12 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
BTW: Isn't it kind of stating the obvious to say that the Liberals want to destroy the NDP?? Each party regards the others parties as enemies. The NDP would be only to happy to "destroy" the Liberals if we could and both of the NDP and the Liberals would like to destroy the Conservatives.

This is politics. were you expecting Marquess of Queensberry rules?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 28 January 2006 01:13 PM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The face of the CoC is the Liberal face of Maude Barlow, someone who will likely run for the Liberals someday. There is even a part of the CoC website devoted to her ego. So even if there are some NDPers involved, it is still primarily a Liberal organization.
From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 28 January 2006 01:14 PM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, wow. I take back that "woosh". Privateer's second post had no such helpful winking icon to indicate sarcasm.
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 28 January 2006 01:21 PM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
This is politics. were you expecting Marquess of Queensberry rules?

There are too many people in the NDP who don't have the fighting desire that a political party, particularly a left-wing party, needs. Some also have the misperception that the existance of the LPC serves some useful purpose.

[ 28 January 2006: Message edited by: Privateer ]


From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
TCD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9061

posted 28 January 2006 02:07 PM      Profile for TCD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stockholm, two things:

1) From what I've heard Maude acted unilaterally and has had some significant blowback from members of the CoC. Her defensive insistence that she wasn't urging people to vote Liberal kinda confrims this.

2) It may be obvious to you but a lot of New Dems and people like Buzz Hargrove insist that the Liberals and the NDP can work together for the benefit of Canada. I just like remninding folks that that's not what the Liberals are interested in.


From: Toronto | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 28 January 2006 02:16 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree that we should have no fait in the Liberals motives, but that being said, there is no question that in a minority situation, the Liberals will cave to the NDP on far more issues than will a Conservative minority government because the Liberals want to attract left of centre votes from the NDP. So it is in their interest to appropriate NDP policies and try to attract Liberal/NDP voters.

The Conservatves on the other hand probably do not see the NDP as competition for votes to any significant degree. There is nothing in it for them to adopt NDP policies - if anything it would only irritate their own core voters.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Thrasymachus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5747

posted 28 January 2006 02:29 PM      Profile for Thrasymachus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Throughout the years, I've actively campaigned against the Council of Canadians. I've told all NDPers I know that the CoC is a Liberal organization that takes money that would otherwise go to the NDP. All NDPers should cancel their PACS with the CoC and give the money to a truly worthwhile organization, hopefully the NDP.
I dropped out of the CoC even before I came to the full realization that the group was primarily focused on the engrandizement of Maude's ego. The reason I quit and would counsel many to think twice about joining them is that they have a tendency to sell their lists. I received more junk mail asking me for cash in the one year that I was a member of CoC than all my other years combined. And that's saying a lot as a life long dipper.

From: South of Hull | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
asterlake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11892

posted 28 January 2006 03:53 PM      Profile for asterlake        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by BCastro:
this is why the ndp needs to finish off the liberals at next opportunity. the ridings to focus on are obvious.

That's like me saying to Mike Tyson:
"C'mon Mike, are you chicken or what? Come out here and fight like a man. I'm going to give you a lesson you'll never forget.

Ouch!. Hey, no fair, I didn't say you could fight back."


From: Exshaw | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
candle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3103

posted 28 January 2006 03:56 PM      Profile for candle     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Privateer:
The face of the CoC is the Liberal face of Maude Barlow, someone who will likely run for the Liberals someday. There is even a part of the CoC website devoted to her ego. So even if there are some NDPers involved, it is still primarily a Liberal organization.

That should read someone who will lijely run AGAIN for the Liberals someday.


From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Brian White
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8013

posted 28 January 2006 04:09 PM      Profile for Brian White   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that people who think the coc are a liberal organization are on crack.
Has any of you read "too close for comfort"?
Barlow does not mince words. If she says the conservatives is a front for the corperations, who would disagree? It is clear as day. She also took a cold look at top liberals like pettigrew and their attempts to impose deep intigration on canada through more devious ways.

