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


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Peter Kent: the next Foreign Affairs minister?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Peter Kent: the next Foreign Affairs minister?
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 27 September 2008 02:41 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The so-called Canadian Coalition for Democracies

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 27 September 2008 03:09 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wow, gross! I thought he was a red Tory! That's a totally racist, nasty organization. I used to get all sorts of spam from them (no idea how I got on their mailing list) until I trained my spam filter to send it straight to my trash folder.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 27 September 2008 03:12 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Read all about this hate group here.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 27 September 2008 03:30 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Reader Buckets reminds us that CCD was one of the infamous “42 organizations” demanding the firing of Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin for chairing the committee that awarded the Order of Canada to Dr. Henry Morgentaler. Read all about that bogus complaint here.
Unfucking believable! Now, IMV, this is doggable material as it is expressing hate not only against an identifiable group, but apparently would seek to stem women's rights, by not standing behind the 1 person (male) who actually fought for women's rights to self determine.

From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 27 September 2008 04:05 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm actually a bit surprised about that one - the CCD is focused on foreign policy/security issues. Anyway Kent is known for having socially liberal views on abortion and gay rights - so why is he associated with a group that opposed Morgentaler's getting the order of Canada?
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 28 September 2008 07:12 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bouquets of gray reports that Kent is not only a "senior member" but a member of the CCD's Board of Directors and, at one time, its executive committee.

Dr Dawg has the following Ten Questions for Peter Kent:

quote:
Dear Peter Kent:

Given your position on the Board of the far-right "Canadian Coalition for Democracies":

1) Do you support the CCD's lobbying for diplomatic and economic ties with the Indian state of Gujurat, where rioters, with government complicity, murdered, raped and dispossessed tens of thousands of Muslims, and where schoolchildren are taught to admire Adolf Hitler?

2) Did you endorse the CCD's position in favour of firing Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, for chairing a meeting that awarded an Order of Canada to Dr. Henry Morgentaler?

3) Do you believe, with the CCD, that "many" Members of Parliament are "apologists for terrorists who celebrate the killing and maiming of men, women, and children?"

4) If yes, who are these Parliamentarians?

5) Do you endorse the smearing of David Suzuki by your president, Alistair Gordon, and his irresponsible retailing of the anti-environmentalist lie that a DDT ban killed millions in sub-Saharan Africa?

6) As a member of the CCD Board, what role did you play in the attempted character assassination of Liberal MP Omar Alghabra in 2005--for which your organization later had to apologize and retract?

7) Do you believe, with your colleague David Harris, that Muslim terrorists have infiltrated the FBI and CIA, the State Department, the U.S. Muslim military chaplain corps, the White House, Homeland Security, the U.S. Air Force, Guantanamo, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons--and in Canada, the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Quebec NDP?

8) Do you take the view, as your colleague Salim Mansour does, that Canada should walk out of the UN?

9) Do you believe that veiled Muslim women at the polls might be engaging in criminal acts including suicide bombing, as a CCD press release suggests? (Are you aware that the current provisions of the Canada Elections Act permit such women to vote without unveiling, so long as they are not relying on photo ID as proof of identity?)

10) Do you support the bombing of Iran, like your colleague David Harris?



From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 28 September 2008 10:57 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Peter Kent does mention his membership in his website bio, but not surprisingly most of his prominent endorsements are from red Tory stalwarts like John Tory, Bill Davis and Hugh Segal.

[ 28 September 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jaku
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14801

posted 28 September 2008 01:35 PM      Profile for Jaku     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wow that site is something else. Did anyone gon to their discussioon board? Disgusting really!!

And I also noted that Toni Silberman and Rochelle Wilner were on its Executive. Arent they both Bnai Brith stalwarts? Has Bnai Brith drifted that far to the right? Does nayone know if the CJC is also part of this? The way CCD attacks cjc in its discussion board I would doubt it but you never know


From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 28 September 2008 01:48 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The CJC will jump into bed with anyone that claims to support Israel. Sad but true.

One guy from the CJC actually had the nerve to claim I was an anti-Semite for saying the CJC had enough money to print its own flyers and suchlike if need be. That's how low the CJC itself will sink, so I'm not surprised that they don't care about associating with people or organizations that trash Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims or really any suspicious-looking brown person.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 28 September 2008 04:25 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Rochelle Wilner is also running for the Tories in Ken Dryden's riding...though she has no chance in hell of winning.

[ 28 September 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
St. Paul's Progressive
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12621

posted 29 September 2008 07:57 AM      Profile for St. Paul's Progressive     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jaku:
Wow that site is something else. Did anyone gon to their discussioon board? Disgusting really!!

And I also noted that Toni Silberman and Rochelle Wilner were on its Executive. Arent they both Bnai Brith stalwarts? Has Bnai Brith drifted that far to the right? Does nayone know if the CJC is also part of this? The way CCD attacks cjc in its discussion board I would doubt it but you never know


Yes, Bnai Brith has drifted that far to the right. They will happily align with the Christian Right because of their support for Israel. Stephen Scheinberg has documented their rightwing drift. As for CJC, there's no evidence that they're in any way aligned with this lunatic far-right group.

As for Kent, I'm surprised. I thought he was a Red Tory.