From: Victoria Bc | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 28 January 2006 04:54 PM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Douglas' story about Mouseland talks about cats with spots who make noise like a mouse but eat like cats (*cough*Buzz*cough*). We have to watch out for those.
From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
JKR
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7904

posted 29 January 2006 03:55 AM      Profile for JKR        Edit/Delete Post
The CoC is more progressive then the NDP. Have people forgotten the disapointing governments in Ontario and BC? Are people raving about the utopias the NDP has created in Sask and Manitoba? Where was the NDp when it came to fight free-trade? When it comes to fighting the neo-Con agenda, the CoC has been leagues ahead of the NDP.

If we had PR we wouldn't have to worry so much about the dreaded Liberals taking away a few centre-left progressive voters. We could spend a lot more time sticking to progressive issues. But as it stands now we allow anti-Liberal rhetoric to replace reasoned dialogue on the issues. Our problem with the Liberals is that their policies are too close to ours. If we had PR we wouldn't have to concentrate so much on a counterproductive turf war.

And if the Liberals are the enemy, why are they the ones we've worked with so successfully in minority governments? Have people forgotten about the NDP's glory years during the Liberal minority government of Pearson? Have people forgotten about the child care plan? The Kelowna Agreement? Reducing taxes on the low and middle income tax brackets? Layton went around boasting about the great things the NDP accomplished within a Liberal minority government. Would any sane person say that the NDP will get these deals implemented with the current Conservative government?

The Liberals are not the enemy. Neither are the Conservatives. The enemy is neo-Con ideas that are hurting the world. And it is a fact that the Cons are much more alligned to the neo-Con agenda then the Libs are. And to a certain extent NDP governments have alligned themselves with the neo-Con agenda.

I'm not prepared to wage a war against the Libs that will just lead to a never ending reign of neo-Conservative governments. The Libs are a fact of life in Canada. They're here to stay for the foreseeable future. If the NDP wants to serve a useful role in supporting a progressive agenda they'll have to be prepared to work with Liberals. Because the Cons are never going to work toward progressive ideals.

[ 29 January 2006: Message edited by: JKR ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
LukeVanc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2735

posted 29 January 2006 04:04 AM      Profile for LukeVanc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm pretty sure that the CoC is one of the many, many organizations that the NDP sells its membership lists to. I have received absolute piles upon piles of spam from the CoC over the last several years I have been a member of the NDP.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Thrasymachus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5747

posted 29 January 2006 04:06 AM      Profile for Thrasymachus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I'm not prepared to wage a war against the Libs that will just lead to a never ending reign of neo-Conservative governments. The Libs are a fact of life in Canada. They're here to stay for the foreseeable future. If the NDP wants to serve a useful role in supporting a progressive agenda they'll have to be prepared to work with Liberals. Because the Cons are never going to work toward progressive ideals.
So why don't we just join the Liberals and try to change that party from within? Or better yet, forget about joining a political party. Join a lobbying group on the periphery of the political process and simply stand in judgement of progressives who have had to wrestle with the difficulties of being in power and fundraise based on the fear of an apocalyptic enemy.

From: South of Hull | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
JKR
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7904

posted 29 January 2006 04:31 AM      Profile for JKR        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Thrasymachus:
So why don't we just join the Liberals and try to change that party from within?

If it wasn't for the possibility of getting PR I think that would be the best way to go at the federal level. Under FPTP, a hostile takeover of the Libs by NDP'ers would be the way to go.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 29 January 2006 04:42 AM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by LukeVanc:
I'm pretty sure that the CoC is one of the many, many organizations that the NDP sells its membership lists to. I have received absolute piles upon piles of spam from the CoC over the last several years I have been a member of the NDP.

Not the Nova Scotia NDP because I have never received junkmail from the CoC, or at least not in many years.


From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
obscurantist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8238

posted 29 January 2006 04:44 AM      Profile for obscurantist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by JKR:
The CoC is more progressive then the NDP. Have people forgotten the disapointing governments in Ontario and BC? Are people raving about the utopias the NDP has created in Sask and Manitoba? Where was the NDp when it came to fight free-trade? When it comes to fighting the neo-Con agenda, the CoC has been leagues ahead of the NDP.

Apples and oranges.

I'm not going to defend every thing that's been done by every NDP government. On balance I think they've been about as good as any other party in government, and often better. I once was so upset with the BC NDP that I joined and campaigned for the Green Party.

But of course we can't say for sure what the Greens might be like in government, because they've never been there. Nor has the Council of Canadians. And the Greens are, at least in theory, campaigning to one day BE the government. The CoC isn't. So to call them "more progressive" than the NDP overlooks the fact that the CoC hasn't had to make the hard decisions that NDP governments have, particularly when you point to the record of those governments to support your argument.


From: an unweeded garden | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Thrasymachus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5747

posted 29 January 2006 04:46 AM      Profile for Thrasymachus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I'm pretty sure that the CoC is one of the many, many organizations that the NDP sells its membership lists to. I have received absolute piles upon piles of spam from the CoC over the last several years I have been a member of the NDP.
The federal NDP provides you with the option of allowing them to share your name with other organizations. The CoC does not provide you with the same courtesy.

From: South of Hull | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
garthwest
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8100

posted 29 January 2006 05:04 PM      Profile for garthwest        Edit/Delete Post
Seems to me debates about the relative purity of the CoC and Maude Barlow, Buzz Hargrove and his motives, the NDP and, for that matter, the progressive wing of the Liberal party are futile. The good and the perfect, after all, ought not be enemies. At this particular point in the evolution of this country it is nonsense to spend time and energy firing into the centre of whatever's left of 'liberal' opinion.
If progressives don't find some positive way to respond to Harper and the conservatives they are going to find that the current government will be able to successfully respond to a range of perceived problems in a variety of ways. How successfully the new Prime Minister is in this exercise will determine the makeup of the next majority government.
In an economic atmosphere where the fiscal levers of power are available to cater to the whims of provincial politicians and social conservatives I think it's dangerous for the left to pretend that we don't have a real problem on our hands.
Taking for granted that a minority situation will lead to something positive is naive and dangerous.
So far as I know, Harper and the CPC have not made any commitment to Proportional Representation; in the absence of real change in the way our representatives are elected it may not be just the NDP that finds itself in the wilderness for an unfortunately long time.

From: Canada | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Nemo
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7925

posted 30 January 2006 03:09 PM      Profile for Nemo        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by JKR:
Are people raving about the utopias the NDP has created in Sask and Manitoba?

Well if people in Manitoba say all politicians are crooks, even conservatives can't find anything Doer has done that's wrong. Other than being different.

Libs are in debt and if there is an early election Jack might win more seats than the NDP ever had. Even Toronto might fall.

Since when did the rest of canada listen to how good a job manitoba is doing We've had balanced budgets for 10 years.

Buzz needs to be organized out of a job. I wonder what his motives were? Senate seat?

[ 30 January 2006: Message edited by: Nemo ]


From: winnipeg | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
LukeVanc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2735

posted 30 January 2006 11:59 PM      Profile for LukeVanc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

The federal NDP provides you with the option of allowing them to share your name with other organizations. The CoC does not provide you with the same courtesy.

Well you don't join the federal NDP. You join your provincial counterpart.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
happy go leftie (Red Tory)
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11640

posted 06 February 2006 07:17 PM      Profile for happy go leftie (Red Tory)        Edit/Delete Post
Quote:
TCD: Just stating the obvious.
1) From what I've heard Maude acted unilaterally and has had some significant blowback from members of the CoC. Her defensive insistence that she wasn't urging people to vote Liberal kinda confrims this.