[ 29 September 2008: Message edited by: St. Paul's Progressive ]


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
St. Paul's Progressive
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12621

posted 29 September 2008 09:36 AM      Profile for St. Paul's Progressive     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Having the election on Sukkot hurts Kent in Thornhill, and if this gets out, his ties to a group that opposed Morgentaler getting the Order of Canada would hurt him as well.
From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 14 October 2008 09:06 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The asshole has been elected.
From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
statica
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1420

posted 14 October 2008 09:07 PM      Profile for statica   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WTF!!!!
From: t-oront-o | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 14 October 2008 10:09 PM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:
Rochelle Wilner is also running for the Tories in Ken Dryden's riding...though she has no chance in hell of winning.

She actually did relatively well. In what used to be one of the safest Liberal seats in the country with the Liberals winning over 70% of the vote as recently as 2000, Wilner came within 2500 votes of Dryden. She won 37% of the vote to Dryden's 44% - the first time since 1972 that the Liberals have gotten less than 50% of the vote.

I'm afraid there seems to have been a sea change in the Jewish vote. It may still be majority Liberal but not overwhelmingly so.

[ 14 October 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152

posted 15 October 2008 02:39 AM      Profile for ghoris     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Joe Volpe had a surprisingly close call in Eglinton-Lawrence too:

Volpe (Liberal) 19,108
Oliver (Conservative) 16,848
James (Green) 3,826
Chatwin (NDP) 3,680

A stronger NDP showing and the Tories might have snatched this one. Max Bialystock has better political antennae than most, it would seem.

I expect that Kent is virtually assured a Cabinet post as one of just a handful of Tories elected in the GTA. Hopefully something minor, like Minister for Paper Clips or something.

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: ghoris ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 15 October 2008 06:31 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
I'm afraid there seems to have been a sea change in the Jewish vote. It may still be majority Liberal but not overwhelmingly so.

I think you mean plurality-Liberal (the Libs did still win St. Paul's and Willowdale easily as well as Westmount and Mount Royal). I don't think any group is majority-Liberal anymore.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
ohara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7961

posted 15 October 2008 08:54 AM      Profile for ohara        Edit/Delete Post
I am pretty shocked at the Kent victory. Seems to me that this tells us the Jewish vote in Thornhill came out quite strong.
From: Ottawa | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Prophit
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15312

posted 15 October 2008 09:23 AM      Profile for Prophit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ohara:
I am pretty shocked at the Kent victory. Seems to me that this tells us the Jewish vote in Thornhill came out quite strong.
Im not so sure this is true.

There is a large South Asian and new Immigrant community in Thornhill that the Tories targeted and my guess is quite successfully. The so-called "Jewish" vote may have increased a bit around the Bathurst, Steeles,Clarke area but in my opinion not enough to have led to the pretty convincing victory of Kent's.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
St. Paul's Progressive
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12621

posted 15 October 2008 09:39 AM      Profile for St. Paul's Progressive     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There is a large religious Jewish vote in Thornhill. I am told most of the Orthodox Jewish community has moved up there and when I'm there it feels like a religious community. Contrast that to St. Paul's - where Carolyn Bennett won easily. Same for Willowdale.

Still, Kent's margin of victory was significant and it's clear the Tories have made inroads in the Jewish community. I think we'll start to see more small-"c" conservatives there. It looks like there has been a bit of a rightwing swing among Jews in the past few years. I think John McCain will be getting a lot more Jewish votes in the US than George Bush did. Now the conservatives are not a majority - most remain Liberal in Canada and Democratic in the U.S. - but it's less monolithic.

We shouldn't make too much of a mountain out of a molehill though. This election was a disaster for the Liberals and I'll bet Liberal voters staying home because of their uninspiring leader Dion played a role (Harper got his vote out). And Kent is a big name who I'm sure got lots of votes from Italians, Chinese, WASPs and other groups in Thornhill too.

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: St. Paul's Progressive ]


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
St. Paul's Progressive
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12621

posted 15 October 2008 10:13 AM      Profile for St. Paul's Progressive     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have a feeling Kent will be appointed Foreign Affairs minister.
From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 15 October 2008 10:15 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good choice really since he actually has been outside of Canada... North America even.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 15 October 2008 10:59 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by St. Paul's Progressive:
I have a feeling Kent will be appointed Foreign Affairs minister.

He's a genuine neo-con on foreign policy. The foreign policy group he co-founded, the Canadian Coalition for Democracies, started its life organizing pro-Iraq War rallies, calls for a war on Iran, is to the right of the Likud on Israel, supports the Hindu nationalist BJP in India etc. Harper would be entering a real minefield if he appointed Kent to the FM post.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
ohara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7961

posted 15 October 2008 11:46 AM      Profile for ohara        Edit/Delete Post
Any worse a minefield than Bernier
From: Ottawa | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152

posted 15 October 2008 11:47 AM      Profile for ghoris     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Speaking of which, Bernier got an astounding vote of confidence from his own riding last night. The Tories are so thin on the ground in Quebec that I think Harper will have to look seriously at putting him back in Cabinet (but no sensitive documents, please).
From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 15 October 2008 01:32 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by aka Mycroft:

He's a genuine neo-con on foreign policy. The foreign policy group he co-founded, the Canadian Coalition for Democracies, started its life organizing pro-Iraq War rallies, calls for a war on Iran, is to the right of the Likud on Israel, supports the Hindu nationalist BJP in India etc. Harper would be entering a real minefield if he appointed Kent to the FM post.