>>>>>TCD: where did you hear this twaddle, from a Conservative? Bunch of twaddle. Make it real good and insightful why don’t you? You kinda confirm you’re not on the level. The announcement by Barlow “to not vote Conservative” was ENDORSED BY THE COUNCIL OF CANADIANS. What a pack of bull you’re piping off the presses. Can’t believe a stinking word of this.

You made that up about Barlow acting unilaterally. The CofC endorsed that statement “to not vote Conservative”. Oh, “you hear” eh? Bet your right in the thick of the CofC right? You made that whole clap trap up. And you say: since she wasn’t urging people to vote Liberal, that “KINDA” confirms this? You’re really whacked. This is “reverse onus”, a person guilty just because they’re “not” doing something? This “reverse onus” CRAP is a well known Conservative tactic, and this entire thread premise really smells foul.

You stated nothing of the kind “just stating the obvious”. You made the whole damn thing out of nothing. Where does this article indicate your “imagined premise”? What did your phoney premise have to do with Barlow and May? What has the author of this article done to defend progressive Canadians? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO DEFEND PROGRESSIVE CANADIANS? Jane Taber’s view? That dough-headed barfly, who’s “not hot” dingbat from Harper’s own CTV television station? But her idiocy aside, “your quoted article didn’t even remotely “infer” what you are spreading. It’s a pure fabrication on your part. Give me a break. Why did you bring Maude Barlow and Elizabeth May into this, nothing to do with the article? This stinks like a Conservative skunk. Barlow is railing against Harper, and warning everyone, so she is now YOUR likely target to discredit right?

You turned a nothing article into a big hullabaloo for what purpose? You thought very clever, but NOT SO MUCH. How the hell that came out of the premise of this article is just bull. The article didn’t say the Liberals were out to destroy the NDP party, but you used this as a devious “lead in” to sneakily elicit antagonism against Barlow and May.

The Conservatives campaigned rampantly, and repeatedly to take NDP votes, where it was in their direct interests, in B.C. Saskatchewan, Oshawa, etc. The Conservatives made up a story “that Layton used Privatized healthcare”, to tarnish NDP about their stand on public healthcare. Conservatives used everybody, the NDP, the Bloc, and the Liberals as slander targets, and are opportunistic as hell. That’s the game, how it was played everywhere.

This is just a bogus thread to stir up hatred, partisanship, in a disturbing attempt to destroy reputations of some very dedicated progressive leaders in this country, and divert people from real issues, and what’s good for Canada. Partisanship incitements like this one against progressives are tasteless, fruitless, insulting, brainless manipulations. People who believe this garbage are incited to split from the people who work for the good of the country, and tarnish the reputations of incredibly good people? This is ignorance at it’s best. What is your ulterior motive? It’s pretty clear.

Someone is trying to divert attention from the real enemy of Canada "this Conservative Party", and it's a sleazy attempt. Sounds very much like a well-known “Conservative strategy”: Divide and Conquer. Seen it before, you can keep it. Ridiculous assertions about Barlow and May. Maybe you’re part of the non-progressive Conservative party. It isn’t only about the party, it’s about the progressive needs of the people, the country. Anything less than this is pure evil. Unless you don’t care what happens to the people you pretend to care about? Unless the only goal is to weaken the pro-Canada forces? Duhhhh?

Harper is Pro-U.S.A. The Conservative party wants us to be the U.S. of Canada, and in a big "all encompassing" hurry. And you’re making up stories to make people mad at some of the most progressive people in this country that have worked tirelessly for things the people care about the most? Just a scam.

This was a sneaky way to undermine Barlow, using a bogus article to make it look like she was against the NDP by default:
Maude Barlow said do not vote Conservative, as did the Nurses Federation and others. Huge difference. What, in your little mind you get to control whether any really progressive forces get to speak in this country? Forget it.

Attacking Barlow is so bogus. She's a force for good. Barlow attacks any party that threatens the interests of Canadians, a fact. If the Liberal leader turns out to be left-leaning pro-Canada, that wouldn't even be an issue anyways. It's the country that counts, hell with this bull. Sleazy manipulators are a dime a dozen.

Dare to attack Maude Barlow. Barlow, and the Council of Canadians are the ones who fought Globalization, fought and won stopping the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), fought tons of battles for Canadians. This is a dirty act to try to impugn incredibly valuable people who want the Harper agenda stopped. Unless you aren't on the side of Canada, how the hell can you attack the people who are “actually” standing up for Canada? What did you do to fight for progressive Canadian interests? Guess you wanted such things as the MAI to happen? Canada’s water to be sold off? Or is this all talk, and armchair machinations?

I suppose next you'll be attacking Linda McQuaig too. How about the 125,000 member Nurses who are fighting Harper Conservatives to stop the destruction and complete privatization of our healthcare system? The nurses federation “was aware of Harper’s plan to fund complete privatization of our healthcare system by funding all of it on the public purse all over the country” to U.S. Multinational corporate HMO’s and “cold-blooded” corporate greed. I guess the Nurses just wanted to destroy the NDP too? What drivel. They want to stop HARPER. I guess that offends your manipulative sensibilities?

Some of the comments in this thread are very suspiciously anti-Canadian interests. One needs to wonder why? NOT.

Some people TALK, some people act. Maude Barlow stood side by side with Layton, and many others attacking Globalization. Council of Canadians worked tirelessly for Canada’s interests. Where do the big talkers get off attacking the people who act in Canada's best interests? Barlow IS non-partisan, pro-left, pro-Canadian interests. Guess you’re opposed to this? This thread premise is only to incite hatred against really good people. You believe every article you read? Better yet, how someone “reads into an article” and finds something about incredibly good people that isn’t even there? That's exactly the problem. That’s exactly how some people use anything they can to incite you, and why are some of you falling for it?

It is clear that the moderator should be looking quite closely at the reason for this thread, and the deliberate “manipulative slander job used against Barlow and May”. Michelle, Audra, anyone see this attack on incredible life-long progressive Canadians? This is a progressive board, where deliberate “reputation smears” against progressives should not be tolerated. Hope you’re paying close attention. Not to mention this is pure baiting of progressive people to have to address such ludicrous assertions in the first place.

“Just stating the obvious”, only a Conservative backer who is absolutely not progressive could even create such blather as this thread, and it is clear why. THIS IS THE WOMAN THAT “LCD” WOULD INCITE PROGRESSIVES TO HATE (just a few of the incredible initiatives of Maude Barlow):

For those who need a refresher on what the MAI proposed to do:

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/MAI.asp#MoreInformation

Maude Barlow firmly supports the left, and progressive forces:

http://www.canadians.org/browse_categories.htm?COC_token=23@@a4b42bd56c343de3fce29b95fa268ea3&step=2&catid=430&iscat=1

(sorry for scroll)

Council denounces Harper’s desire to include property rights in Charter and their horrific implications for Canadians on several levels.

http://www.canadians.org/display_document.htm?COC_token=23@@18a3dcecd6881d9195bb7f195bbde60b&id=1347&isdoc=1&catid=121

“The Charter is supposed to protect the rights of all Canadians”, said Maude Barlow, National Chairperson for the Council of Canadians. “This legal change would favour private property over people.”
The entrenchment of property rights would give new meaning to the “expropriation” of property and the compensation awarded in such cases. Most Canadians would agree that an individual should be compensated when the government seizes private property for a national park or a highway. However, few would find it acceptable if the government were prevented from protecting public health or the environment in order to safeguard a corporation’s profit margin. Under Stephen Harper’s plan that is exactly what is likely to happen, according to Jean-Yves Lefort, Trade Campaigner for the Council of Canadians.
“We have seen this with NAFTA’s Chapter 11”, says Lefort. “Huge corporations have used their property rights under NAFTA to challenge environmental laws, municipal land-use controls, water protection measures, the activities of Canada Post, and even the decisions of juries and appellate courts.”
A new broad definition of property rights under the Canadian Charter could put a chill on a variety of regulations and initiatives designed to protect the public interest. Governments would be forced to govern under the constant threat of lawsuits and heavy compensation costs. “Canadians would have to pay corporations for the privilege of exercising democracy”, says Barlow.