I know he is, but Kent has an image of being an old-style PC type. He was given a free pass on his CCD affiliation.

ETA: But you're right - if he's considered for the position this stuff would come out and it would not look good for Harper.

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 15 October 2008 01:37 PM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ohara:
Any worse a minefield than Bernier

Yes. Bernier didn't participate and help organize demos in favour of publishing the Muhammed cartoons. He also wasn't a member and co-founder of an openly anti-Muslim organization.

If he were appointed FM there'd be a serious risk of an anti-Canada backlash in some quarters abroad.

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
ohara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7961

posted 15 October 2008 02:34 PM      Profile for ohara        Edit/Delete Post
Where did kent help organize these demos?
From: Ottawa | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 15 October 2008 02:38 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/03/canadians-hold-free-speech-rally-in.html
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
ohara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7961

posted 15 October 2008 03:35 PM      Profile for ohara        Edit/Delete Post
I have absolutely no love for the CCD. However amd I to understand that his speaking on their behalf is the same as him planiing this gathering?

Secondly, the CCd are a bunch of neanderthals but are you saying that as offensive as these cartoons may be and as stupid as people like Levant and others may be for reproducing them is it your positikon that they did not have the right to do so? Seems to me that was what Kent was there for no?


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Prophit
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15312

posted 15 October 2008 03:39 PM      Profile for Prophit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thank you for that link Lord palmerston. Seems pretty clear to me that Peter Kent is deeply involved with this group. What say you now O'Hara?
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 15 October 2008 03:59 PM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ohara:
I have absolutely no love for the CCD. However amd I to understand that his speaking on their behalf is the same as him planiing this gathering?

Kent didn't just speak on their behalf. He is a co-founder and a leading member of CCD.


CCD organized the rally hence he is an organizer of the rally at which he spoke. Or is it your position that being a co-founder and leader of an organization frees you from responsibility for that organization's actions?

quote:

Secondly, the CCd are a bunch of neanderthals

And Kent is one of the head neanderthals. Do you think neanderthals should be appointed to cabinet or made Foreign Minister?


quote:
but are you saying that as offensive as these cartoons may be and as stupid as people like Levant and others may be for reproducing them is it your positikon that they did not have the right to do so? Seems to me that was what Kent was there for no?

Yeah, I've heard that free speech argument from Paul Fromm too. I might believe that CCD and Kent were motivated purely by civil libertarianism rather than extreme anti-Muslim sentiment had it not been for the fact that CCD and its spokespersons have made a string of extreme anti-Muslim comments over the years.

quote:
* Islam and the terrorism it promotes must be religated [sic] to the ash bin of history, much like what we had to do with National Socialism in Europe in the last century. –Naresh Raghubeer, CCD Executive Director [NB: This quote was subsequently taken down by CCD–presumably the mask slipped just a tad too far–but nothing disappears entirely on the Internet. –DD]

* Just by looking around the world, who could be blamed for concluding that Islam is a savage, barbaric, primitive, cruel, despotic religion… –Alistair Gordon, CCD President*

* Maoists, Muslims - small minds, big ideas, no humanity. Interesting how Canada kowtows both to the Muslim world and to Mao’s China, while marginalizing those who should be our natural allies… — Alastair Gordon, CCD President**

* Louise Arbour - Islamist mouthpiece at the UN … When you thought Canada’s unprincipled foreign policy, based primarily on being anti-American, could not sink any lower, we have the idiotic statements of Canada’s own Louise Arbour… — Alastair Gordon, CCD President

* There are all sorts of things that one cannot do on an airplane, including push-ups in the aisle and yoga. If these imams are so devout and pious, then it is their duty to avoid travel if it interferes with their piety. It is not the duty of the traveling public or airline operators to accomodate their rituals, especially when thier own safety is at risk. –Alastair Gordon, CCD President [The imams in question were praying in the airport, not on a plane. –DD]


As for CCD's civil libertrianism - I'm afraid it doesn't extend beyond the right to publish inflammatory anti-Muslim cartoons.

quote:
On April 4, 2006, Al Gordon, President of the CCD wrote the following on CCD's website:

The gutless Guelph students deserve to have their freedoms extinguished for capitulating to Islamist thugs. What snivelling, cowardly little nebishes.


Ten Questions for Peter Kent

quote:
Given your position on the Board of the far-right "Canadian Coalition for Democracies":

1) Do you support the CCD's lobbying for diplomatic and economic ties with the Indian state of Gujurat, where rioters, with government complicity, murdered, raped and dispossessed tens of thousands of Muslims, and where schoolchildren are taught to admire Adolf Hitler?

2) Did you endorse the CCD's position in favour of firing Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, for chairing a meeting that awarded an Order of Canada to Dr. Henry Morgentaler?

3) Do you believe, with the CCD, that "many" Members of Parliament are "apologists for terrorists who celebrate the killing and maiming of men, women, and children?"

4) If yes, who are these Parliamentarians?

5) Do you endorse the smearing of David Suzuki by your president, Alistair Gordon, and his irresponsible retailing of the anti-environmentalist lie that a DDT ban killed millions in sub-Saharan Africa?

6) As a member of the CCD Board, what role did you play in the attempted character assassination of Liberal MP Omar Alghabra in 2005--for which your organization later had to apologize and retract?

7) Do you believe, with your colleague David Harris, that Muslim terrorists have infiltrated the FBI and CIA, the State Department, the U.S. Muslim military chaplain corps, the White House, Homeland Security, the U.S. Air Force, Guantanamo, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons--and in Canada, the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Quebec NDP?

8) Do you take the view, as your colleague Salim Mansour does, that Canada should walk out of the UN?

9) Do you believe that veiled Muslim women at the polls might be engaging in criminal acts including suicide bombing, as a CCD press release suggests? (Are you aware that the current provisions of the Canada Elections Act permit such women to vote without unveiling, so long as they are not relying on photo ID as proof of identity?)

10) Do you support the bombing of Iran, like your colleague David Harris?


[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
ohara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7961

posted 15 October 2008 04:08 PM      Profile for ohara        Edit/Delete Post
Thank you. You made your point.
From: Ottawa | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 15 October 2008 07:54 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I changed the title.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 15 October 2008 07:58 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Great!
From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 15 October 2008 08:06 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Peter Kent is no worse than anyone else in the Tory caucus. In fact, at least he is pretty socially liberal and marches in the gay pride parade every year.

If he is put into cabinet, hopefully he will be kept away from anything involving foreign policy and maybe he would be a better minister of Canadian Heritage than Josee "Dumb as a Post" Verner.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 15 October 2008 08:20 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I am, however, incredibly saddened, frightened, and disappointed by my fellow constituents in Thornhill who voted in Conservative candidate Peter Kent. By switching the colour of our riding to Conservative Blue after twenty years of being a staunch Liberal stronghold, Thornhill stands out amongst the Red blood of the GTA as a warning sign against the dangers of one-issue voting. Back home, voters were swayed by a “star” candidate who was able to win because of his “stance” on one issue - support of Israel. If I wasn’t so shocked, I could laugh at what I’m about to say…

I place the blame squarely on my fellow Jews. By and large, it is clear that Kent was able to win by duping many of Thornhill’s voting Jews into believing that he is more supportive of Israel than Liberal Susan Kadis. Just a drive through any of the Orthodox neighbourhoods in town is proof enough of where Kent’s support truly lies - blue and white signs adorn the lawns, and if you squint just enough, you might be able to convince yourself that you are looking at Israeli flags.

This is disastrous. It is a dangerous conflation of religion and politics.

I should make it patently clear that I’m not a sore loser. As a die-hard ENFP, I can at the very least respect the results of an election and the choices of the populous even if I disagree with the results. That’s democracy, folks. But I have little respect and great disdain for those who vote based on one campaign issue - let alone an issue that is a foreign affairs issue for parliament. Politics is a comprehensive thing. A government cannot govern based on one issue. Voters cannot vote based on one issue. Those who do have shirked their civic duty.

Even if you disregard that Canada is at best a minor player with regards to Israel in every way (at the UN, with the peace-process, with economic ties, etc…), and even if you disregard that Canada’s relationship with Israel has not changed substantially under any government, and even if you disregard that “support of Israel” is a highly tenuous and subjective term…

Voters still voted based on one issue, and a shady one at that. Shame on you.


[URL=http://jepaikin.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/why-im-not-entirely-depressed-and-why-im-entirely-depressed/[/URL]

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: Max Bialystock ]


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 15 October 2008 08:30 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm sure Bernie, Frank Dimant and Mr. O'hara have popped out the champagne.
From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 15 October 2008 08:43 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
Peter Kent is no worse than anyone else in the Tory caucus. In fact, at least he is pretty socially liberal and marches in the gay pride parade every year.

Are you going to applaud Paul Wolfowitz for being "pretty socially liberal" too?


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 15 October 2008 08:54 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
IF he was given a position of power that only dealt with domestic issues then if he was a social liberal - I'd say good for him.

ALL Conservatives are pretty hawkish on foreign policy. It doesn't matter if its Peter Kent or Maxime Bernier - they all believe in the same stuff.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 15 October 2008 09:03 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kent saw one of the biggest increases in raw vote for a Tory in the GTA - by about 7000. I'm afraid Max has a point - it appears the Jewish community swung right because of Israel, at least in Thornhill.

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 15 October 2008 09:11 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What does it have to do with Israel when there is essentially no difference between the parties in their policy on the Middle East in the first place?

There was a pretty sharp swing away from the Liberals all across 905 - esp. in high income ridings. Thornhill is one of the wealthiest ridings in Canada - so that was probably a major factor as well.

BTW: Isn't it interesting how people on the far left will stereotype Jews as all being "neocons", but people on the far right think Jews are all "godless communists" and go on about the ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government).

Draw what conclusions you wish from that.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 15 October 2008 09:18 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It had its effect. The raw vote increase in Thornhill was quite big. And Harper has gotten a lot of support from the so-called pro-Israel community - there is definitely a perception the Conservatives are the most pro-Israel and the Liberals take the so-called "honest broker" position. I don't think 7000 more votes in that particular riding went Tory because Kent supports more health care privatization! Eg-Law has a big Jewish vote and it was a closer than expected riding for the Tories as well.

Who are you accusing of being "far left who thinks all Jews are neocons"? People like that aren't leftists - they're just idiots.

[ 15 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 16 October 2008 05:52 AM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:
Eg-Law has a big Jewish vote and it was a closer than expected riding for the Tories as well.

And, rather surprisingly given its history and Dryden's incumbency, York Centre.


From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 October 2008 06:52 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
If he is put into cabinet, hopefully he will be kept away from anything involving foreign policy and maybe he would be a better minister of Canadian Heritage than Josee "Dumb as a Post" Verner.

Would he? I don't think he would. He wants to see the CBC reduced to PBS-style begathons.

I don't want to see this guy anywhere near a culture portfolio.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Prophit
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15312

posted 16 October 2008 07:10 AM      Profile for Prophit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I live in the northern reaches of Thornhill and can tell you that Peter Kent signs adorned the lawns of many there as well. I can also tell you that this area where I live is far from Jewish, more Italian and South Asian decent. Friends polling for the NDP candidate told me that Kent was doing surprisingly well within those areas as well.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 16 October 2008 08:06 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

BTW: Isn't it interesting how people on the far left will stereotype Jews as all being "neocons",

Isn't it interesting how no one actually said that? Indeed, the most anyone has said is that instead of overwhelmingly supporting the Liberals it now seems that the Liberals only have a plurality of the Jewish vote.

While it's true the term neocon has been misused, overused, and sometimes appropriated as a code word the fact is Kent actually is a neo-conservative in the Richard Perle/Donald Rumsfeld/Bill Kristol/Project for a New American Century mold.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 16 October 2008 08:07 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

Would he? I don't think he would. He wants to see the CBC reduced to PBS-style begathons.

I don't want to see this guy anywhere near a culture portfolio.



He also doesn't like streetcars so don't let him near urban infrastructure.

From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 October 2008 08:11 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Peter Kent posted a campaign video that had all sorts of praise for him from the biggest names in Canadian journalism. Putting them on a campaign video looks like an attempt to fool voters into believing that all these journalists endorsed him.

CTV, however, has put out a press release, clarifying that Pamela Wallin and Lloyd Robertson did NOT endorse his candidacy, and that in fact those clips are from a journalism industry event.

So did the CBC.

Pretty shady on the ethical front if you ask me.

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 16 October 2008 09:42 AM      Profile for ceti     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
CCD is a extreme right-wing organization not unlike the World Anti-Communist Leagues of the 1970s and 1980s that was crawling with neo-nazis and death squad supporters. This time, they want to wage a civilizational war against all Muslims, ideologically uniting right-wing Zionism, Hindutva, Christian Fundamentalism, and rabid old-time anti-communism.

I'm disturbed that on a progressive board, there can be any softness on this group. By stealth, they are capturing community institutions and turning them into hard right mouthpieces. In fact, they are perhaps the most dangerous group around because of these stealth tactics and the repercussions on our foreign policy.


From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 October 2008 09:46 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What are you talking about? What "softness"? The CCD has been criticized roundly by babblers for years. There isn't one single post in this thread that says anything good about the CCD.

So why are you feeling "disturbed"?

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 16 October 2008 10:07 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Prophit:
I live in the northern reaches of Thornhill and can tell you that Peter Kent signs adorned the lawns of many there as well. I can also tell you that this area where I live is far from Jewish, more Italian and South Asian decent. Friends polling for the NDP candidate told me that Kent was doing surprisingly well within those areas as well.

Well his margin was quite big and the riding is only 35-40% Jewish, so he had to do well among other groups as well. But it looks like no ethnic group in Canada is majority-Liberal any more and the Tories have made inroads among Italians, Chinese and South Asians as well (i.e. Oak Ridges, Richmond BC, and nearly taking Brampton West). Kent's "big name" probably drew a lot of votes as well.

It looks like the Tories' courting of ethnic communities has largely paid off.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 16 October 2008 10:37 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Tory courting of ethnic minorities probably handed the NDP a seat in Vancouver-Kingsway. The Tory vote in that riding (which has a very large Chinese population) soared from 18% to 29% and I suspect that it almost all came from the Liberals who lost their big edge in that community.

Thank you Tories in Kingsway - we couldn't have done it without you.

It was also notable that the Tories crushed the liberal in the most heavily Chinese riding of all in Richmond, BC and that in Bill Siksay's Burnaby-Douglas seat(which also has a very large Chinese population) - the Liberal vote plummeted and the Tory was his main opposition.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 16 October 2008 02:23 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ghoris:
[QB]Joe Volpe had a surprisingly close call in Eglinton-Lawrence too:

Volpe (Liberal) 19,108
Oliver (Conservative) 16,848
James (Green) 3,826
Chatwin (NDP) 3,680

A stronger NDP showing and the Tories might have snatched this one. Max Bialystock has better political antennae than most, it would seem.


I just report the facts as I see them. I take no pleasure in being proven correct.


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 16 October 2008 02:36 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
BTW: Isn't it interesting how people on the far left will stereotype Jews as all being "neocons", but people on the far right think Jews are all "godless communists" and go on about the ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government).

Draw what conclusions you wish from that.


The fact is the Jews of Thornhill voted Conservative because of one single issue - ISRAEL. Shame on them!


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Prophit
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15312

posted 16 October 2008 02:51 PM      Profile for Prophit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Max Bialystock:

The fact is the Jews of Thornhill voted Conservative because of one single issue - ISRAEL. Shame on them!


That is not fair. It simply is not true. I am a Jew. I live in Thornhill and I did not vote Tory. I know quite a few other "Jews" who did not vote Tory and also live in Thornhill. Such stereotyping is really wrong in my judgement.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 16 October 2008 02:59 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm Jewish as well and I'm sickened by the fact that so many of my fellow Jews decided to cast their vote for whoever takes the most extreme pro-Israel position and to hell with everything else.

Just go up to the Bathurst to Yonge see how many blue Kent signs are still up there. Religious fanaticism has won the day in Thornhill.


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Uncle John
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14940

posted 16 October 2008 03:15 PM      Profile for Uncle John     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How can you say shame on a voter for voting the way they voted? How would you like it if someone said shame on you for voting the way you voted?

That is completely outrageous and an affront to democracy.

A democrat would accept the will of the voters and make the best of it that they could.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 16 October 2008 03:17 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Uncle John:
A democrat would accept the will of the voters and make the best of it that they could.

Fuck off. I accept that Kent was democratically elected. I retain my right to condemn people for voting for him.

But according to you, I guess it's wrong to condemn those racist voters in West Virginia and Pennslyvania Democratic primaries who voted for Hillary because they didn't want a black man to run for president. Since Hillary "won" those states I guess condemnation is "an affront to democracy."

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Max Bialystock ]

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Max Bialystock ]


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Prophit
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15312

posted 16 October 2008 03:50 PM      Profile for Prophit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Max it is the fact that you choose to identify these voters by their faith and then make assumptions that all those of the same faith voted in a particular manner. Hiding behind your own professed Judaism is really meaningless. Sterotyping is still stereotyping. It is wrong and it is highly offensive.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 16 October 2008 03:53 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hi Bernie.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
statica
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1420

posted 16 October 2008 04:45 PM      Profile for statica   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
oh, that peter kent video is so slimy, so ...grrr...
From: t-oront-o | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 October 2008 05:07 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Max Bialystock:
The fact is the Jews of Thornhill voted Conservative because of one single issue - ISRAEL. Shame on them!

Hi, could you please not stereotype? That would be lovely. I'm sure every Jewish person in Thornhill didn't vote Conservative.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 17 October 2008 12:47 AM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:

Well his margin was quite big and the riding is only 35-40% Jewish, so he had to do well among other groups as well. But it looks like no ethnic group in Canada is majority-Liberal any more and the Tories have made inroads among Italians, Chinese and South Asians as well (i.e. Oak Ridges, Richmond BC, and nearly taking Brampton West). Kent's "big name" probably drew a lot of votes as well.

It looks like the Tories' courting of ethnic communities has largely paid off.


And Maurizio B.'s margin in Vaughan was way narrower than he's been accustomed to...


From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 17 October 2008 09:20 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kent is a lot older than the ancient picture on his signs.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 18 October 2008 11:45 AM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
...which are recycled signs from his '06 St. Paul's campaign, anyway. (And surprisingly ugly signs, considering his supposed stature in that campaign.)

I believe (at least, judging from a drive along Steeles) his non-recycled signs this go-around were standard Tory white-on-blue, no photos.


From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 18 October 2008 03:19 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

Hi, could you please not stereotype? That would be lovely. I'm sure every Jewish person in Thornhill didn't vote Conservative.


Never said they did.


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 18 October 2008 03:33 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by adma:
I believe (at least, judging from a drive along Steeles) his non-recycled signs this go-around were standard Tory white-on-blue, no photos.

Are you sure they weren't Israeli flags?


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 18 October 2008 05:17 PM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Max Bialystock:

Are you sure they weren't Israeli flags?


Come to think of it, you may have a "colours of Israel" point there--sort of parallel to the old saw about Poles supporting Liberals because of a certain red-and-white solidarity...


From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
St. Paul's Progressive
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12621

posted 20 October 2008 09:19 AM      Profile for St. Paul's Progressive     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kent will be hard to dislodge. I would have thought the ultra-religious Jewish vote would be upset about the Sukkot election, but apparently they love Harper so much that they'll vote against a Jewish Liberal for a non-Jewish Tory on an election called on Sukkot.

[ 20 October 2008: Message edited by: St. Paul's Progressive ]


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 20 October 2008 04:58 PM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ah, a non-Jewish Tory, but touched by the hand of Asper, remember.
From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
miles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7209

posted 20 October 2008 05:00 PM      Profile for miles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by adma:
Ah, a non-Jewish Tory, but touched by the hand of Asper, remember.

Yes but before that touched by the hand of the CBC.

I wonder does CBC negate Asper


From: vaughan | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 20 October 2008 05:10 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wonder to what extent Kent's attacks on the CBC helped his vote in Thornhill's Orthodox areas.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
miles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7209

posted 20 October 2008 05:13 PM      Profile for miles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
LP I don't know but Susan Kadis lost 13,000 votes from 2006. In 2006 she won by 8,000 and change and now she lost by 5,000


That spread is more than just the Jewish Vote. I can't wait for the poll by poll results to be released because I have to assume that their was movement across the riding away from Susan.

She was not that popular for supporting some building and development that residents don't like.

Also she was endorsed by the Vaughan Council which is the kiss of death


From: vaughan | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 20 October 2008 05:25 PM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, I'd assume she lost significant non-Jewish share, too.

Consider, especially, the swing in neighbouring Vaughan (Maurizio B.'s seat)--the Liberals down from 59.7 to 49.2, the Tories up from 26.1 to 34.3; for the Grits to be reduced to a plurality and a 15-point margin in Vaughan surely counts as a shock result of sorts...


From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 24 October 2008 04:24 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm sure those questions about Kent's CCD affiliation will never come up in the MSM.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
BetterRed
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11865

posted 24 October 2008 11:30 PM      Profile for BetterRed     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by adma:
Well, I'd assume she lost significant non-Jewish share, too.

Consider, especially, the swing in neighbouring Vaughan (Maurizio B.'s seat)--the Liberals down from 59.7 to 49.2, the Tories up from 26.1 to 34.3; for the Grits to be reduced to a plurality and a 15-point margin in Vaughan surely counts as a shock result of sorts...


Thats very true, and what elese needs mentioning is that the Dipper candidate has obtained 9.62% - nearly enough to reach deposit.
And tahts in one of the most affluent ridings in the country.

The Thornhill result was a bit depressing - below 7%. I wonder why that is


From: They change the course of history, everyday ppl like you and me | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
1948
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15673

posted 30 October 2008 08:44 AM      Profile for 1948   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hmmm.

Now kent is Minister of State (Americas). I wonder what he thinks about the racist postings made on the CCD's website about the man who will likely by the next US President? Has he distanced himself from this garbage?

See this delightful screed that asks whether "We can elect a President with not one, not two, but THREE Islamic names?" or this post entitled "How can you possibly feel safe with Obama's personal history?"


From: Ontario | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 30 October 2008 09:03 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by 1948:
Hmmm.

Now kent is Minister of State (Americas). I wonder what he thinks about the racist postings made on the CCD's website about the man who will likely by the next US President? Has he distanced himself from this garbage?

See this delightful screed that asks whether "We can elect a President with not one, not two, but THREE Islamic names?" or this post entitled "How can you possibly feel safe with Obama's personal history?"


I wonder what this means for Canada-Cuba relations (or Canada-Venezuela, Canada-Bolivia or even Canada-Brazil)?


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 30 October 2008 09:27 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I suspect it will mean absolutely nothing for any of those.

Making Kent Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Americas) strikes me as a non-job that is probably just a fancy title with no actual responsibility. Would you have preferred him to be Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Middle East)??


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 30 October 2008 09:45 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
I suspect it will mean absolutely nothing for any of those.

Making Kent Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Americas) strikes me as a non-job that is probably just a fancy title with no actual responsibility. Would you have preferred him to be Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Middle East)??


No, not at all. Just wondering what, if anything, this means for Canadian policy in the region.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mr.Canada
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15677

posted 30 October 2008 09:48 AM      Profile for Mr.Canada     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Many on the right view OCAP as an urban terror group. Does that make it so?

Of course not. Try to look at all the viewpoints before making a decision. Get your news from left and right wing news sources. The truth is usually in the middle.

Peter Kent would make an excellent minister.


From: Canada | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 30 October 2008 10:01 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Canada:
Many on the right view OCAP as an urban terror group. Does that make it so? Of course not.

Are you proposing John Clarke as Minister of Community and Social Services then or Solicitor-General?

quote:
Try to look at all the viewpoints before making a decision. Get your news from left and right wing news sources. The truth is usually in the middle.

Peter Kent would make an excellent minister.


Perhaps - but not of anything related to foreign affairs, culture (he hates the CBC) or transport (he hates streetcar right of ways).

No one is saying CCD are terrorists but they certainly have hard right views on international affairs of the Richard Perle - Donald Rumsfeld - Paul Wolfowitz variety and their views on Muslims are extreme. While it is a relief that he's neither foreign minister nor minister for the mideast I believe his appointment as Minister of State (Americas) is a further indication that the Harper government is of one mind with the US State Department when it comes to its orientation towards left wing governments in Latin America on the one hand and right wing regimes such as Colombia on the other.

[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
1948
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15673

posted 30 October 2008 12:43 PM      Profile for 1948   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
I suspect it will mean absolutely nothing for any of those.

Making Kent Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Americas) strikes me as a non-job that is probably just a fancy title with no actual responsibility. Would you have preferred him to be Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Middle East)??


Uh... Wha?

Yes, Stockholm, it's true that he's not the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Nor is he the Prime Minitser.

But he is in the Cabinet, sits on the Foreign Affairs Committee, and has a specific mandate to deal with "the Americas" so his views on Foreign Affairs and the incoming US President should probably draw our attention.

ETA: I'd say the views found posted on Obama are outside the mainstream (at least the Canadian mainstream) and Kent has some explaining to do. If these views don't represent the CCD's views then why did the CCD allow them to be posted? If they do then it's legitimate to ask if he shares them? If he doesn't why didn't he raise it? If he didn't know why wasn't he paying attention?

[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: 1948 ]


From: Ontario | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152

posted 30 October 2008 01:12 PM      Profile for ghoris     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kent's title is not a new one - there was a Secretary of State (Latin America and Africa) in the Chretien government.

Special bonus points to anyone who can name any of the three household names who served in this coveted, high-profile posting in the Chretien years.


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
1948
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15673

posted 30 October 2008 01:16 PM      Profile for 1948   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
David Kilgour.
Denis Paradis.

From: Ontario | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 30 October 2008 01:19 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Harper government is of one mind with the US State Department when it comes to its orientation towards left wing governments in Latin America on the one hand and right wing regimes such as Colombia on the other.

The "State Department" and the Bush administration are two very different things. Historically, the people who work in the State Department tend to be vastly more liberal-minded than are the foreign policy advisors to Republican presidents.

The Harper government MIGHT be of one mind with Georhe W. Bush and Condeleeza Rice when it comes to policy towards Latin America - but in a few short weeks - American foreign policy will be set by Barack Obama and his raft of appointees etc... Somehow I find it very hard to imagine that Canada is suddenly going to take a hardline neo-con policy towards Latin America at precisely the same time as the US is moving in the opposite direction.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152

posted 30 October 2008 01:20 PM      Profile for ghoris     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by 1948:
David Kilgour.
Denis Paradis.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

Can anyone name the third?


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
penumbra
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13297

posted 30 October 2008 03:01 PM      Profile for penumbra     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
holy shit.

that campaign video looks more like something you'd expect to be shown after his death.


From: ON | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 05 November 2008 09:46 AM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
The Harper government MIGHT be of one mind with Georhe W. Bush and Condeleeza Rice when it comes to policy towards Latin America - but in a few short weeks - American foreign policy will be set by Barack Obama and his raft of appointees etc... Somehow I find it very hard to imagine that Canada is suddenly going to take a hardline neo-con policy towards Latin America at precisely the same time as the US is moving in the opposite direction.

Why do you assume Latin America policy is going to change under Obama?


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 05 November 2008 09:49 AM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
Would you have preferred him to be Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Middle East)??

No but I bet voters in Thornhill would have preferred that (since that was the only reason he won there in the first place)?


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 05 November 2008 12:10 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
we have no way of knowing that.

BTW: You must be very disappointed that Obama won an estimated 79% of the Jewish vote yesterday. i know you were hoping they would vote for McCain.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 November 2008 12:41 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Quit trolling, Stockholm.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 05 November 2008 09:39 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'll take the bait.

quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
we have no way of knowing that.

Given that

1) Harper is seen as the most pro-Israel PM ever
and is a big hero among so-called Jewish leaders
and
2) The Conservatives went from an 11,000 vote loss to a 5,000 margin of victory in that riding

it certainly played a role.

quote:
BTW: You must be very disappointed that Obama won an estimated 79% of the Jewish vote yesterday. i know you were hoping they would vote for McCain.[/QB]

No I was hoping they (and American non-Jews) voted for Nader or McKinney...but it didn't happen.

Anyway given the Democrats are so rightwing and pro-Israel, there's no need for a switch among so-called pro-Israel voters. Not the case in Canada though where they are now clearly Tory. What do you make of that?


From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 06 November 2008 06:56 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I would argue that the Liberals in Canada are every bit as pro-Israel as the Tories 9with the NDP not far behind), so there is no reason for anyone to switch their vote on that issue in Canada either.

Thornhill is one of the wealthiest ridings in Canada and it was no different from other "905" ridings in recording a major swing away from the Liberals and their weak leaders and their extremely unpopular carbon tax.

It probably didn't hurt that the Liberal incumbent in Thornhill was a low profile non-entity while Peter Kent was a big name.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 06 November 2008 11:19 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think there is a difference in terms of a perception - Harper is a great hero to rightwing Zionists who think Israel can do no wrong and they were ecstatic about his support for Israel's attack on Lebanon. I'm certain that won him support in some quarters of the Jewish community. Peter Kent also was as noted earlier, "touched by the hand of Asper." I don't think Max is correct to suggest they're in the Conservative camp now though.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 06 November 2008 12:35 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I think there is a difference in terms of a perception - Harper is a great hero to rightwing Zionists who think Israel can do no wrong and they were ecstatic about his support for Israel's attack on Lebanon.

So what? In the US there is a similar perception and rightwing Zionists there salute Bush as a great hero who also thinks Israel can do no wrong etc... - yet 78% of American Jews voted Obama and rejected the Bush acolyte - McCain.

Jews in the US supported Obama to greater extent than any other group in the US other than African-Americans - more than Latinos, more than gays and lesbians...


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Max Bialystock
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13870

posted 07 November 2008 02:57 PM      Profile for Max Bialystock     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A friend in Thornhill attended an all-candidates' debate there. They were asked who they supported in the US election. Susan Kadis and all the others said Obama. Peter Kent rather smartly said "it's not up to us here in Canada, it's up to the Americans" to decide. Smart move. They were obviously cheering for McCain up there.
From: North York | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 07 November 2008 03:33 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I doubt that very much - polls show that even among Conservative supporters in Canada - Obama was preferred over McCain by more than a two to one margin.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 08 November 2008 09:45 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kent was by far the most high-profile Tory running in the GTA and also got a boost from the Orthodox population that was probably near unanimous in its support for Harper.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 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