edited to separate links

[ 06 February 2006: Message edited by: happy go leftie (Red Tory) ]


From: suburban outskirts | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 06 February 2006 07:37 PM      Profile for ceti     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
happy go lefty, great analysis. It is pretty egregious that folks are stirring up shit against Barlow and May who have been at the forefront of progressive movements in this country. It also smacks of excessive partisanship. I wouldn't be surprised if this particular bit of nastiness was guided by the invisible hand of Conservative think tanks, but then again, a lot of lefties are often their own worst enemy.
From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 06 February 2006 07:37 PM      Profile for ceti     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
happy go lefty, great analysis. It is pretty egregious that folks are stirring up shit against Barlow and May who have been at the forefront of progressive movements in this country. It also smacks of excessive partisanship. I wouldn't be surprised if this particular bit of nastiness was guided by the invisible hand of Conservative think tanks, but then again, a lot of lefties are often their own worst enemy.
From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Pogo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2999

posted 06 February 2006 08:36 PM      Profile for Pogo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Its all a question of what is progressive.
From: Richmond BC | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
happy go leftie (Red Tory)
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11640

posted 06 February 2006 09:20 PM      Profile for happy go leftie (Red Tory)        Edit/Delete Post
this was not invented by any left-leaning progressive person, this topic was created to bait progressives, and to undermine the credibility of some of the most powerful progressive voices, needed now more than ever, to fight the Harper agenda. There is no way this was a progressive view to begin with, but is a dirty tactic to remove all opposition public voices out of Harper's path. There was nothing in the article that fed this monstrous attack on Barlow and May, and there is nothing in the world that justifies it's entire premise. This smells of manipulation in it's most disturbing form.
From: suburban outskirts | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Thrasymachus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5747

posted 06 February 2006 10:05 PM      Profile for Thrasymachus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Opposition voices like say... Emerson.
From: South of Hull | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 06 February 2006 11:39 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
hgl - your links are causing me sidescroll. Please edit your post using make a shorter link or tinyurl.
From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
tommie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8455

posted 09 February 2006 01:22 PM      Profile for tommie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Great post HGL. I'm a card-carrying New Democrat, but before being a New Democrat I am a supporter of the leftist social movement of Canada that includes but is not limited to the NDP. Putting down social and environmental organizations, unions or other groups for not blindly and unconditionally supporting the NDP is absurd. Frankly, I think these groups being anti-Tory first is a much wiser choice than pro-NDP no matter what.


From: Canada? | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 09 February 2006 01:57 PM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by obscurantist:
Apples and oranges.

I'm not going to defend every thing that's been done by every NDP government. On balance I think they've been about as good as any other party in government, and often better. I once was so upset with the BC NDP that I joined and campaigned for the Green Party.

But of course we can't say for sure what the Greens might be like in government, because they've never been there. Nor has the Council of Canadians. And the Greens are, at least in theory, campaigning to one day BE the government. The CoC isn't. So to call them "more progressive" than the NDP overlooks the fact that the CoC hasn't had to make the hard decisions that NDP governments have, particularly when you point to the record of those governments to support your argument.


I do agree with the apples and oranges statement, because the NDP is different than organisations like the CoC and the CCPA. The NDP is a political party, so that means they have to be concerned with such things as optics, chosing their battles, and in some cases dealing with defeat. They have to struggle within the legislative system to accomplish their agenda.

The CoC and the CCPA, however, not being political parties, don't have that worry, and it isn't their mandate anyways. These types of ogranisations are lobbying/watchdog organisations. They keep an eye on the types of policies the government choses, and lobby for other types of policies. Ultimately, their main focus is on which policies are enacted and not on the policy makers themselves, even though at times they may work with parties like the NDP where they have common ground on some issues.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 09 February 2006 02:16 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Membership lists cannot be sold anymore, as of january last year. If it's still happening, I believe it's a breach of new privacy laws (at least in BC).

Of course the Liberals try to poach votes from the NDP, and we do the same to them. The Liberals also try to poach votes from the Conservatives (the center right folks).

In honesty, the NDP also poach some votes from the Conservatives, at least out West where people vote against Ottawa. We can expect the NDP to make gains against the Cons in BC next election for that reason (like in 88).

So they are trying to poach votes. Let them try - we need to turn the tables, and make them into the fringe party. NDP has an opportunity right now, with some small chance of entering Stornoway after the next election. I'd like to hear options for how to do it.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
asterlake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11892

posted 09 February 2006 02:30 PM      Profile for asterlake        Edit/Delete Post
Poach votes? The vote belongs 100% to the voter and every election a candidate must earn it. The NDP doen't own my vote..I do. If I vote NDP 10 times in a row they no more own it the 11th time than as if I had never voted for them.

I always get amused by party hacks who complain about some group or party muscling in and 'stealing' their votes. It asumes that they have some 'right' to that vote. They don't. The only one with a right to the vote is the voter.

Every election is a race that starts at square one. The votes are 'zero' next to every candidates name. That's a plus for the NDP as it means there's room for expansion.


From: Exshaw | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 09 February 2006 02:36 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You are deliberately misinterpreting what I said. Get over the word 'poach' and focus on the content.
From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Burns
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7037

posted 09 February 2006 07:05 PM      Profile for Burns   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by happy go leftie (Red Tory):
this was not invented by any left-leaning progressive person, this topic was created to bait progressives, and to undermine the credibility of some of the most powerful progressive voices, needed now more than ever, to fight the Harper agenda. There is no way this was a progressive view to begin with, but is a dirty tactic to remove all opposition public voices out of Harper's path. There was nothing in the article that fed this monstrous attack on Barlow and May, and there is nothing in the world that justifies it's entire premise. This smells of manipulation in it's most disturbing form.
If Buzz Hargrove is one of the most "powerful progressive voices" Canada has then it is truly little wonder that we are so fucked.

Look - happy go etc - Elizabeth May and Maude Barlow can claim that the best progressive Canadians can possibly hope for is a Liberal government. That's fine. It's a legitimate argument - even though I disagree with it.

But please let's not pretend that makes them the only legitimate voices on the Left. There are lots of us who happen to believe that constantly electing and re-electing a party that does nothing on the environment, that moves us closer and closer to deep integration with the US, that push deals like NAFTA, FTAA and MAI, does very little to move a progressive agenda forward.

I don't doubt Maude's commitment but I do think she's wrong in embracing this tactic. A lot of members of her organization felt the same. My Mom's active in her local CoC chapter and I know she did.

That doesn't make us Tories - no matter how shrill (or lengthy) your posts are.

[ 10 February 2006: Message edited by: Burns ]


From: ... is everything. Location! Location! Location! | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
davidt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8006

posted 09 February 2006 08:56 PM      Profile for davidt   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I never get spam from anybody and i have been signed up for the NDP email updates for a few years now.

If they sell lists they have never sold mine.


From: hong kong | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
asterlake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11892

posted 09 February 2006 10:10 PM      Profile for asterlake        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by arborman:
You are deliberately misinterpreting what I said. Get over the word 'poach' and focus on the content.

No. your choice of words reflects the entitlement that is not warranted. The vote belongs to the voter and not to any party.


From: Exshaw | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Kinetix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5296

posted 10 February 2006 03:59 AM      Profile for Kinetix     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
davidt, spam is this case refers to unsolicited canada post mail drops from a number of organizations, such as the CoC, PETA, and the myriad other social organizations out there, and I get tonnes of it.
From: Montréal, Québec | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca